[
  {
    "id": 831,
    "question": "According to the IPCC AR6 Synthesis Report, which statement would most likely lead to increased vulnerability of biodiversity and ecosystem services while simultaneously reducing carbon uptake, based on the relationships described?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Implementing targeted management strategies for ocean ecosystems without addressing global warming.",
      "B": "Failing to rebuild overexploited fisheries while achieving significant reductions in fossil fuel dependency.",
      "C": "Limiting global warming but neglecting land restoration efforts and cooperative decision-making with Indigenous Peoples.",
      "D": "Prioritizing disaster risk management and early warning systems without integrating ecosystem considerations into climate policies.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "46",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 SYR.pdf",
    "source_text": "30 Summary for Policymakers Summary for Policymakersocean ecosystems, together with targeted management to adapt to unavoidable impacts of climate change reduces the vulnerability of biodiversity and ecosystem services to climate change ( high confidence ), reduces coastal erosion and flooding ( high confidence ), and could increase carbon uptake and storage if global warming is limited ( medium confidence ). Rebuilding overexploited or depleted fisheries reduces negative climate change impacts on fisheries (medium confidence) and supports food security, biodiversity, human health and well-being ( high confidence ). Land restoration contributes to climate change mitigation and adaptation with synergies via enhanced ecosystem services and with economically positive returns and co-benefits for poverty reduction and improved livelihoods ( high confidence ). Cooperation, and inclusive decision making, with Indigenous Peoples and local communities, as well as recognition of inherent rights of Indigenous Peoples, is integral to successful adaptation and mitigation across forests and other ecosystems ( high confidence ). {4.5.4, 4.6 } (Figure SPM.7 ) Health and Nutrition C.3.7 Human health will benefit from integrated mitigation and adaptation options that mainstream health into food, infrastructure, social protection, and water policies ( very high confidence ). Effective adaptation options exist to help protect human health and well-being, including: strengthening public health programs related to climate-sensitive diseases, increasing health systems resilience, improving ecosystem health, improving access to potable water, reducing exposure of water and sanitation systems to flooding, improving surveillance and early warning systems, vaccine development ( very high confidence ), improving access to mental healthcare, and Heat Health Action Plans that include early warning and response systems ( high confidence ). Adaptation strategies which reduce food loss and waste or support balanced, sustainable healthy diets contribute to nutrition, health, biodiversity and other environmental benefits ( high confidence ). {4.5.5 } (Figure SPM.7 ) Society, Livelihoods, and Economies C.3.8 Policy mixes that include weather and health insurance, social protection and adaptive social safety nets, contingent finance and reserve funds, and universal access to early warning systems combined with effective contingency plans, can reduce vulnerability and exposure of human systems. Disaster risk management, early warning systems, climate services and risk spreading and sharing approaches have broad applicability across sectors. Increasing education including capacity building, climate literacy, and information provided through climate services and community approaches can facilitate heightened risk perception and accelerate behavioural changes and planning. ( high confidence ) {4.5.6 } Synergies and Trade-Offs with Sustainable Development C.4 Accelerated and equitable action in mitigating and adapting to climate change impacts is critical to sustainable development. Mitigation and adaptation actions have more synergies than trade-offs with Sustainable Development Goals. Synergies and trade-offs depend on context and scale of implementation. (high confidence ) {3.4, 4.2, 4.4, 4.5, 4.6, 4.9, Figure 4.5 } C.4.1 Mitigation efforts embedded within the wider development context can increase the pace, depth and breadth of emission reductions ( medium confidence ). Countries at all stages of economic development seek to improve the well-being of people, and their development priorities reflect different starting points and contexts. Different contexts include but are not limited to social, economic, environmental, cultural, political circumstances, resource endowment, capabilities, international environment, and prior development ( high confidence ). In regions with high dependency on fossil fuels for, among other things, revenue and employment generation, mitigating risk for sustainable development requires policies that promote economic and energy sector diversification and considerations of just transitions principles, processes and practices ( high confidence ). Eradicating extreme poverty, energy poverty, and providing decent living standards in low-emitting countries / regions in the context of achieving sustainable development objectives, in the near term, can be achieved without significant global emissions growth ( high confidence ). {4.4, ",
    "new_id": 1
  },
  {
    "id": 889,
    "question": "According to Climate Change 2023 — Synthesis Report, which statement best captures the relationship between global warming levels (GWLs) and the timing of their occurrence in the context of climate scenarios?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Geographical patterns of climatic impacts for a given GWL are consistent across scenarios, independent of when that level is reached.",
      "A": "The geographical patterns of climatic impacts at a given GWL are scenario-dependent and vary significantly based on when the level is reached.",
      "C": "The timing of reaching a specific GWL determines the severity of risks, as later occurrences allow more time for adaptation policies to mitigate hazards.",
      "D": "Global warming levels are defined exclusively by radiative forcing values, making them irrelevant to risk assessments tied to temperature changes.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "80-81",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 SYR.pdf",
    "source_text": "64 Section 2 Section 1Section 2Global Warming Levels (GWLs) For many climate and risk variables, the geographical patterns of changes in climatic impact-drivers110 and climate impacts for a level of global warming111 are common to all scenarios considered and independent of timing when that level is reached. This motivates the use of GWLs as a dimension of integration. { WGI Box SPM.1.4, WGI TS.1.3.2; WGII Box SPM.1 } (Figure 3.1, Figure 3.2 ) Risks Dynamic interactions between climate-related hazards, exposure and vulnerability of the affected human society, species, or ecosystems result in risks arising from climate change. AR6 assesses key risks across sectors and regions as well as providing an updated assessment of the Reasons for Concern (RFCs) – five globally aggregated categories of risk that evaluate risk accrual with increasing global surface temperature. Risks can also arise from climate change mitigation or adaptation responses when the response does not achieve its intended objective, or when it results in adverse effects for other societal objectives. { WGII SPM A, WGII Figure SPM.3, WGII Box TS.1, WGII Figure TS.4; SR1.5 Figure SPM.2; SROCC Errata Figure SPM.3; SRCCL Figure SPM.2 } (3.1.2, Cross-Section Box.2 Figure 1, Figure 3.3 ) 110 See Annex I: Glossary 111 See Annex I: Glossary. Here, global warming is the 20-year average global surface temperature relative to 1850–1900. The assessed time of when a certain global warming level is reached under a particular scenario is defined here as the mid-point of the first 20-year running average period during which the assessed average global surface temperature change exceeds the level of global warming. {WGI SPM footnote 26, Cross-Section Box TS.1 }\n\n[Page 81]\n65 Current Status and TrendsSection 2which drives that change influence Emissionsa) AR6 integrated assessment framework on future climate, impacts and mitigation Climate Impacts / Risks Mitigation Policy Adaptation PolicySocio-economic changes 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 °C b) Scenarios and pathways across AR6 Working Group reports c) Determinants of riskTemperature for SSP-based scenarios over the 21st century and C1-C8 at 2100Risks can be represented as “burning embers” C1-C8 in 2100 increasing risk 2050 2100 0 50 100 2050 2100 GtCO 2/yr SSP1-1.9 SSP1-2.6 SSP2-4.5 SSP3-7.0 SSP5-8.5 SSP1-1.9 SSP1-2.6 SSP2-4.5 SSP3-7.0 SSP5-8.5RFC1 Unique and threatened systemscolor shading shows C1-C8 category color shading shows range for SSP3-7.0 and SSP1-2.6 Category in WGIIICategory descriptionGHG emissions scenarios(SSPx-y*) in WGI & WGII RCPy** inWGI & WGII C1limit warming to 1.5°C (>50%)with no or limited overshootVery low (SSP1-1.9) Low (SSP1-2.6) RCP2.6C2return warming to 1.5°C (>50%)after a high overshoot C3 limit warming to 2°C (>67%) C4 limit warming to 2°C (>50%) C5 limit warming to 2.5°C (>50%) C6 limit warming to 3°C (>50%) Intermediate (SSP2-4.5) RCP 4.5 RCP 8.5C7 limit warming to 4°C (>50%) High (SSP3-7.0) C8 exceed warming of 4°C (>50%) Very high (SSP5-8.5)Scenarios and warming levels structure our understanding across the cause-effect chain from emissions to climate change and risks CO 2 emissions for SSP-based scenarios and C1-C8 categories Vulnerability Hazard ResponseRisk ExposureClimatic Impact- Drivers 0 1 2 3 4 5°Cinfluence shape * The terminology SSPx-y is used, where ‘SSPx’ refers to the Shared Socio-economic Pathway or ‘SSP’ describing the socio-economic trends underlying the scenario, and ‘y’ refers to the approximate level of radiative forcing (in watts per square metre, or Wm–2) resulting from the scenario in the year 2100. ** The AR5 scenarios (RCPy), which partly inform the AR6 WGI and WGII assessments, are indexed to a similar set of approximate 2100 radiative forcing levels (in W m-2). The SSP scenarios cover a broader range of GHG and air pollutant futures than the RCPs. They are similar but not identical, with differences in concentration trajectories for different GHGs. The overall radiative forcing tends to be higher for the SSPs compared to the RCPs with the same label (medium confidence ). {WGI TS.1.3.1 } *** Limited overshoot refers to exceeding 1.5°C global warming by up to about 0.1°C, high overshoot by 0.1°C-0.3°C, in both cases for up to several decades.",
    "new_id": 2
  },
  {
    "id": 892,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between observed climate impacts and their attribution to human influence, based on the confidence levels provided in Climate Change 2023 — Synthesis Report?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Attribution of observed physical climate changes to human influence is rated as virtually certain for hot extremes and upper ocean acidification, but only likely for heavy precipitation.",
      "A": "High or very high confidence in attribution is assigned to all observed increases in hot extremes and upper ocean acidification, but not to glacier retreat.",
      "B": "The text explicitly states that medium confidence applies to increases in compound flooding, agricultural drought, and fire weather, while glacier retreat is assessed with very high confidence.",
      "D": "Increases in heavy precipitation and sea level rise are attributed to human influence with very high confidence, whereas changes in biodiversity lack sufficient evidence for any confidence level.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "23",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 SYR.pdf",
    "source_text": "7 Summary for PolicymakersSummary for PolicymakersFigure SPM.1: (a) Climate change has already caused widespread impacts and related losses and damages on human systems and altered terrestrial, freshwater and ocean ecosystems worldwide. Physical water availability includes balance of water available from various sources including ground water, water quality and demand for water. Global mental health and displacement assessments reflect only assessed regions. Confidence levels reflect the assessment of attribution of the observed impact to climate change. (b) Observed impacts are connected to physical climate changes including many that have been attributed to human influence such as the selected climatic impact-drivers shown. Confidence and likelihood levels reflect the assessment of attribution of the observed climatic impact-driver to human influence. (c) Observed (1900–2020) and projected (2021–2100) changes in global surface temperature (relative to 1850-1900), which are linked to changes in climate conditions and impacts, illustrate how the climate has already changed and will change along the lifespan of three Adverse impacts from human-caused climate change will continue to intensify Terrestrial ecosystemsFreshwater ecosystemsOcean ecosystemsa) Observed widespread and substantial impacts and related losses and damages attributed to climate change Confidence in attribution to climate change High or very high confidence Medium confidenceLow confidenceIncludes changes in ecosystem structure, species ranges and seasonal timingBiodiversity and ecosystemsWater availability and food production Health and well-being Cities, settlements and infrastructure Inland flooding and associated damagesFlood/storm induced damages in coastal areasDamages to key economic sectorsDamages to infra- structurePhysical water availabilityAgriculture/ crop productionFisheries yields and aquaculture productionAnimal and livestock health and productivityInfectious diseasesDisplacement Mental healthHeat, malnutrition and harm from wildfireObserved increase in climate impacts to human systems and ecosystems assessed at global level Adverse impacts Adverse and positive impacts Climate-driven changes observed, no global assessment of impact directionKey 1900 1940 1980 2060 2100 very high high very lowlowintermediate2020future experiences depend on how we address climate change2011-2020 was around 1.1°C warmer than 1850-1900 warming continues beyond 2100 70 years old in 2050born in 1980bornin 2020 born in 1950 70 years old in 2090 70 years old in 2020 Global temperature change above 1850-1900 levels °C 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 4 3.5c) The extent to which current and future generations will experience a hotter and different world depends on choices now and in the near term Future emissions scenarios:b) Impacts are driven by changes in multiple physical climate conditions, which are increasingly attributed to human influence Attribution of observed physical climate changes to human influence: Virtually certain Increase in hot extremes Upper ocean acidificationpHLikely Increase in heavy precipitationVery likely Global sea level riseGlacier retreatMedium confidence Increase in compound floodingIncrease in agricultural & ecological droughtIncrease in fire weather",
    "new_id": 3
  },
  {
    "id": 983,
    "question": "According to the Climate Change 2023 — Synthesis Report, which of the following represents a region where biodiversity loss is explicitly linked to both habitat shifts and disruptions in human systems dependent on freshwater, land, and ocean ecosystems?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Asia",
      "A": "Europe",
      "B": "Small Islands",
      "C": "North America",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "92",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 SYR.pdf",
    "source_text": "76 Section 3 Section 1Section 3011.5234 011.5234°C °C 011.5234 011.5234°C °CEurope -Risks to people, economies and infrastructures due to coastal and inland flooding -Stress and mortality to people due to increasing temperatures and heat extremes -Marine and terrestrial ecosystems disruptions -Water scarcity to multiple interconnected sectors -Losses in crop production, due to compound heat and dry conditions, and extreme weatherSmall Islands-Loss of terrestrial, marine and coastal biodiversity and ecosystem services -Loss of lives and assets, risk to food security and economic disruption due to destruction of settlements and infrastructure -Economic decline and livelihood failure of fisheries, agriculture, tourism and from biodiversity loss from traditional agroecosystems -Reduced habitability of reef and non-reef islands leading to increased displacement -Risk to water security in almost every small island Africa -Species extinction and reduction or irreversible loss of ecosystems and their services, including freshwater, land and ocean ecosystems -Risk to food security, risk of malnutrition (micronutrient deficiency), and loss of livelihood due to reduced food production from crops, livestock and fisheries -Risks to marine ecosystem health and to livelihoods in coastal communities -Increased human mortality and morbidity due to increased heat and infectious diseases (including vector-borne and diarrhoeal diseases) -Reduced economic output and growth, and increased inequality and poverty rates -Increased risk to water and energy security due to drought and heatAus- tralasia-Degradation of tropical shallow coral reefs and associated biodiversity and ecosystem service values -Loss of human and natural systems in low-lying coastal areas due to sea level rise -Impact on livelihoods and incomes due to decline in agricultural production -Increase in heat-related mortality and morbidity for people and wildlife -Loss of alpine biodiversity in Australia due to less snow Asia -Urban infrastructure damage and impacts on human well-being and health due to flooding, especially in coastal cities and settlements -Biodiversity loss and habitat shifts as well as associated disruptions in dependent human systems across freshwater, land, and ocean ecosystems -More frequent, extensive coral bleaching and subsequent coral mortality induced by ocean warming and acidification, sea level rise, marine heat waves and resource extraction -Decline in coastal fishery resources due to sea level rise, decrease in precipitation in some parts and increase in temperature -Risk to food and water security due to increased temperature extremes, rainfall variability and droughtCentral and South America-Risk to water security -Severe health effects due to increasing epidemics, in particular vector-borne diseases -Coral reef ecosystems degradation due to coral bleaching -Risk to food security due to frequent/extreme droughts -Damages to life and infrastructure due to floods, landslides, sea level rise, storm surges and coastal erosion North America-Climate-sensitive mental health outcomes, human mortality and morbidity due to increasing average temperature, weather and climate extremes, and compound climate hazards -Risk of degradation of marine, coastal and terrestrial ecosystems, including loss of biodiversity, function, and protective services -Risk to freshwater resources with consequences for ecosystems, reduced surface water availability for irrigated agriculture, other human uses, and degraded water quality -Risk to food and nutritional security through changes in agriculture, livestock, hunting, fisheries, and aquaculture productivity and access -Risks to well-being, livelihoods and economic activities from cascading and compounding climate hazards, including risks to coastal cities, settlements and infrastructure from sea level riseDelayed impacts of sea level rise in the MediterraneanFood production from crops, fisheries and livestock in AfricaMortality and morbidity from heat and infectious disease in AfricaBiodiversity and ecosystems in Africa Health and wellbeing in the MediterraneanWater scarcity to people in southeastern EuropeCoastal flooding to people and infrastructures in EuropeHeat stress, mortality and morbidity to people in EuropeWater quality and availability in the Mediterranean••• ••• •••••• ••• •••• •• •• •••• •••••• Costs and damages related to maintenance and reconstruction of transportation infrastructure in North AmericaLyme disease in",
    "new_id": 4
  },
  {
    "id": 1077,
    "question": "According to the Climate Change 2023 — Synthesis Report, which combination of measures is implied to address both inland and coastal flooding risks, while also aligning with broader adaptation strategies applicable across multiple sectors?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Early warning systems, flood-proofing of buildings, and social safety nets.",
      "B": "Afforestation, reforestation, and levees.",
      "C": "Agroecological practices, disaster risk management, and climate services.",
      "D": "Heat Health Action Plans, vector-borne disease surveillance, and levees.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "72",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 SYR.pdf",
    "source_text": "56 Section 2 Section 1Section 2wetlands, rangelands, mangroves and forests); while afforestation and reforestation, restoration of high-carbon ecosystems, agroforestry, and the reclamation of degraded soils take more time to deliver measurable results. Significant synergies exist between adaptation and mitigation, for example through sustainable land management approaches. Agroecological principles and practices and other approaches that work with natural processes support food security, nutrition, health and well-being, livelihoods and biodiversity, sustainability and ecosystem services. (high confidence ) {WGII SPM C.2.1, WGII SPM C.2.2, WGII SPM C.2.5, WGII TS.D.4.1; SRCCL SPM B.1.2, SRCCL SPM.B.6.1; SROCC SPM C.2 } Combinations of non-structural measures like early warning systems and structural measures like levees have reduced loss of lives in case of inland flooding ( medium confidence ) and early warning systems along with flood-proofing of buildings have proven to be cost- effective in the context of coastal flooding under current sea level rise ( high confidence ). Heat Health Action Plans that include early warning and response systems are effective adaptation options for extreme heat (high confidence ). Effective adaptation options for water, food and vector-borne diseases include improving access to potable water, reducing exposure of water and sanitation systems to extreme weather events, and improved early warning systems, surveillance, and vaccine development ( very high confidence ). Adaptation options such as disaster risk management, early warning systems, climate services and social safety nets have broad applicability across multiple sectors (high confidence ). {WGII SPM C.2.1, WGII SPM C.2.5, WGII SPM C.2.9, WGII SPM C.2.11, WGII SPM C.2.13; SROCC SPM C.3.2 } Integrated, multi- sectoral solutions that address social inequities, differentiate responses based on climate risk and cut across systems, increase the feasibility and effectiveness of adaptation in multiple sectors (high confidence ). {WGII SPM C.2 }",
    "new_id": 5
  },
  {
    "id": 1119,
    "question": "As implied by the Climate Change 2023 — Synthesis Report, which scenario best illustrates a potential limitation or challenge associated with applying the concept of blue carbon to non-coastal marine ecosystems?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Non-coastal processes could involve slower carbon fluxes that are less amenable to management compared to coastal blue carbon ecosystems.",
      "A": "The high carbon burial rates in tidal marshes might not apply universally to all oceanic regions.",
      "C": "Open ocean systems lack rooted vegetation, which is essential for long-term carbon storage in soils and sediments.",
      "D": "Other anthropogenic climate forcers may outweigh the benefits of expanding blue carbon initiatives into non-coastal areas.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "137",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 SYR.pdf",
    "source_text": "121 GlossaryAnnexesand in the agricultural landscape, diversifies and sustains production for increased social, economic and environmental benefits for land users at all levels. Anthropogenic Resulting from or produced by human activities. Behavioural change In this report, behavioural change refers to alteration of human decisions and actions in ways that mitigate climate change and/or reduce negative consequences of climate change impacts. Biodiversity Biodiversity or biological diversity means the variability among living organisms from all sources including, among other things, terrestrial, marine and other aquatic ecosystems , and the ecological complexes of which they are part; this includes diversity within species, between species and of ecosystems. See also: Ecosystem , Ecosystem services . Bioenergy Energy derived from any form of biomass or its metabolic by-products. See also: Biofuel . Bioenergy with carbon dioxide capture and storage (BECCS) Carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS) technology applied to a bioenergy facility. Note that, depending on the total emissions of the BECCS supply chain, carbon dioxide (CO 2) can be removed from the atmosphere. See also: Anthropogenic removals , Carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS) , Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) . Blue carbon Biologically-driven carbon fluxes and storage in marine systems that are amenable to management. Coastal blue carbon focuses on rooted vegetation in the coastal zone, such as tidal marshes, mangroves and seagrasses. These ecosystems have high carbon burial rates on a per unit area basis and accumulate carbon in their soils and sediments. They provide many non-climatic benefits and can contribute to ecosystem-based adaptation . If degraded or lost, coastal blue carbon ecosystems are likely to release most of their carbon back to the atmosphere . There is current debate regarding the application of the blue carbon concept to other coastal and non-coastal processes and ecosystems, including the open ocean. See also: Ecosystem services , Sequestration . Blue infrastructure See: Infrastructure . Carbon budget Refers to two concepts in the literature: (1) an assessment of carbon cycle sources and sinks on a global level, through the synthesis of evidence for fossil fuel and cement emissions, emissions and removals associated with land use and land-use change , ocean and natural land sources and sinks of carbon dioxide (CO 2), and the resulting change in atmospheric CO 2 concentration. This is referred to as the Global Carbon Budget; (2) the maximum amount of cumulative net global anthropogenic CO 2 emissions that would result in limiting global warming to a given level with a given probability, taking into account the effect of other anthropogenic climate forcers . This is referred to as the Total Carbon Budget when expressed starting from the pre-industrial period, and as the Remaining Carbon Budget when expressed from a recent specified date. [Note 1: Net anthropogenic CO 2 emissions are anthropogenic CO 2 emissions minus anthropogenic CO 2 removals. See also: Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) . Note 2: The maximum amount of cumulative net global anthropogenic CO 2 emissions is reached at the time that annual net anthropogenic CO 2 emissions reach zero. Note 3: The degree to which anthropogenic climate forcers other than CO 2 affect the total carbon budget and remaining carbon budget depends on human choices about the extent to which these forcers are mitigated and their resulting climate effects. Note 4: The notions of a total carbon budget and remaining carbon budget are also being applied in parts of the scientific literature and by some entities at regional, national, or sub- national level. The distribution of global budgets across individual different entities and emitters depends strongly on considerations of equity and other value judgements.] Carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS) A process in which a relatively pure stream of carbon dioxide (CO 2) from industrial and energy-related sources is separated (captured), conditioned, compressed and transported to a storage location for long-term isolation from the atmosphere . Sometimes referred to as Carbon Capture and Storage. See also: Anthropogenic removals , Bioenergy with carbon dioxide capture and storage (BECCS) , Carbon dioxide capture and utilisation (CCU) , Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) , Sequestration . Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) Anthropogenic activities removing carbon dioxide (",
    "new_id": 6
  },
  {
    "id": 1189,
    "question": "Based on the definitions and implications provided in the Climate Change 2023 — Synthesis Report, which statement accurately captures the relationship between carbon dioxide removal (CDR) and bioenergy with carbon dioxide capture and storage (BECCS)?",
    "options": {
      "C": "BECCS is a subset of CDR, and is valid only when the total emissions across the BECCS supply chain result in net negative atmospheric CO2 levels.",
      "A": "BECCS is a subset of CDR, as it specifically involves anthropogenic activities removing CO2 through bioenergy processes.",
      "B": "CDR and BECCS are unrelated concepts since CDR focuses exclusively on natural land sinks, while BECCS pertains to industrial applications.",
      "D": "BECCS eliminates the need for CDR by inherently ensuring zero anthropogenic CO2 emissions during energy production.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "137",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 SYR.pdf",
    "source_text": "121 GlossaryAnnexesand in the agricultural landscape, diversifies and sustains production for increased social, economic and environmental benefits for land users at all levels. Anthropogenic Resulting from or produced by human activities. Behavioural change In this report, behavioural change refers to alteration of human decisions and actions in ways that mitigate climate change and/or reduce negative consequences of climate change impacts. Biodiversity Biodiversity or biological diversity means the variability among living organisms from all sources including, among other things, terrestrial, marine and other aquatic ecosystems , and the ecological complexes of which they are part; this includes diversity within species, between species and of ecosystems. See also: Ecosystem , Ecosystem services . Bioenergy Energy derived from any form of biomass or its metabolic by-products. See also: Biofuel . Bioenergy with carbon dioxide capture and storage (BECCS) Carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS) technology applied to a bioenergy facility. Note that, depending on the total emissions of the BECCS supply chain, carbon dioxide (CO 2) can be removed from the atmosphere. See also: Anthropogenic removals , Carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS) , Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) . Blue carbon Biologically-driven carbon fluxes and storage in marine systems that are amenable to management. Coastal blue carbon focuses on rooted vegetation in the coastal zone, such as tidal marshes, mangroves and seagrasses. These ecosystems have high carbon burial rates on a per unit area basis and accumulate carbon in their soils and sediments. They provide many non-climatic benefits and can contribute to ecosystem-based adaptation . If degraded or lost, coastal blue carbon ecosystems are likely to release most of their carbon back to the atmosphere . There is current debate regarding the application of the blue carbon concept to other coastal and non-coastal processes and ecosystems, including the open ocean. See also: Ecosystem services , Sequestration . Blue infrastructure See: Infrastructure . Carbon budget Refers to two concepts in the literature: (1) an assessment of carbon cycle sources and sinks on a global level, through the synthesis of evidence for fossil fuel and cement emissions, emissions and removals associated with land use and land-use change , ocean and natural land sources and sinks of carbon dioxide (CO 2), and the resulting change in atmospheric CO 2 concentration. This is referred to as the Global Carbon Budget; (2) the maximum amount of cumulative net global anthropogenic CO 2 emissions that would result in limiting global warming to a given level with a given probability, taking into account the effect of other anthropogenic climate forcers . This is referred to as the Total Carbon Budget when expressed starting from the pre-industrial period, and as the Remaining Carbon Budget when expressed from a recent specified date. [Note 1: Net anthropogenic CO 2 emissions are anthropogenic CO 2 emissions minus anthropogenic CO 2 removals. See also: Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) . Note 2: The maximum amount of cumulative net global anthropogenic CO 2 emissions is reached at the time that annual net anthropogenic CO 2 emissions reach zero. Note 3: The degree to which anthropogenic climate forcers other than CO 2 affect the total carbon budget and remaining carbon budget depends on human choices about the extent to which these forcers are mitigated and their resulting climate effects. Note 4: The notions of a total carbon budget and remaining carbon budget are also being applied in parts of the scientific literature and by some entities at regional, national, or sub- national level. The distribution of global budgets across individual different entities and emitters depends strongly on considerations of equity and other value judgements.] Carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS) A process in which a relatively pure stream of carbon dioxide (CO 2) from industrial and energy-related sources is separated (captured), conditioned, compressed and transported to a storage location for long-term isolation from the atmosphere . Sometimes referred to as Carbon Capture and Storage. See also: Anthropogenic removals , Bioenergy with carbon dioxide capture and storage (BECCS) , Carbon dioxide capture and utilisation (CCU) , Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) , Sequestration . Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) Anthropogenic activities removing carbon dioxide (",
    "new_id": 7
  },
  {
    "id": 1296,
    "question": "According to the Climate Change 2023 — Synthesis Report, which of the following best describes why combining or sequencing adaptation responses to sea level rise is critical, given the limitations and effectiveness of individual measures?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Combining responses avoids maladaptation by preventing overreliance on single measures like seawalls, which can lead to long-term exposure risks if not integrated into adaptive plans.",
      "A": "Combining responses ensures that all sociocultural values are preserved without the need for community engagement.",
      "B": "Sequencing responses allows for short-term reliance on seawalls while ecosystem-based solutions are developed, despite their physical limits above 1.5ºC of warming.",
      "C": "Sequencing responses prioritizes planned relocation as the most effective standalone strategy in scenarios of high sea level rise rates.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "95-96",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 SYR.pdf",
    "source_text": "79 Long-Term Climate and Development FuturesSection 3long-term planning and implementation of adaptation actions with benefits to many sectors and systems. (high confidence ) {WGII SPM C.4, WGII SPM.C.4.1, WGII SPM C.4.2, WGII SPM C.4.3 } Sea level rise poses a distinctive and severe adaptation challenge as it implies both dealing with slow onset changes and increases in the frequency and magnitude of extreme sea level events ( high confidence ). Such adaptation challenges would occur much earlier under high rates of sea level rise ( high confidence ). Responses to ongoing sea level rise and land subsidence include protection, accommodation, advance and planned relocation ( high confidence ). These responses are more effective if combined and/or sequenced, planned well ahead, aligned with sociocultural values and underpinned by inclusive community engagement processes ( high confidence ). Ecosystem-based solutions such as wetlands provide co-benefits for the environment and climate mitigation, and reduce costs for flood defences ( medium confidence) , but have site-specific physical limits, at least above 1.5ºC of global warming (high confidence ) and lose effectiveness at high rates of sea level rise beyond 0.5 to 1 cm yr-1 (medium confidence ). Seawalls can be maladaptive as they effectively reduce impacts in the short term but can also result in lock-ins and increase exposure to climate risks in the long term unless they are integrated into a long-term adaptive plan ( high confidence ). {WGI SPM C.2.5; WGII SPM C.2.8, WGII SPM C.4.1; WGII 13.10, WGII Cross-Chapter B ox SLR; SROCC SPM B. 9, SROCC SPM C.3.2, SROCC Figure SPM.4, SROCC Figure SPM.5c } (Figure 3.4 )\n\n[Page 96]\n80 Section 3 Section 1Section 32020 2100 2050 2150Ecosystem-based adaptation Sediment-based protection Elevating houses Protect levees Protect barriers Planned relocation≈30 years ≈50 years ≥100 years≈100 years≈15 years ≈15 years Indicative time for planning and implementation Typical intended lifetime of measuresLong-living societal legacy 01m2m3m 01m2m4m5m6m7m 3m4m5m15m 2000 2020 1950 1900 2100 2050 2150 2300Sea level rise greater than 15m cannot be ruled out with very high emissions Low-likelihood, high-impact storyline, including ice sheet instability processes under the very high emissions scenarioObservedUnavoidable sea level rise will cause: These cascade into risks to: livelihoods, settlements, health, well-being, food and water security and cultural values.Losses of coastal ecosystems and ecosystem services Groundwater salinisation Flooding and damages to coastal infrastructureGlobal sea level rise in meters relative to 1900 sea level rise by 2100 depends on the emissions scenariothis can be chronic high tide flooding and extreme flooding during storms likely ranges of sea level rise very lowlowintermediatehighvery high low emissions scenario range very high emissions scenario range a) Sea level rise: observations and projections 2020-2100, 2150, 2300 (relative to 1900)Sea level rise will continue for millennia, but how fast and how much depends on future emissions Example: timing of 0.5m sea level rise 2000 2100 2200 2300+ very lowvery highHigher greenhouse gas emissions lead to larger and faster sea level rise, demanding earlier and stronger responses, and reducing the lifetime of some options Key Responding to sea level rise requires long-term planning b) Typical timescales of coastal risk-management measures 1 billion people exposedBy 2050: Extreme sea level events that occured once per century will be 20-30 times more frequent",
    "new_id": 8
  },
  {
    "id": 1297,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the role and function of the SYR Scientific Steering Committee (SSC) as described in the process for developing the Climate Change 2023 — Synthesis Report?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The SSC provided oversight and advice throughout the development of the report, excluding members who served as Review Editors.",
      "B": "The SSC was tasked with directly revising the First Order Draft based on expert and government feedback.",
      "C": "The SSC selected Contributing Authors and Extended Writing Team members to ensure adequate expertise.",
      "D": "The SSC monitored the review process to guarantee all comments received appropriate consideration.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "10",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 SYR.pdf",
    "source_text": "viii Process The SYR was prepared in accordance with the procedures of the IPCC. A scoping meeting to develop a detailed outline of the AR6 Synthesis Report was held in Singapore from 21 to 23 October 2019 and the outline produced in that meeting was approved by the Panel at the 52nd IPCC Session from 24 to 28 February 2020 in Paris, France. In accordance with IPCC procedures, the IPCC Chair, in consultation with the Co-Chairs of the Working Groups, nominated authors for the Core Writing Team (CWT) of the SYR. A total of 30 CWT members and 9 Review Editors were selected and accepted by the IPCC Bureau at its 58th Session on 19 May 2020. In the process of developing the SYR, 7 Extended Writing Team (EWT) authors were selected by the CWT and approved by the Chair and the IPCC Bureau, and 28 Contributing Authors were selected by the CWT with the approval of the Chair. These additional authors were to enhance and deepen the expertise required for the preparation of the Report. The Chair established at the 58th Session of the Bureau an SYR Scientific Steering Committee (SSC) with a mandate to advise the development of the SYR. The SYR SSC comprised the members of the IPCC Bureau, excluding those members who served as Review Editors for the SYR. Due to the covid pandemic, the first two meetings of the CWT were held virtually from 25 to 29 January 2021 and from 16 to 20 August 2021. The First Order Draft (FOD) was released to experts and governments for review on 10 January 2022 with comments due on 20 March 2022. The CWT met in Dublin from 25 to 28 March 2022 to discuss how best to revise the FOD to address the more than 10,000 comments received. The Review Editors monitored the review process to ensure that all comments received appropriate consideration. The IPCC circulated a final draft of the Summary for Policymakers and a longer report of the SYR to governments for review from 21 November 2022 to 15 January 2023 which resulted in over 6,000 comments. A final SYR draft for approval incorporating the comments from the final government distribution was submitted to the IPCC member governments on 8 March 2023. The Panel at its 58th Session, held from 13 to 17 March 2023 in Interlaken, Switzerland, approved the SPM line by line and adopted the longer report section by section. Acknowledgements The SYR was made possible thanks to the hard work and commitment to excellence shown by the Section Facilitators, members of CWT and EWT, and Contributing Authors. Specific thanks are due to Section Facilitators Kate Calvin, Dipak Dasgupta, Gerhard Krinner, Aditi Mukherji, Peter Thorne, and Christopher Trisos whose work was essential in ensuring a high standard of the longer report sections and the SPM.We would like to express our appreciation to the IPCC member governments, observer organizations, and expert reviewers for providing constructive comments on the draft reports. We would like to thank the Review Editors Paola Arias, Mercedes Bustamante, Ismail Elgizouli, Gregory Flato, Mark Howden, Steven Rose, Yamina Saheb, Roberto Sánchez, and Cunde Xiao for their work on the treatment of FOD comments, and Gregory Flato, Carlos Méndez, Joy Jacqueline Pereira, Ramón Pichs- Madruga, Diana Ürge-Vorsatz, and Noureddine Yassaa for their work during the approval session, collaborating with author teams to ensure consistency between the SPM and the underlying reports. We are grateful to the members of the SSC for their thoughtful advice and support for the SYR throughout the process: IPCC Vice-Chairs Ko Barret, Thelma Krug, and Youba Sokona; Co-Chairs of Working Groups (WG) and Task Force on National Greenhouse Gas Inventories (TFI) Valérie Masson-Delmotte, Panmao Zhai, Hans-Otto Pörtner, Debra Roberts, Priyadarshi R. Shukla, Jim Skea, Eduardo Calvo Buendía, and Kiyoto Tanabe; WG Vice-Chairs Edvin Aldrian, Fatima Driouech, Jan Fuglestvedt, Muhammad Tariq, Carolina Vera, Noureddine Yassaa, Andreas Fischlin, Joy Jacqueline Pereira, Sergey Semenov, Pius Yanda, Taha M, Zatari, Amjad Abdulla, Carlo Carraro, Diriba Korecha Dadi, Nagmeldin G.E. Mahmoud, Ramón Pichs-Madruga, Andy Reisinger, and Diana Ürge-Vorsatz. The IPCC Vice-Chairs and WG Co-Chairs served also as members of the CWT and we are grateful for their contributions. We wish to thank the IPCC Secretariat for their guidance and support for the SYR in preparation, release and publication of the Report: Deputy Secretary Emira Fida, Mudathir Abdallah, Jesbin Baidya, Laura Biagioni, Oksana Ek",
    "new_id": 9
  },
  {
    "id": 1298,
    "question": "Which statement best captures the relationship between the IPCC's assessment of climate change mitigation and adaptation, and the integration of knowledge systems, as implied in the Climate Change 2023 — Synthesis Report?",
    "options": {
      "B": "The report emphasizes the interdependence of climate, ecosystems, and human societies, recognizing diverse knowledge systems as critical to both mitigation and adaptation strategies.",
      "A": "The report exclusively prioritizes physical science perspectives over socio-economic considerations when integrating knowledge systems for mitigation and adaptation.",
      "C": "The integration of diverse forms of knowledge is presented as a secondary outcome of the assessment, with primary focus on technological solutions for mitigation.",
      "D": "Adaptation and mitigation are treated as independent strategies, with no substantial connection drawn to diverse knowledge systems or interdisciplinary approaches.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "54",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 SYR.pdf",
    "source_text": "38 Section 1 Section 1This Synthesis Report (SYR) of the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report (AR6) summarises the state of knowledge of climate change, its widespread impacts and risks, and climate change mitigation and adaptation, based on the peer-reviewed scientific, technical and socio-economic literature since the publication of the IPCC’s Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) in 2014. The assessment is undertaken within the context of the evolving international landscape, in particular, developments in the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change ( UNFCCC) process, including the outcomes of the Kyoto Protocol and the adoption of the Paris Agreement. It reflects the increasing diversity of those involved in climate action. This report integrates the main findings of the AR6 Working Group reports58 and the three AR6 Special Reports59. It recognizes the interdependence of climate, ecosystems and biodiversity, and human societies; the value of diverse forms of knowledge; and the close linkages between climate change adaptation, mitigation, ecosystem health, human well-being and sustainable development. Building on multiple analytical frameworks, including those from the physical and social sciences, this report identifies opportunities for transformative action which are effective, feasible, just and equitable using concepts of systems transitions and resilient development pathways60. Different regional classification schemes61 are used for physical, social and economic aspects, reflecting the underlying literature. After this introduction, Section 2, ‘ Current Status and Trends’ , opens with the assessment of observational evidence for our changing climate, historical and current drivers of human-induced climate change, and its impacts. It assesses the current implementation of adaptation and mitigation response options. Section 3, ‘ Long-Term Climate and Development Futures ’, provides a long-term assessment of climate change to 2100 and beyond in a broad range of socio-economic 58 The three Working Group contributions to AR6 are: Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis; Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability; and Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change, respectively. Their assessments cover scientific literature accepted for publication respectively by 31 January 2021, 1 September 2021 and 11 October 2021. 59 The three Special Reports are : Global Warming of 1.5°C (2018): an IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty (SR1.5); Climate Change and Land (2019): an IPCC Special Report on climate change, desertification, land degradation, sustainable land management, food security, and greenhouse gas fluxes in terrestrial ecosystems (SRCCL); and The Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate (2019) (SROCC). The Special Reports cover scientific literature accepted for publication respectively by 15 May 2018, 7 April 2019 and 15 May 2019. 60 The Glossary (Annex I) includes definitions of these, and other terms and concepts used in this report drawn from the AR6 joint Working Group Glossary. 61 Depending on the climate information context, geographical regions in AR6 may refer to larger areas, such as sub-continents and oceanic regions, or to typological regions, such as monsoon regions, coastlines, mountain ranges or cities. A new set of standard AR6 WGI reference land and ocean regions have been defined. WGIII allocates countries to geographical regions, based on the UN Statistics Division Classification { WGI 1.4.5, WGI 10.1, WGI 11.9, WGI 12.1–12.4, WGI Atlas.1.3.3–1.3.4 }. 62 Each finding is grounded in an evaluation of underlying evidence and agreement. A level of confidence is expressed using five qualifiers: very low, low, medium, high and very high, and typeset in italics, for example, medium confidence . The following terms have been used to indicate the assessed likelihood of an outcome or result: virtually certain 99–100% probability; very likely 90–100%; likely 66–100%; more likely than not >50-100%; about as likely as not 33–66%; unlikely 0–33%; very unlikely 0–10%; and exceptionally unlikely 0–1%. Additional terms (extremely likely 95–100% and extremely unlikely 0–5%) are also used when appropriate. Assessed likelihood also is typeset in italic",
    "new_id": 10
  },
  {
    "id": 1300,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between human influence, observed climate extremes, and their disproportionate impacts on vulnerable populations, as inferred from the Climate Change 2023 Synthesis Report?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The rise in compound extremes, including concurrent heatwaves and droughts since the 1950s, is attributed to human influence, while highly vulnerable regions face amplified risks due to both climatic and non-climatic factors.",
      "A": "Human influence has unequivocally caused an increase in single extreme events like heatwaves but not compound extremes such as concurrent heatwaves and droughts.",
      "B": "Vulnerable communities with historically lower contributions to climate change experience disproportionately higher adverse impacts primarily due to their geographic location rather than systemic development constraints.",
      "D": "Increased mortality rates in highly vulnerable regions result exclusively from rising sea levels rather than from other climate-related hazards like floods, droughts, or storms.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "21",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 SYR.pdf",
    "source_text": "5 Summary for PolicymakersSummary for Policymakersemissions came from the sectors of energy, industry, transport, and buildings together and 22%10 from agriculture, forestry and other land use ( AFOLU). Emissions reductions in CO 2-FFI due to improvements in energy intensity of GDP and carbon intensity of energy, have been less than emissions increases from rising global activity levels in industry, energy supply, transport, agriculture and buildings. ( high confidence ) {2.1.1 } A.1.5 Historical contributions of CO 2 emissions vary substantially across regions in terms of total magnitude, but also in terms of contributions to CO 2-FFI and net CO 2 emissions from land use, land-use change and forestry (CO 2-LULUCF). In 2019, around 35% of the global population live in countries emitting more than 9 tCO 2-eq per capita11 (excluding CO 2-LULUCF) while 41% live in countries emitting less than 3 tCO 2-eq per capita; of the latter a substantial share lacks access to modern energy services. Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and Small Island Developing States (SIDS) have much lower per capita emissions (1.7 tCO 2-eq and 4.6 tCO 2-eq, respectively) than the global average (6.9 tCO 2-eq), excluding CO 2-LULUCF . The 10% of households with the highest per capita emissions contribute 34–45% of global consumption-based household GHG emissions, while the bottom 50% contribute 13–15%. ( high confidence ) {2.1.1, Figure 2.2 } Observed Changes and Impacts A.2 Widespread and rapid changes in the atmosphere, ocean, cryosphere and biosphere have occurred. Human-caused climate change is already affecting many weather and climate extremes in every region across the globe. This has led to widespread adverse impacts and related losses and damages to nature and people ( high confidence ). Vulnerable communities who have historically contributed the least to current climate change are disproportionately affected ( high confidence ). {2.1, Table 2.1, Figure 2.2, Figure 2.3 } (Figure SPM.1) A.2.1 It is unequivocal that human influence has warmed the atmosphere, ocean and land. Global mean sea level increased by 0.20 [0.15 to 0.25] m between 1901 and 2018. The average rate of sea level rise was 1.3 [0.6 to 2.1] mm yr-1 between 1901 and 1971, increasing to 1.9 [0.8 to 2.9] mm yr-1 between 1971 and 2006, and further increasing to 3.7 [3.2 to 4.2] mm yr-1 between 2006 and 2018 ( high confidence ). Human influence was very likely the main driver of these increases since at least 1971. Evidence of observed changes in extremes such as heatwaves, heavy precipitation, droughts, and tropical cyclones, and, in particular, their attribution to human influence, has further strengthened since AR5. Human influence has likely increased the chance of compound extreme events since the 1950s, including increases in the frequency of concurrent heatwaves and droughts ( high confidence ). {2.1.2, Table 2.1, Figure 2.3, Figure 3.4 } (Figure SPM.1 ) A.2.2 Approximately 3.3 to 3.6 billion people live in contexts that are highly vulnerable to climate change. Human and ecosystem vulnerability are interdependent. Regions and people with considerable development constraints have high vulnerability to climatic hazards. Increasing weather and climate extreme events have exposed millions of people to acute food insecurity12 and reduced water security, with the largest adverse impacts observed in many locations and/or communities in Africa, Asia, Central and South America, LDCs, Small Islands and the Arctic, and globally for Indigenous Peoples, small-scale food producers and low-income households. Between 2010 and 2020, human mortality from floods, droughts and storms was 15 times higher in highly vulnerable regions, compared to regions with very low vulnerability. ( high confidence ) {2.1.2, 4.4 } (Figure SPM.1 ) A.2.3 Climate change has caused substantial damages, and increasingly irreversible losses, in terrestrial, freshwater, cryospheric, and coastal and open ocean ecosystems ( high confidence ). Hundreds of local losses of species have been driven by increases in the magnitude of heat extremes (high confidence ) with mass mortality events recorded on land and in the ocean ( very high confidence ). Impacts on some ecosystems are approaching irreversibility such as the impacts of hydrological changes resulting from the retreat of glaciers, or the changes in some mountain ( medium confidence ) and Arctic ecosystems driven by permafrost thaw ( high confidence ). {2.1.2, Figu",
    "new_id": 11
  },
  {
    "id": 1301,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between climate resilient development and the role of international cooperation, as implied in the Climate Change 2023 — Synthesis Report?",
    "options": {
      "D": "International cooperation is a critical enabler of climate resilient development, particularly through improved access to financial resources and inclusive governance mechanisms.",
      "A": "International cooperation is one of several optional strategies that can marginally enhance climate resilient development but is not essential for its success.",
      "B": "Climate resilient development is primarily a local initiative, with international cooperation playing a secondary, supportive role only in cases of severe financial constraints.",
      "C": "The text explicitly states that climate resilient development can be achieved independently of international cooperation if technological innovation is prioritized.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "40",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 SYR.pdf",
    "source_text": "24 Summary for Policymakers Summary for PolicymakersC. Responses in the Near Term Urgency of Near-Term Integrated Climate Action C.1 Climate change is a threat to human well-being and planetary health ( very high confidence ). There is a rapidly closing window of opportunity to secure a liveable and sustainable future for all (very high confidence ). Climate resilient development integrates adaptation and mitigation to advance sustainable development for all, and is enabled by increased international cooperation including improved access to adequate financial resources, particularly for vulnerable regions, sectors and groups, and inclusive governance and coordinated policies (high confidence ). The choices and actions implemented in this decade will have impacts now and for thousands of years ( high confidence ). {3.1, 3.3, 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 4.4, 4.7, 4.8, 4.9, Figure 3.1, Figure 3.3, Figure 4.2 } (Figure SPM.1, Figure SPM.6 ) C.1.1 Evidence of observed adverse impacts and related losses and damages, projected risks, levels and trends in vulnerability and adaptation limits, demonstrate that worldwide climate resilient development action is more urgent than previously assessed in AR5. Climate resilient development integrates adaptation and GHG mitigation to advance sustainable development for all. Climate resilient development pathways have been constrained by past development, emissions and climate change and are progressively constrained by every increment of warming, in particular beyond 1.5°C. (very high confidence ) {3.4, 3.4.2, 4.1 } C.1.2 Government actions at sub- national, national and international levels, with civil society and the private sector, play a crucial role in enabling and accelerating shifts in development pathways towards sustainability and climate resilient development ( very high confidence ). Climate resilient development is enabled when governments, civil society and the private sector make inclusive development choices that prioritize risk reduction, equity and justice, and when decision-making processes, finance and actions are integrated across governance levels, sectors, and timeframes ( very high confidence ). Enabling conditions are differentiated by national, regional and local circumstances and geographies, according to capabilities, and include: political commitment and follow-through, coordinated policies, social and international cooperation, ecosystem stewardship, inclusive governance, knowledge diversity, technological innovation, monitoring and evaluation, and improved access to adequate financial resources, especially for vulnerable regions, sectors and communities ( high confidence ). {3.4, 4.2, 4.4, 4.5, 4.7, 4.8 } (Figure SPM.6 ) C.1.3 Continued emissions will further affect all major climate system components, and many changes will be irreversible on centennial to millennial time scales and become larger with increasing global warming. Without urgent, effective, and equitable mitigation and adaptation actions, climate change increasingly threatens ecosystems, biodiversity, and the livelihoods, health and well-being of current and future generations. (high confidence ) {3.1.3, 3.3.3, 3.4.1, Figure 3.4, 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 4.4 } (Figure SPM.1, Figure SPM.6 )",
    "new_id": 12
  },
  {
    "id": 1302,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between adaptation options in agriculture, forestry, and other land use (AFOLU) and their effectiveness under increasing global warming, as discussed in the Climate Change 2023 — Synthesis Report?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The effectiveness of ecosystem-based adaptation and most water-related adaptation options declines with increasing warming, necessitating additional complementary strategies.",
      "B": "All AFOLU adaptation options maintain consistent effectiveness regardless of the level of global warming.",
      "C": "Ecosystem-based adaptation and most water-related adaptation options become more effective as global warming increases.",
      "D": "Sustainable agricultural intensification is the only AFOLU option that remains unaffected by rising temperatures.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "122",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 SYR.pdf",
    "source_text": "106 Section 4 Section 1Section 4and marginalised communities including people living in informal settlements ( high confidence ). {WGII SPM C.2.5, WGII SPM C.2.6, WGII SPM C.2.7, WGII SPM D.3.2, WGII TS.E.1.4, WGII Cross-Chapter Box FEAS; WGIII SPM C.6, WGIII SPM C.6.2, WGIII SPM D.1.3, WGIII SPM D.2.1 } Responses to ongoing sea level rise and land subsidence in low-lying coastal cities and settlements and small islands include protection, accommodation, advance and planned relocation. These responses are more effective if combined and/or sequenced, planned well ahead, aligned with sociocultural values and development priorities, and underpinned by inclusive community engagement processes. ( high confidence ) {WGII SPM C.2.8 } 4.5.4. Land, Ocean, Food, and Water There is substantial mitigation and adaptation potential from options in agriculture, forestry and other land use, and in the oceans, that could be upscaled in the near term across most regions ( high confidence ) (Figure 4.5). Conservation, improved management, and restoration of forests and other ecosystems offer the largest share of economic mitigation potential, with reduced deforestation in tropical regions having the highest total mitigation potential. Ecosystem restoration, reforestation, and afforestation can lead to trade-offs due to competing demands on land. Minimizing trade-offs requires integrated approaches to meet multiple objectives including food security. Demand-side measures (shifting to sustainable healthy diets and reducing food loss/waste) and sustainable agricultural intensification can reduce ecosystem conversion and CH 4 and N 2O emissions, and free up land for reforestation and ecosystem restoration. Sustainably sourced agriculture and forest products, including long-lived wood products, can be used instead of more GHG-intensive products in other sectors. Effective adaptation options include cultivar improvements, agroforestry, community-based adaptation, farm and landscape diversification, and urban agriculture. These AFOLU response options require integration of biophysical, socioeconomic and other enabling factors. The effectiveness of ecosystem-based adaptation and most water-related adaptation options declines with increasing warming (see 3.2). (high confidence ) {WGII SPM C.2 .1, WGII SPM C.2.2, WGII SPM C.2.5; WGIII SPM C.9.1; SRCCL SPM B.1.1, SRCCL SPM B.5.4, SRCCL SPM D.1; SROCC SPM C } Some options, such as conservation of high-carbon ecosystems (e.g., peatlands, wetlands, rangelands, mangroves and forests), have immediate impacts while others, such as restoration of high-carbon ecosystems, reclamation of degraded soils or afforestation, take decades to deliver measurable results ( high confidence ). Many sustainable land management technologies and practices are financially profitable in three to ten years ( medium confidence ). {SRCCL SPM B.1.2, SRCCL SPM D.2.2 } Maintaining the resilience of biodiversity and ecosystem services at a global scale depends on effective and equitable conservation of approximately 30–50% of Earth’s land, freshwater and ocean areas, including currently near-natural ecosystems ( high confidence ). The services and options provided by terrestrial, freshwater, coastal and ocean ecosystems can be supported 156 Balanced diets refer to diets that feature plant-based foods, such as those based on coarse grains, legumes, fruits and vegetables, nuts and seeds, and animal-sourced food produced in resilient, sustaina ble and low-GHG emission systems, as described in SRCCL.by protection, restoration, precautionary ecosystem-based management of renewable resource use, and the reduction of pollution and other stressors ( high confidence ). {WGII SPM C.2.4, WGII SPM D.4; SROCC SPM C.2 } Large-scale land conversion for bioenergy, biochar, or afforestation can increase risks to biodiversity , water and food security. In contrast, restoring natural forests and drained peatlands, and improving sustainability of managed forests enhances the resilience of carbon stocks and sinks and reduces ecosystem vulnerability to climate change. Cooperation, and inclusive decision making, with local communities and Indigenous Peoples, as well as recognition of inherent rights of Indigenous Peoples, is integral to successful adaptation across forests and other ecosystems. (high confidence ) {WGII SPM B.5.4, WGII SPM C.2.3, WGII SPM C.2.4; WGIII SPM D.2.3; SRCCL B.7.3, SRCCL SPM C.4.3, SRCCL TS.7 } Natural rivers, wetlands and up",
    "new_id": 13
  },
  {
    "id": 1304,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between the deployment of biological CDR and sustainable development, based on the challenges and synergies outlined in the Climate Change 2023 Synthesis Report??",
    "options": {
      "B": "While afforestation is highlighted as a critical biological CDR method, its large-scale implementation poses significant risks to food security and Indigenous Peoples’ rights, which could undermine sustainable development goals.",
      "A": "Achieving net zero CO2 emissions inherently guarantees positive outcomes for biodiversity and local livelihoods due to universal synergies with sustainable development.",
      "C": "The primary challenge in aligning net zero CO2 pathways with sustainable development lies in the insufficient global geological storage capacity for CCS technologies.",
      "D": "Modelled pathways prioritizing resource efficiency and sustainability eliminate all trade-offs associated with land use and biodiversity, rendering CDR methods unnecessary.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "37",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 SYR.pdf",
    "source_text": "21 Summary for PolicymakersSummary for PolicymakersTable SPM.1: Greenhouse gas and CO 2 emission reductions from 2019, median and 5-95 percentiles. {3.3.1, 4.1, Table 3.1, Figure 2.5, Box SPM.1 } Reductions from 2019 emission levels (%) 2030 2035 2040 2050 Limit warming to1.5°C (>50%) with no or limited overshootGHG 43 [34-60] 60 [49-77] 69 [58-90] 84 [73-98] CO 2 48 [36-69] 65 [50-96] 80 [61-109] 99 [79-119] Limit warming to 2°C (>67%) GHG 21 [1-42] 35 [22-55] 46 [34-63] 64 [53-77] CO 2 22 [1-44] 37 [21-59] 51 [36-70] 73 [55-90] B.6.2 Reaching net zero CO 2 or GHG emissions primarily requires deep and rapid reductions in gross emissions of CO 2, as well as substantial reductions of non-CO 2 GHG emissions ( high confidence ). For example, in modelled pathways that limit warming to 1. 5°C (>50%) with no or limited overshoot, global methane emissions are reduced by 34 [21–57]% by 2030 relative to 2019. However, some hard-to-abate residual GHG emissions (e.g., some emissions from agriculture, aviation, shipping, and industrial processes) remain and would need to be counterbalanced by deployment of CDR methods to achieve net zero CO 2 or GHG emissions (high confidence) . As a result, net zero CO 2 is reached earlier than net zero GHGs (high confidence ). {3.3.2, 3.3.3, Table 3.1, Figure 3.5 } (Figure SPM.5 ) B.6.3 Global modelled mitigation pathways reaching net zero CO 2 and GHG emissions include transitioning from fossil fuels without carbon capture and storage (CCS) to very low- or zero-carbon energy sources, such as renewables or fossil fuels with CCS, demand-side measures and improving efficiency, reducing non-CO 2 GHG emissions, and CDR47. In most global modelled pathways, land-use change and forestry (via reforestation and reduced deforestation) and the energy supply sector reach net zero CO 2 emissions earlier than the buildings, industry and transport sectors. ( high confidence ) {3.3.3, 4.1, 4.5, Figure 4.1 } (Figure SPM.5, Box SPM.1 ) B.6.4 Mitigation options often have synergies with other aspects of sustainable development, but some options can also have trade-offs. There are potential synergies between sustainable development and, for instance, energy efficiency and renewable energy. Similarly, depending on the context48, biological CDR methods like reforestation, improved forest management, soil carbon sequestration, peatland restoration and coastal blue carbon management can enhance biodiversity and ecosystem functions, employment and local livelihoods. However, afforestation or production of biomass crops can have adverse socio-economic and environmental impacts, including on biodiversity, food and water security, local livelihoods and the rights of Indigenous Peoples, especially if implemented at large scales and where land tenure is insecure. Modelled pathways that assume using resources more efficiently or that shift global development towards sustainability include fewer challenges, such as less dependence on CDR and pressure on land and biodiversity. (high confidence ) {3.4.1 } 47 CCS is an option to reduce emissions from large-scale fossil-based energy and industry sources provided geological storage is available. When CO 2 is captured directly from the atmosphere (DACCS), or from biomass (BECCS), CCS provides the storage component of these CDR methods. CO 2 capture and subsurface injection is a mature technology for gas processing and enhanced oil recovery. In contrast to the oil and gas sector, CCS is less mature in the power sector, as well as in cement and chemicals production, where it is a critical mitigation option. The technical geological storage capacity is estimated to be on the order of 1000 GtCO 2, which is more than the CO 2 storage requirements through 2100 to limit global warming to 1.5°C, although the regional availability of geological storage could be a limiting factor. If the geological storage site is appropriately selected and managed, it is estimated that the CO 2 can be permanently isolated from the atmosphere. Implementation of CCS currently faces technological, economic, institutional, ecological-environmental and socio-cultural barriers. Currently, global rates of CCS deployment are far below those in modelled pathways limiting global warming to 1.5°C to 2°C. Enabling conditions such as policy instruments, greater public support and technological innovation could reduce these barriers. ( high confidence ) {3.3.3 } 48 The impacts, risks, and co-benefits of CDR deployment f",
    "new_id": 14
  },
  {
    "id": 1305,
    "question": "Which of the following statements most accurately reflects a logical consequence or synthesis of the information provided about adaptation effectiveness and its limitations, as described in the Climate Change 2023 — Synthesis Report?",
    "options": {
      "C": "While some adaptation measures have proven effective in specific contexts, financial, governance, and institutional constraints currently limit their scalability and long-term success in certain vulnerable areas.",
      "A": "Ecosystem-based adaptation has been universally effective in all regions, particularly in reducing urban heat and flood risks, without exception.",
      "B": "Incremental adaptations are sufficient to address climate risks across all sectors, eliminating the need for transformative approaches even in lower-income regions.",
      "D": "Maladaptation is a negligible concern since observed benefits from adaptation measures outweigh any adverse impacts on marginalized groups.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "24",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 SYR.pdf",
    "source_text": "8 Summary for Policymakers Summary for Policymakersrepresentative generations (born in 1950, 1980 and 2020). Future projections (2021–2100) of changes in global surface temperature are shown for very low (SSP1-1.9), low (SSP1-2.6), intermediate (SSP2-4.5), high (SSP3-7.0) and very high (SSP5-8.5) GHG emissions scenarios. Changes in annual global surface temperatures are presented as ‘ climate stripes’, with future projections showing the human-caused long-term trends and continuing modulation by natural variability (represented here using observed levels of past natural variability). Colours on the generational icons correspond to the global surface temperature stripes for each year, wit h segments on future icons differentiating possible future experiences. {2.1, 2.1.2, Figure 2.1, Table 2.1, Figure 2.3, Cross-Section Box.2, 3.1, Figure 3.3, 4.1, 4.3 } (Box SPM.1 ) Current Progress in Adaptation and Gaps and Challenges A.3 Adaptation planning and implementation has progressed across all sectors and regions, with documented benefits and varying effectiveness. Despite progress, adaptation gaps exist, and will continue to grow at current rates of implementation. Hard and soft limits to adaptation have been reached in some ecosystems and regions. Maladaptation is happening in some sectors and regions. Current global financial flows for adaptation are insufficient for, and constrain implementation of, adaptation options, especially in developing countries (high confidence ). {2.2, 2.3 } A.3.1 Progress in adaptation planning and implementation has been observed across all sectors and regions, generating multiple benefits (very high confidence ). Growing public and political awareness of climate impacts and risks has resulted in at least 170 countries and many cities including adaptation in their climate policies and planning processes (high confidence ). {2.2.3 } A.3.2 Effectiveness15 of adaptation in reducing climate risks16 is documented for specific contexts, sectors and regions (high confidence ). Examples of effective adaptation options include: cultivar improvements, on-farm water management and storage, soil moisture conservation, irrigation, agroforestry, community-based adaptation, farm and landscape level diversification in agriculture, sustainable land management approaches, use of agroecological principles and practices and other approaches that work with natural processes (high confidence ). Ecosystem-based adaptation17 approaches such as urban greening, restoration of wetlands and upstream forest ecosystems have been effective in reducing flood risks and urban heat (high confidence ). Combinations of non-structural measures like early warning systems and structural measures like levees have reduced loss of lives in case of inland flooding (medium confidence ). Adaptation options such as disaster risk management, early warning systems, climate services and social safety nets have broad applicability across multiple sectors (high confidence ). {2.2.3 } A.3.3 Most observed adaptation responses are fragmented, incremental18, sector-specific and unequally distributed across regions. Despite progress, adaptation gaps exist across sectors and regions, and will continue to grow under current levels of implementation, with the largest adaptation gaps among lower income groups. (high confidence ) {2.3.2 } A.3.4 There is increased evidence of maladaptation in various sectors and regions. Maladaptation especially affects marginalised and vulnerable groups adversely. (high confidence ) {2.3.2 } A.3.5 Soft limits to adaptation are currently being experienced by small-scale farmers and households along some low- lying coastal areas (medium confidence ) resulting from financial, governance, institutional and policy constraints (high confidence ). Some tropical, coastal, polar and mountain ecosystems have reached hard adaptation limits (high confidence ). Adaptation does not prevent all losses and damages, even with effective adaptation and before reaching soft and hard limits (high confidence ). {2.3.2 } 15 Effectiveness refers here to the extent to which an adaptation option is anticipated or observed to reduce climate-related risk. {2.2.3 } 16 See Annex I: Glossary. {2.2.3 } 17 Ecosystem-based Adaptation (EbA) is recognized internationally under the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD14/5). A related concept is Nature-based Solutions (NbS), see Annex I: Glossary. 18 Incremental adaptations to change in climate are und",
    "new_id": 15
  },
  {
    "id": 1307,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between policy measures, international cooperation, and the global diffusion of mitigation technologies, as described in the Climate Change 2023 — Synthesis Report?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Successful low-carbon innovation requires both national policy measures and international cooperation, which together address financial, technical, and capacity-building gaps in developing countries.",
      "A": "Policy measures alone are sufficient to ensure the global diffusion of low-emission technologies, even without international cooperation.",
      "B": "International cooperation is critical for aligning mitigation technologies with development objectives but has no impact on accelerating their diffusion.",
      "C": "The global diffusion of mitigation technologies is primarily hindered by a lack of technological innovation rather than insufficient international cooperation or tailored policies.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "129",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 SYR.pdf",
    "source_text": "113 Near-Term Responses in a Changing ClimateSection 44.8.3. Technology Innovation, Adoption, Diffusion and Transfer Enhancing technology innovation systems can provide opportunities to lower emissions growth and create social and environmental co- benefits. Policy packages tailored to national contexts and technological characteristics have been effective in supporting low-emission innovation and technology diffusion. Support for successful low-carbon technological innovation includes public policies such as training and R&D, complemented by regulatory and market-based instruments that create incentives and market opportunities such as appliance performance standards and building codes. (high confidence ) {WGIII SPM B.4, WGIII SPM B.4.4, WGIII SPM E.4.3, WGIII SPM E4.4 }International cooperation on innovation systems and technology development and transfer, accompanied by capacity building, knowledge sharing, and technical and financial support can accelerate the global diffusion of mitigation technologies, practices and policies and align these with other development objectives (high confidence ). Choice architecture can help end-users adopt technology and low-GHG-intensive options ( high confidence ). Adoption of low- emission technologies lags in most developing countries, particularly least developed ones, due in part to weaker enabling conditions, including limited finance, technology development and transfer, and capacity building ( medium confidence ). {WGIII SPM B.4.2, WGIII SPM E.6.2, WGIII SPM C.10.4, WGIII 16.5 }Higher mitigation investment flows required for all sectors and regions to limit global warming Actual yearly flows compared to average annual needs in billions USD (2015) per year Multiplication factors* 0 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 500 2017 2018 2019 2020 Annual mitigation investment needs (averaged until 2030)IEA data mean 2017–2020 Average flows0 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 500 *Multiplication factors indicate the x-fold increase between yearly mitigation flows to average yearly mitigation investment needs. Globally, current mitigation financial flows are a factor of three to six below the average levels up to 2030.Yearly mitigation investment flows (USD 2015/yr ) in:By sector By type of economyEnergy efficiency Developing countries By region Europe Eastern Europe and West-Central AsiaLatin America and Caribbean Africa Middle EastNorth America Australia, Japan and New Zealand South-East Asia and PacificSouthern AsiaDeveloped countriesAgriculture, forestry and other land useElectricityTransport Eastern AsiaLower rangeUpper range x10 x31x2 x5 x3 x5 x6x7 x14 x12 x14 x28x12x3x4x2x3 x6 x4 x7 x15x5x4 x7x7 x7 x7 x2 x4x2 x8 x7 Figure 4.6: Breakdown of average mitigation investment flows and investment needs until 2030 (USD billion). Mitigation investment flows and investment needs by sector ( energy efficiency, transport, electricity, and agriculture, forestry and other land use), by type of economy, and by region (see WGIII Annex II Part I Section 1 for the classification schemes for countries and areas). The blue bars display data on mitigation investment flows for four years: 2017, 2018, 2019 and 2020 by sector and by type of economy. For the regional breakdown, the annual average mitigation investment flows for 2017–2019 are shown. The grey bars show the minimum and maximum level of global annual mitigation investment needs in the assessed scenarios. This has been averaged until 2030. The multiplication factors show the ratio of global average early mitigation investment needs (averaged until 2030) and current yearly mitigation flows (averaged for 2017/18–2020). The lower multiplication factor refers to the lower end of the range of investment needs. The upper multiplication factor refers to the upper range of investment needs. Given the multiple sources and lack of harmonised methodologies, the data can be considered only if indicative of the size and pattern of investment needs. { WGIII Figure TS.25, WGIII 15.3, WGIII 15.4, WGIII 15.5, WGIII Table 15.2, WGIII Table 15.3, WGIII Table 15.4 }",
    "new_id": 16
  },
  {
    "id": 1308,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between climate resilient development and the constraints imposed by past actions, as well as the implications of exceeding specific warming thresholds, according to the Climate Change 2023 — Synthesis Report?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Past development and emissions have constrained climate resilient development, which will become progressively harder to achieve beyond 1.5°C warming due to limited adaptive capacity of ecosystems.",
      "B": "Climate resilient development is unaffected by historical emissions but becomes unachievable in all regions if global warming exceeds 2°C.",
      "C": "The feasibility of climate resilient development depends solely on current financial support for developing countries, with no significant influence from past actions or warming thresholds.",
      "D": "Safeguarding biodiversity ensures climate resilient development remains possible even if global warming exceeds 2°C, provided inclusive planning is implemented.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "105-106",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 SYR.pdf",
    "source_text": "89 Long-Term Climate and Development FuturesSection 33.4.2 Advancing Integrated Climate Action for Sustainable Development An inclusive, equitable approach to integrating adaptation, mitigation and development can advance sustainable development in the long term ( high confidence ). Integrated responses can harness synergies for sustainable development and reduce trade-offs ( high confidence ). Shifting development pathways towards sustainability and advancing climate resilient development is enabled when governments, civil society and the private sector make development choices that prioritise risk reduction, equity and justice, and when decision-making processes, finance and actions are integrated across governance levels, sectors and timeframes ( very high confidence ) (see also Figure 4.2 ). Inclusive processes involving local knowledge and Indigenous Knowledge increase these prospects ( high confidence ). However, opportunities for action differ substantially among and within regions, driven by historical and ongoing patterns of development ( very high confidence ). Accelerated financial support for developing countries is critical to enhance mitigation and adaptation action ( high confidence ). {WGII SPM C.5.4, WGII SPM D.1, WGII SPM D.1.1, WGII SPM D.1.2, WGII SPM D.2, WGII SPM D.3, WGII SPM D.5, WGII SPM D.5.1, WGII SPM D.5.2; WGIII SPM D.1, WGIII SPM D.2, WGIII SPM D.2.4, WGIII SPM E.2.2, WGIII SPM E.2.3, WGIII SPM E.5.3, WGIII Cross-Chapter Box 5 } Policies that shift development pathways towards sustainability can broaden the portfolio of available mitigation and adaptation responses ( medium confidence ). Combining mitigation with action to shift development pathways, such as broader sectoral policies , approaches that induce lifestyle or behaviour changes, financial regulation, or macroeconomic policies can overcome barriers and open up a broader range of mitigation options ( high confidence ). Integrated, inclusive planning and investment in everyday decision- making about urban infrastructure can significantly increase the adaptive capacity of urban and rural settlements. Coastal cities and settlements play an important role in advancing climate resilient development due to the high number of people living in the Low Elevation Coastal Zone, the escalating and climate compounded risk that they face, and their vital role in national economies and beyond (high confidence ). {WGII SPM.D.3, WGII SPM D.3.3; WGIII SPM E.2, WGIII SPM E.2.2; SR1.5 SPM D.6 } Observed adverse impacts and related losses and damages, projected risks, trends in vulnerability, and adaptation limits demonstrate that transformation for sustainability and climate resilient development action is more urgent than previously assessed ( very high confidence ). Climate resilient development integrates adaptation and GHG mitigation to advance sustainable development for all. Climate resilient development pathways have been constrained by past development, emissions and climate change and are progressively constrained by every increment of warming, in particular beyond 1.5°C ( very high confidence ). Climate resilient development will not be possible in some regions and sub-regions if global warming exceeds 2°C ( medium confidence ). Safeguarding biodiversity and ecosystems is fundamental to climate resilient development, but biodiversity and ecosystem services have limited capacity to adapt to increasing global warming levels, making climate resilient development progressively harder to achieve beyond 1.5°C warming (very high confidence ). {WGII SPM D.1, WGII SPM D.1.1, WGII SPM D.4, WGII SPM D.4.3, WGII SPM D.5.1; WGIII SPM D.1.1 } The cumulative scientific evidence is unequivocal: climate change is a threat to human well-being and planetary health ( very high confidence ). Any further delay in concerted anticipatory global action on adaptation and mitigation will miss a brief and rapidly closing window of opportunity to secure a liveable and sustainable future for all ( very high confidence ). Opportunities for near-term action are assessed in the following section. {WGII SPM D.5.3; WGIII SPM D.1.1 }\n\n[Page 106]\n90",
    "new_id": 17
  },
  {
    "id": 1311,
    "question": "Which scenario best illustrates a combination of maladaptation and reaching hard adaptation limits, as described in the Climate Change 2023 Synthesis Report?",
    "options": {
      "B": "A coastal city builds seawalls without integrating them into long-term adaptive planning, leading to increased exposure to climate risks and eventual freshwater scarcity.",
      "A": "A region dependent on glacier melt implements large-scale desalination plants, avoiding water shortages but increasing greenhouse gas emissions significantly.",
      "C": "An island nation adopts ecosystem-based adaptation measures for coral reefs, successfully maintaining biodiversity despite rising ocean temperatures.",
      "D": "A mountain community invests in multi-sectoral solutions that differentiate responses based on climate risk, reducing social inequities and enhancing resilience.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "35",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 SYR.pdf",
    "source_text": "19 Summary for PolicymakersSummary for PolicymakersAdaptation Options and their Limits in a Warmer World B.4 Adaptation options that are feasible and effective today will become constrained and less effective with increasing global warming. With increasing global warming, losses and damages will increase and additional human and natural systems will reach adaptation limits. Maladaptation can be avoided by flexible, multi- sectoral, inclusive, long-term planning and implementation of adaptation actions, with co-benefits to many sectors and systems. ( high confidence ) {3.2, 4.1, 4.2, 4.3 } B.4.1 The effectiveness of adaptation, including ecosystem-based and most water-related options, will decrease with increasing warming. The feasibility and effectiveness of options increase with integrated, multi- sectoral solutions that differentiate responses based on climate risk, cut across systems and address social inequities. As adaptation options often have long implementation times, long-term planning increases their efficiency. (high confidence ) {3.2, Figure 3.4, 4.1, 4.2 } B.4.2 With additional global warming, limits to adaptation and losses and damages, strongly concentrated among vulnerable populations, will become increasingly difficult to avoid (high confidence ). Above 1.5°C of global warming, limited freshwater resources pose potential hard adaptation limits for small islands and for regions dependent on glacier and snow melt (medium confidence ). Above that level, ecosystems such as some warm- water coral reefs, coastal wetlands, rainforests, and polar and mountain ecosystems will have reached or surpassed hard adaptation limits and as a consequence, some Ecosystem-based Adaptation measures will also lose their effectiveness (high confidence ). {2.3.2, 3.2, 4.3 } B.4.3 Actions that focus on sectors and risks in isolation and on short-term gains often lead to maladaptation over the long term, creating lock-ins of vulnerability, exposure and risks that are difficult to change. For example, seawalls effectively reduce impacts to people and assets in the short term but can also result in lock-ins and increase exposure to climate risks in the long term unless they are integrated into a long-term adaptive plan. Maladaptive responses can worsen existing inequities especially for Indigenous Peoples and marginalised groups and decrease ecosystem and biodiversity resilience. Maladaptation can be avoided by flexible, multi- sectoral, inclusive, long-term planning and implementation of adaptation actions, with co-benefits to many sectors and systems. (high confidence ) {2.3.2, 3.2 } Carbon Budgets and Net Zero Emissions B.5 Limiting human-caused global warming requires net zero CO 2 emissions. Cumulative carbon emissions until the time of reaching net zero CO 2 emissions and the level of greenhouse gas emission reductions this decade largely determine whether warming can be limited to 1.5°C or 2°C ( high confidence ). Projected CO 2 emissions from existing fossil fuel infrastructure without additional abatement would exceed the remaining carbon budget for 1.5°C (50%) (high confidence ). {2.3, 3.1, 3.3, Table 3.1 } B.5.1 From a physical science perspective, limiting human-caused global warming to a specific level requires limiting cumulative CO 2 emissions, reaching at least net zero CO 2 emissions, along with strong reductions in other greenhouse gas emissions. Reaching net zero GHG emissions primarily requires deep reductions in CO 2, methane, and other GHG emissions, and implies net negative CO 2 emissions39. Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) will be necessary to achieve net negative CO 2 emissions ( see B.6). Net zero GHG emissions, if sustained, are projected to result in a gradual decline in global surface temperatures after an earlier peak. ( high confidence ) {3.1.1, 3.3.1, 3.3.2, 3.3.3, Table 3.1, Cross-Section Box.1 } B.5.2 For every 1000 GtCO 2 emitted by human activity, global surface temperature rises by 0.45°C (best estimate, with a likely range from 0.27°C to 0.63°C). The best estimates of the remaining carbon budgets from the beginning of 2020 are 500 GtCO 2 for a 50% likelihood of limiting global warming to 1.5°C and 1150 GtCO 2 for a 67% likelihood of limiting warming to 2°C40. The stronger the reductions in non-CO 2 emissions, the lower the resulting temperatures are for a given remaining carbon budget or the larger remaining carbon budget for the same level of temperature change41. {3.3.1 } 39 Net zero GHG emiss",
    "new_id": 18
  },
  {
    "id": 1882,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes a scenario where an entity might need to adjust its reported emissions despite maintaining consistent operational output, as outlined in the Oil & Gas – Midstream – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The entity divests from a subsidiary whose emissions were previously included, leading to a proportional reduction in reported emissions.",
      "A": "The entity begins participating in a voluntary emissions trading system that overlaps with existing mandatory regulations.",
      "B": "The entity adopts a new calculation methodology that aligns with The Greenhouse Gas Protocol but excludes certain GHGs covered under the Kyoto Protocol.",
      "D": "The entity reports higher emissions due to acquiring a facility already regulated under a different mandatory emissions-limiting regulation.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "10",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Oil & Gas – Midstream.pdf",
    "source_text": "4.1.3 Quebec Cap-and-Trade (Quebec Environment Quality Act) 4.2 The percentage shall be calculated as the total amount of gross global Scope 1 GHG emissions (CO 2-e) covered under emissions-limiting regulations divided by the total amount of gross global Scope 1 GHG emissions (CO 2-e). 4.2.1 For emissions subject to more than one emissions-limiting regulation, the entity shall not account for those emissions more than once. 4.3 The scope of emissions-limiting regulations excludes emissions covered under voluntary emissions-limiting regulations (for example, voluntary trading systems), as well as reporting-based regulations. 5The entity may discuss any change in its emissions from the previous reporting period, including whether the change was because of emissions reductions, divestment, acquisition, mergers, changes in output or changes in calculation methodology. 6In the case that current reporting of GHG emissions to the CDP or other entity (for example, a national regulatory disclosure programme) differs in terms of the scope and consolidation approach used, the entity may disclose those emissions. However, primary disclosure shall be according to the guidelines described above. 7The entity may discuss the calculation methodology for its emissions disclosure, such as if data are from continuous emissions monitoring systems (CEMS), engineering calculations or mass balance calculations. EM-MD-110a.2. Discussion of long- and short-term strategy or plan to manage Scope 1 emissions, emissions reduction targets, and an analysis of performance against those targets 1The entity shall discuss its long- and short-term strategy or plan to manage its Scope 1 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. 1.1 Scope 1 emissions are defined and shall be calculated according to the methodology contained in The Greenhouse Gas Protocol: A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard (GHG Protocol), Revised Edition, March 2004, published by the World Resources Institute and the World Business Council on Sustainable Development (WRI/WBCSD). 1.2 The scope of GHG emissions includes the seven GHGs covered under the Kyoto Protocol —carbon dioxide (CO 2), methane (CH 4), nitrous oxide (N 2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), sulphur hexafluoride (SF 6), and nitrogen trifluoride (NF 3). 2The entity shall discuss its emission reduction target(s) and analyse its performance against the target(s), including, if relevant: 2.1 The scope of the emission reduction target (for example, the percentage of total emissions to which the target is applicable); SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |OIL & GAS – MIDSTREAM |10",
    "new_id": 19
  },
  {
    "id": 1887,
    "question": "Which scenario would NOT qualify as a reportable incident under the given definitions for hazardous liquid or gas pipelines, according to the Oil & Gas – Midstream – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "A hazardous liquid pipeline releasing four barrels of highly volatile liquid with no fire or explosion.",
      "A": "A release of liquefied natural gas resulting in property damage below jurisdictional thresholds but causing a fatality.",
      "B": "An unintentional release of 90,000 cubic meters of gas without injuries or significant property damage.",
      "C": "An emergency shutdown of an LNG facility triggered by a false alarm during routine testing.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "22",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Oil & Gas – Midstream.pdf",
    "source_text": "2.4 estimated property damage, including cost of clean-up and recovery, value of lost product, and damage to the property of the operator or others (or both), exceeding jurisdictionally defined property damage thresholds for pipeline incident/accident reporting in the local currency. 3 Incidents associated with gas transmission, gathering and distribution are defined as any of these events: 3.1 an event that involves a release of gas from a pipeline, or of liquefied natural gas (LNG), liquefied petroleum gas, refrigerant gas, or gas from an LNG facility, and results in: 3.1.1 a fatality or an injury necessitating in-patient hospitalisation; 3.1.2 estimated property damage exceeding jurisdictionally defined property damage thresholds for pipeline incident/accident reporting in the local currency, including loss to the operator and others (or both), but excluding cost of gas lost; or 3.1.3 unintentional estimated gas loss of 85,000 cubic metres (3 million cubic feet) or more. 3.2 an event that results in an emergency shutdown of an LNG facility (activation of an emergency shutdown system for reasons other than an actual emergency does not constitute an incident); or 3.3 an event that is significant in the judgement of the operator, even though it did not meet the criteria of the above paragraphs of this definition. 4The entity shall disclose (2) the percentage of reportable accidents that were significant, in which a significant accident or incident is defined as one that resulted in: 4.1 a fatality or an injury requiring in-patient hospitalisation; 4.2 total costs exceeding jurisdictionally defined property damage thresholds for pipeline incident/accident reporting in the local presentation currency; 4.3 highly volatile liquid releases of five barrels or more, or other liquid releases of 50 barrels or more; or 4.4 liquid releases resulting in an unintentional fire or explosion. 5The entity shall disclose reportable incidents involving hazardous liquid pipelines and gas pipelines. 5.1 A hazardous liquid pipeline is defined as all parts of a pipeline facility through which a hazardous liquid or carbon dioxide moves in transit, which may include line pipe, valves and other appurtenances connected to line pipe, pumping units, fabricated assemblies associated with pumping units, metering and delivery stations and fabricated assemblies therein, and breakout tanks. 5.2 A gas pipeline is defined as all parts of a pipeline facility through which gas moves in transit, including pipe, valves and other appurtenance attached to pipe, compressor units, metering stations, regulator stations, delivery stations, holders and fabricated assemblies. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |OIL & GAS – MIDSTREAM |22",
    "new_id": 20
  },
  {
    "id": 1888,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes a scenario where an entity might face complications in calculating its percentage of gross global Scope 1 GHG emissions covered under emissions-limiting regulations, as described in the Oil & Gas – Midstream – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The entity fails to exclude emissions subject to multiple mandatory regulations to avoid double-counting.",
      "B": "The entity operates in a jurisdiction with overlapping mandatory and voluntary emissions-limiting regulations.",
      "C": "The entity includes emissions data from continuous emissions monitoring systems (CEMS) without considering engineering calculations.",
      "D": "The entity reports emissions reductions due to divestments or mergers without adjusting its baseline calculations.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "10",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Oil & Gas – Midstream.pdf",
    "source_text": "4.1.3 Quebec Cap-and-Trade (Quebec Environment Quality Act) 4.2 The percentage shall be calculated as the total amount of gross global Scope 1 GHG emissions (CO 2-e) covered under emissions-limiting regulations divided by the total amount of gross global Scope 1 GHG emissions (CO 2-e). 4.2.1 For emissions subject to more than one emissions-limiting regulation, the entity shall not account for those emissions more than once. 4.3 The scope of emissions-limiting regulations excludes emissions covered under voluntary emissions-limiting regulations (for example, voluntary trading systems), as well as reporting-based regulations. 5The entity may discuss any change in its emissions from the previous reporting period, including whether the change was because of emissions reductions, divestment, acquisition, mergers, changes in output or changes in calculation methodology. 6In the case that current reporting of GHG emissions to the CDP or other entity (for example, a national regulatory disclosure programme) differs in terms of the scope and consolidation approach used, the entity may disclose those emissions. However, primary disclosure shall be according to the guidelines described above. 7The entity may discuss the calculation methodology for its emissions disclosure, such as if data are from continuous emissions monitoring systems (CEMS), engineering calculations or mass balance calculations. EM-MD-110a.2. Discussion of long- and short-term strategy or plan to manage Scope 1 emissions, emissions reduction targets, and an analysis of performance against those targets 1The entity shall discuss its long- and short-term strategy or plan to manage its Scope 1 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. 1.1 Scope 1 emissions are defined and shall be calculated according to the methodology contained in The Greenhouse Gas Protocol: A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard (GHG Protocol), Revised Edition, March 2004, published by the World Resources Institute and the World Business Council on Sustainable Development (WRI/WBCSD). 1.2 The scope of GHG emissions includes the seven GHGs covered under the Kyoto Protocol —carbon dioxide (CO 2), methane (CH 4), nitrous oxide (N 2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), sulphur hexafluoride (SF 6), and nitrogen trifluoride (NF 3). 2The entity shall discuss its emission reduction target(s) and analyse its performance against the target(s), including, if relevant: 2.1 The scope of the emission reduction target (for example, the percentage of total emissions to which the target is applicable); SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |OIL & GAS – MIDSTREAM |10",
    "new_id": 21
  },
  {
    "id": 1889,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the implications of the entity's obligations under emissions-limiting regulations, as described in the Oil & Gas – Midstream – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Entities can disregard emissions covered by voluntary or reporting-based regulations when determining compliance with mandatory emissions-limiting regulations.",
      "A": "Entities must report emissions reductions achieved exclusively through operational changes, excluding any impacts from mergers or divestments.",
      "C": "An entity is required to adjust its disclosed emissions data if there are discrepancies between mandatory reporting and voluntary systems like the CDP.",
      "D": "If an entity's emissions fall under multiple regulatory frameworks, it must allocate portions of those emissions to each regulation to avoid double-counting.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "10",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Oil & Gas – Midstream.pdf",
    "source_text": "4.1.3 Quebec Cap-and-Trade (Quebec Environment Quality Act) 4.2 The percentage shall be calculated as the total amount of gross global Scope 1 GHG emissions (CO 2-e) covered under emissions-limiting regulations divided by the total amount of gross global Scope 1 GHG emissions (CO 2-e). 4.2.1 For emissions subject to more than one emissions-limiting regulation, the entity shall not account for those emissions more than once. 4.3 The scope of emissions-limiting regulations excludes emissions covered under voluntary emissions-limiting regulations (for example, voluntary trading systems), as well as reporting-based regulations. 5The entity may discuss any change in its emissions from the previous reporting period, including whether the change was because of emissions reductions, divestment, acquisition, mergers, changes in output or changes in calculation methodology. 6In the case that current reporting of GHG emissions to the CDP or other entity (for example, a national regulatory disclosure programme) differs in terms of the scope and consolidation approach used, the entity may disclose those emissions. However, primary disclosure shall be according to the guidelines described above. 7The entity may discuss the calculation methodology for its emissions disclosure, such as if data are from continuous emissions monitoring systems (CEMS), engineering calculations or mass balance calculations. EM-MD-110a.2. Discussion of long- and short-term strategy or plan to manage Scope 1 emissions, emissions reduction targets, and an analysis of performance against those targets 1The entity shall discuss its long- and short-term strategy or plan to manage its Scope 1 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. 1.1 Scope 1 emissions are defined and shall be calculated according to the methodology contained in The Greenhouse Gas Protocol: A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard (GHG Protocol), Revised Edition, March 2004, published by the World Resources Institute and the World Business Council on Sustainable Development (WRI/WBCSD). 1.2 The scope of GHG emissions includes the seven GHGs covered under the Kyoto Protocol —carbon dioxide (CO 2), methane (CH 4), nitrous oxide (N 2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), sulphur hexafluoride (SF 6), and nitrogen trifluoride (NF 3). 2The entity shall discuss its emission reduction target(s) and analyse its performance against the target(s), including, if relevant: 2.1 The scope of the emission reduction target (for example, the percentage of total emissions to which the target is applicable); SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |OIL & GAS – MIDSTREAM |10",
    "new_id": 22
  },
  {
    "id": 2327,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between the highest governance body's responsibilities and the organization's internal controls for sustainability reporting, as described in the Consolidated Set of the GRI Standards 2021?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The highest governance body may review the adequacy of internal controls, but this is not a mandatory requirement under Disclosure 2-14.",
      "A": "The highest governance body is required to review the adequacy of internal controls to ensure the integrity of sustainability reporting.",
      "B": "The highest governance body delegates all responsibility for internal controls to a sustainability reporting committee without exception.",
      "D": "The highest governance body’s involvement in reviewing internal controls is only necessary if conflicts of interest are identified.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "65-66",
    "ref_doc": "GRI Standards 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Disclosure 2-14 Role of the highest governance body in sustainability reporting The organization shall:REQUIREMENTS report whether the highest governance body is responsible for reviewing and approving the reported information, including the organization’s material topics , and if so, describe the process for reviewing and approving the information;a. if the highest governance body is not responsible for reviewing and approving the reported information, including the organization’s material topics, explain the reason for this.b. The organization can report whether the highest governance body has established a sustainability reporting committee to support the highest governance body’s review and approval process. The organization can also report whether the highest governance body reviews the adequacy of the organization’s internal controls to strengthen the integrity and credibility of the organization’s sustainability reporting (see section 5.2 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 for more information). The involvement of the highest governance body and senior executives in developing the organization’s policy and practice for seeking external assurance is reported under Disclosure 2-5 in this Standard.GUIDANCE GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 64\n\n[Page 66]\nDisclosure 2-15 Conflicts of interest The organization shall:REQUIREMENTS describe the processes for the highest governance body to ensure that conflicts of interest are prevented and mitigated ;a. report whether conflicts of interest are disclosed to stakeholders , including, at a minimum, conflicts of interest relating to: cross-board membership; i. cross-shareholding with suppliers and other stakeholders; ii. existence of controlling shareholders; iii. related parties, their relationships, transactions, and outstanding balances. iv.b. See reference [20] in the Bibliography . Guidance to 2-15-b-iii The organization should use the definition of controlling shareholder applied in the organization’s consolidated financial statements or equivalent documents.GUIDANCE GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 65",
    "new_id": 23
  },
  {
    "id": 2409,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why a supplier with an indirect business relationship is still considered part of the value chain, according to the distinctions made in the Consolidated Set of the GRI Standards 2021?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Because entities upstream from the organization are always categorized as part of the supply chain, which is fully encompassed by the value chain.",
      "A": "Because all suppliers, regardless of their tier, directly contribute to the organization’s product development.",
      "B": "Because indirect suppliers provide essential services that support the activities of first-tier suppliers, thereby influencing the organization’s outputs.",
      "C": "Because the value chain includes only those entities that have a contractual agreement with the organization.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "195",
    "ref_doc": "GRI Standards 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Examples brokers, consultants, contractors, distributors, franchisees, home workers , independent contractors, licensees, manufacturers, primary producers, sub- contractors, wholesalers Note: A supplier can have a direct business relationship with the organization (often referred to as a first-tier supplier) or an indirect business relationship. supply chain range of activities carried out by entities upstream from the organization, which provide products or services that are used in the development of the organization’s own products or services surface water water that occurs naturally on the Earth’s surface in ice sheets, ice caps, glaciers, icebergs, bogs, ponds, lakes, rivers, and streams Source: CDP, CDP Water Security Reporting Guidance , 2018; modified sustainable development / sustainability development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs Source: World Commission on Environment and Development, Our Common Future , 1987 Note: The terms ‘sustainability’ and ‘sustainable development’ are used interchangeably in the GRI Standards. third-party water municipal water suppliers and municipal wastewater treatment plants, public or private utilities, and other organizations involved in the provision, transport, treatment, disposal, or use of water and effluent value chain range of activities carried out by the organization, and by entities upstream and downstream from the organization, to bring the organization’s products or services from their conception to their end use Note 1: Entities upstream from the organization (e.g., suppliers ) provide products or services that are used in the development of the organization’s own products or services. Entities downstream from the organization (e.g., distributors, customers) receive products or services from the organization. Note 2: The value chain includes the supply chain . vulnerable group group of individuals with a specific condition or characteristic (e.g., economic, physical, political, social) that could experience negative impacts as a result of the organization’s activities more severely than the general population Examples: children and youth; elderly persons; ex-combatants; HIV/AIDS-affected households; human rights defenders; indigenous peoples ; internally displaced persons; migrant workers and their families; national or ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities; persons who might be discriminated against based on their sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, or sex characteristics (e.g., lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex); persons with disabilities; refugees or returning refugees; women Note: Vulnerabilities and impacts can differ by gender. waste anything that the holder discards, intends to discard, or is required to discard Source: United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal , 1989 T V W GRI 11: Oil and Gas Sector 2021 194",
    "new_id": 24
  },
  {
    "id": 2414,
    "question": "Under which circumstance is an organization permitted to omit reporting on a disclosure due to confidentiality constraints, while still complying with the GRI Standards, as outlined in the Consolidated Set of the GRI Standards 2021?",
    "options": {
      "A": "When the organization deems the information confidential and its disclosure could harm competitive interests, despite no legal prohibition against reporting it.",
      "B": "When the law explicitly prohibits the collection or public reporting of the required information.",
      "C": "When the organization lacks complete data for certain geographic locations but can identify those locations in its report.",
      "D": "When the organization has not yet developed a policy or process that the disclosure requires them to describe.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "18",
    "ref_doc": "GRI Standards 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "The organization is only permitted to provide one of the four reasons for omission included in Table 1 of this Standard: Not applicable The organization provides ‘not applicable’ as the reason for omission in the following situations: Legal prohibitions The organization provides ‘legal prohibitions’ as the reason for omission when the law forbids collecting the required information or reporting it publicly. Confidentiality constraints There may be cases where the law does not forbid collecting or reporting the required information, but the organization considers the information confidential and cannot report it publicly. In such cases, the organization provides ‘confidentiality constraints’ as the reason for omission. Information unavailable/incomplete There may be cases where the organization has the item specified in a disclosure or in a requirement in a disclosure, but the information about the item is unavailable or incomplete. In such cases, the organization provides ‘information unavailable/incomplete’ as the reason for omission. For example, information is unavailable for Disclosure 305-3 in GRI 305: Emissions 2016 when the organization has other indirect (Scope 3) greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, but it has not collected data on its other indirect (Scope 3) GHG emissions yet. When the organization cannot report part of the required information it means the information is incomplete. When the reported information does not cover the complete scope required by a disclosure (e.g., the information is missing for certain entities, sites, geographic locations), then the organization is required to provide ‘information unavailable/incomplete’ as the reason for omission. The organization must specify the entities, sites, geographic locations, etc., for which the required information is missing and cannot be reported. The required information, or part of the required information, can be unavailable when, for example, it cannot be obtained or is not of adequate quality to report. This may be the case when the information is collected from another organization, such as a supplier . The reasons ‘confidentiality constraints’ and ‘information unavailable/incomplete’ should only be used in exceptionalWhen a disclosure or a requirement in a disclosure does not apply to the organization based on its characteristics (e.g., size, type). For example, 2-15-b-iii in GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 requires the organization to report whether conflicts of interest relating to the existence of controlling shareholders are disclosed to stakeholders. This requirement does not apply to organizations that do not have shareholders (e.g., foundations). In such cases, the organization is required to explain why the disclosure or the requirement does not apply to the organization. However, there may be cases where a disclosure or a requirement in a disclosure applies to the organization, but the organization does not have in place the item specified in the disclosure or in the requirement (e.g., committee, policy, practice, process). For example, 2-23-b in GRI 2 requires the organization to describe its policy commitment to respect human rights. This expectation applies to every organization. All organizations are expected to have a policy commitment to respect human rights, but not every organization may have developed such a policy commitment yet. If the organization cannot report the required information about an item specified in a disclosure because the item (e.g., committee, policy, practice, process) does not exist, it can comply with the requirement by reporting this to be the case. It does not need to provide the ‘not applicable’ reason for omission. In such cases, the organization can explain the reasons for not having this item or describe any plans to develop it. The disclosure does not require the organization to implement the item (e.g., developing a policy), but to report that the item does not exist.• When a disclosure from the GRI Topic Standards that is listed in the applicable GRI Sector Standards is not relevant to the organization’s impacts in relation to a material topic . In such cases, the organization is required to explain why the disclosure is not relevant to its impacts in relation to the material topic.• GRI 1: Foundation 2021 17",
    "new_id": 25
  },
  {
    "id": 2467,
    "question": "When calculating emissions of ozone-depleting substances, which condition would render the reported data non-compliant with the requirements outlined in the Consolidated Set of the GRI Standards 2021?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Inclusion of ODS recycled and reused in the final calculation.",
      "A": "Use of estimation methods due to a lack of default figures without disclosing the basis for estimation.",
      "C": "Exclusion of ODS entirely used as feedstock in the manufacture of other chemicals from the production total.",
      "D": "Reporting combined data for substances included in Annexes A, B, C, and E of the Montreal Protocol.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "391-392",
    "ref_doc": "GRI Standards 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Disclosure 305-6 Emissions of ozone-depleting substances (ODS) The reporting organization shall report the following information: Compilation requirements Production of ODS = - -ODS produced ODS destroyed by approved technologies ODS entirely used as feedstock in the manufacture of other chemicals 2.11.2 exclude ODS recycled and reused.REQUIREMENTS Production, imports, and exports of ODS in metric tons of CFC-11 (trichlorofluoromethane) equivalent .a. Substances included in the calculation. b. Source of the emission factors used. c. Standards, methodologies, assumptions, and/or calculation tools used. d. When compiling the information specified in Disclosure 305-6, the reporting organization shall:2.11 calculate the production of ODS as the amount of ODS produced, minus the amount destroyed by approved technologies, and minus the amount entirely used as feedstock in the manufacture of other chemicals;2.11.1 2.12 When compiling the information specified in Disclosure 305-6, the reporting organization should: 2.12.1 if subject to different standards and methodologies, describe the approach to selecting them; 2.12.2 where it aids transparency or comparability over time, provide a breakdown of the ODS data by: 2.12.2.1 business unit or facility; 2.12.2.2 country; 2.12.2.3 type of source; 2.12.2.4 type of activity.RECOMMENDATIONS Guidance for Disclosure 305-6 The reporting organization can report separate or combined data for the substances included in the calculation. Background Measuring ODS production, imports, and exports helps to indicate how an organization complies with legislation. This is particularly relevant if the organization produces or uses ODS in its processes, products and services and is subject to phase-out commitments. Results on ODS phase-out help to indicate the organization’s position in any markets affected by regulation on ODS. This disclosure covers the substances included in Annexes A, B, C, and E of the ‘Montreal Protocol’ as well as any other ODS produced, imported, or exported by an organization. See references [1], [2], [8] and [9] in the Bibliography .GUIDANCE GRI 305: Emissions 2016 390\n\n[Page 392]\nDisclosure 305-7 Nitrogen oxides (NOx), sulfur oxides (SOx), and other significant air emissions The reporting organization shall report the following information: Compilation requirementsREQUIREMENTS Significant air emissions , in kilograms or multiples, for each of the following: NO x i. SO x ii. Persistent organic pollutants (POP) iii. Volatile organic compounds (VOC) iv. Hazardous air pollutants (HAP) v. Particulate matter (PM) vi. Other standard categories of air emissions identified in relevant regulations vii.a. Source of the emission factors used. b. Standards, methodologies, assumptions, and/or calculation tools used. c. When compiling the information specified in Disclosure 305-7, the reporting organization shall select one of the following approaches for calculating significant air emissions:2.13 Direct measurement of emissions (such as online analyzers); 2.13.1 Calculation based on site-specific data; 2.13.2 Calculation based on published emission factors; 2.13.3 Estimation. If estimations are used due to a lack of default figures, the organization shall indicate the basis on which figures were estimated.2.13.4 RECOMMENDATIONSWhen compiling the information specified in Disclosure 305-7, the reporting organization should:2.14 if subject to different standards and methodologies, describe the approach to selecting them;2.14.1 where it aids transparency or comparability over time, provide a breakdown of the air emissions data by:2.14.2 business unit or facility; 2.14.2.1 country; 2.14.2.2 type of source; 2.14.2.3 type of activity. 2.14.2.4 See references [3], [4], [5], [6] and [10] in the Bibliography .GUIDANCE GRI 305: Emissions 2016 391",
    "new_id": 26
  },
  {
    "id": 2496,
    "question": "Which of the following represents a scenario where an organization's reported air emissions data would fail to meet the requirements for transparency or comparability over time, as recommended in the Consolidated Set of the GRI Standards 2021?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The organization provides a detailed breakdown of emissions by type of activity but excludes data on particulate matter (PM) due to confidentiality agreements.",
      "A": "The organization uses direct measurement for NOx and estimation based on published emission factors for SOx, without explaining the rationale for using different methods.",
      "B": "The organization reports total emissions aggregated across all facilities, while also disclosing the specific methodologies used for each calculation approach.",
      "D": "The organization consistently applies calculation based on site-specific data for all pollutants but does not provide a breakdown by country or business unit.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "392-393",
    "ref_doc": "GRI Standards 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Disclosure 305-7 Nitrogen oxides (NOx), sulfur oxides (SOx), and other significant air emissions The reporting organization shall report the following information: Compilation requirementsREQUIREMENTS Significant air emissions , in kilograms or multiples, for each of the following: NO x i. SO x ii. Persistent organic pollutants (POP) iii. Volatile organic compounds (VOC) iv. Hazardous air pollutants (HAP) v. Particulate matter (PM) vi. Other standard categories of air emissions identified in relevant regulations vii.a. Source of the emission factors used. b. Standards, methodologies, assumptions, and/or calculation tools used. c. When compiling the information specified in Disclosure 305-7, the reporting organization shall select one of the following approaches for calculating significant air emissions:2.13 Direct measurement of emissions (such as online analyzers); 2.13.1 Calculation based on site-specific data; 2.13.2 Calculation based on published emission factors; 2.13.3 Estimation. If estimations are used due to a lack of default figures, the organization shall indicate the basis on which figures were estimated.2.13.4 RECOMMENDATIONSWhen compiling the information specified in Disclosure 305-7, the reporting organization should:2.14 if subject to different standards and methodologies, describe the approach to selecting them;2.14.1 where it aids transparency or comparability over time, provide a breakdown of the air emissions data by:2.14.2 business unit or facility; 2.14.2.1 country; 2.14.2.2 type of source; 2.14.2.3 type of activity. 2.14.2.4 See references [3], [4], [5], [6] and [10] in the Bibliography .GUIDANCE GRI 305: Emissions 2016 391\n\n[Page 393]\nGlossary This glossary provides definitions for terms used in this Standard. The organization is required to apply these definitions when using the GRI Standards. The definitions included in this glossary may contain terms that are further defined in the complete GRI Standards Glossary . All defined terms are underlined. If a term is not defined in this glossary or in the complete GRI Standards Glossary , definitions that are commonly used and understood apply. base year historical datum (such as year) against which a measurement is tracked over time baseline starting point used for comparisons Note: In the context of energy and emissions reporting, the baseline is the projected energy consumption or emissions in the absence of any reduction activity. biogenic carbon dioxide (CO2) emission emission of CO2 from the combustion or biodegradation of biomass carbon dioxide (CO2) equivalent measure used to compare the emissions from various types of greenhouse gas (GHG) based on their global warming potential (GWP) Note: The CO2 equivalent for a gas is determined by multiplying the metric tons of the gas by the associated GWP. CFC11 (trichlorofluoromethane) equivalent measure used to compare various substances based on their relative ozone depletion potential (ODP) Note: The reference level of 1 is the potential of CFC-11 (trichlorofluoromethane) and CFC-12 (dichlorodifluoromethane) to cause ozone depletion. direct (Scope 1) GHG emissions greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from sources that are owned or controlled by the organization Example: CO2 emissions from fuel consumption Note: A GHG source is any physical unit or process that releases GHG into the atmosphere. energy indirect (Scope 2) GHG emissions greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions that result from the generation of purchased or acquired electricity, heating, cooling, and steam consumed by the organization global warming potential (GWP) value describing the radiative forcing impact of one unit of a given greenhouse gas ( GHG) relative to one unit of CO2 over a given period of time Note: GWP values convert GHG emissions data for non-CO2 gases into units of CO2 equivalent . greenhouse gas (GHG) gas that contributes to the greenhouse effect by absorbing infrared radiation greenhouse gas (GHG) trade purchase, sale or transfer of greenhouse gas (GHG) emission offsets or allowances human rights rights inherent to all human beings, which include, at a minimum, the rights set out in the United Nations (UN) International Bill of Human Rights and the principles concerning fundamentalB C D E G H GRI 305: Emissions 2016 392",
    "new_id": 27
  },
  {
    "id": 2507,
    "question": "When assessing water withdrawal in areas with water stress, which of the following would most significantly undermine the credibility of a reporting organization's data if overlooked, according to the Consolidated Set of the GRI Standards 2021?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Failing to include contextual information about standards or methodologies used for compiling water stress data.",
      "A": "Neglecting to report total water withdrawal by suppliers with significant water-related impacts in areas with water stress.",
      "B": "Excluding seawater from the breakdown of water withdrawal sources in areas with water stress.",
      "C": "Omitting a distinction between freshwater and other water categories in the reported breakdown of withdrawal sources.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "344",
    "ref_doc": "GRI Standards 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "2. Topic disclosures Disclosure 303-3 Water withdrawal The reporting organization shall report the following information: Compilation requirementsREQUIREMENTS Total water withdrawal from all areas in megaliters, and a breakdown of this total by the following sources, if applicable: Surface water ; i. Groundwater ; ii. Seawater ; iii. Produced water ; iv. Third-party water . v.a. Total water withdrawal from all areas with water stress in megaliters, and a breakdown of this total by the following sources, if applicable: Surface water; i. Groundwater; ii. Seawater; iii. Produced water; iv. Third-party water, and a breakdown of this total by the withdrawal sources listed in i-iv.v.b. A breakdown of total water withdrawal from each of the sources listed in Disclosures 303-3-a and 303-3-b in megaliters by the following categories: Freshwater (≤1,000 mg/L Total Dissolved Solids); i. Other water (>1,000 mg/L Total Dissolved Solids). ii.c. Any contextual information necessary to understand how the data have been compiled, such as any standards, methodologies, and assumptions used.d. When compiling the information specified in Disclosure 303-3, the reporting organization shall use publicly available and credible tools and methodologies for assessing water stress in an area.2.1 RECOMMENDATIONSThe reporting organization should report the following additional information: 2.2 A breakdown of total water withdrawal in megaliters by withdrawal source categories listed in Disclosure 303-3, at each facility in areas with water stress;2.2.1 Total water withdrawal in megaliters by suppliers with significant water-related impacts in areas with water stress.2.2.2 Background The volume of water withdrawal from areas with water stress can indicate an organization’s impacts in sensitive locations. To learn more about locations where water-related impacts might be significant, and where actions to address them are most needed, the reporting organization can also report the information requested in Disclosure 303-3 for each facility in areas with water stress. This can give stakeholders more confidence in the organization’s water stewardship efforts and practices. Guidance for Disclosure 303-3 For an example of how to present information on requirements in Disclosure 303-3, see Table 1. Surface water includes collected or harvested rainwater. Third-party water includes water supplied by municipal water networks or other organizations.GUIDANCE GRI 303: Water and Effluents 2018 343",
    "new_id": 28
  },
  {
    "id": 2519,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between the GRI Standards' structure and the reporting obligations for an organization addressing impacts on indigenous peoples, as outlined in the Consolidated Set of the GRI Standards 2021?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Sector Standards are optional and serve only as a supplementary reference, while the Universal Standards define mandatory reporting practices.",
      "B": "An organization must independently determine all material topics without guidance from the Sector Standards or Topic Standards.",
      "C": "The Universal Standards provide both the foundational requirements for reporting and specific disclosures about managing impacts on indigenous peoples.",
      "D": "GRI 411: Rights of Indigenous Peoples 2016 mandates disclosures that replace the general requirements outlined in GRI 1: Foundation 2021.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "576",
    "ref_doc": "GRI Standards 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Introduction GRI 411: Rights of Indigenous Peoples 2016 contains disclosures for organizations to report information about their impacts related to the rights of indigenous peoples , and how they manage these impacts. The Standard is structured as follows: The rest of the Introduction section provides a background on the topic, an overview of the system of GRI Standards and further information on using this Standard. Background on the topic This Standard addresses the rights of indigenous peoples. While there is no universal definition of indigenous peoples, they are generally identified as: Many indigenous peoples have suffered from historic injustices and therefore are considered a vulnerable group. Such a group could experience negative impacts as a result of the organization’s activities more severely than the general population. In addition to their collective rights, each person belonging to indigenous peoples shares universal human rights . These concepts are covered in key instruments of the International Labour Organization and the United Nations: see the Bibliography . System of GRI Standards This Standard is part of the GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards (GRI Standards). The GRI Standards enable an organization to report information about its most significant impacts on the economy, environment, and people, including impacts on their human rights , and how it manages these impacts. The GRI Standards are structured as a system of interrelated standards that are organized into three series: GRI Universal Standards, GRI Sector Standards, and GRI Topic Standards (see Figure 1 in this Standard). Universal Standards: GRI 1, GRI 2 and GRI 3 GRI 1: Foundation 2021 specifies the requirements that the organization must comply with to report in accordance with the GRI Standards. The organization begins using the GRI Standards by consulting GRI 1 . GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 contains disclosures that the organization uses to provide information about its reporting practices and other organizational details, such as its activities, governance, and policies. GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 provides guidance on how to determine material topics . It also contains disclosures that the organization uses to report information about its process of determining material topics, its list of material topics, and how it manages each topic. Sector Standards The Sector Standards provide information for organizations about their likely material topics. The organization uses the Sector Standards that apply to its sectors when determining its material topics and when determining what to report for each material topic.Section 1 contains a requirement, which provides information about how the organization manages its impacts related to the rights of indigenous peoples.• Section 2 contains one disclosure, which provides information about the organization’s impacts related to the rights of indigenous peoples.• The Glossary contains defined terms with a specific meaning when used in the GRI Standards. The terms are underlined in the text of the GRI Standards and linked to the definitions.• The Bibliography lists authoritative intergovernmental instruments and additional references used in developing this Standard.• 1 tribal peoples in independent countries whose social, cultural and economic conditions distinguish them from other sections of the national community, and whose status is regulated wholly or partially by their own customs or traditions or by special laws or regulations;• peoples in independent countries who are regarded as indigenous on account of their descent from the populations which inhabited the country, or a geographical region to which the country belongs, at the time of conquest or colonization or the establishment of present state boundaries and who, irrespective of their legal status, retain some or all of their own social, economic, cultural and political institutions.• 2 1Source: International Labour Organization (ILO) Convention 169, ‘Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention’, 1989. 2Source: United Nations (UN) Declaration, ‘United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples’, 2007. GRI 411: Rights of Indigenous Peoples 2016 575",
    "new_id": 29
  },
  {
    "id": 2532,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between the steps for determining material topics and the sustainability reporting process, as described in the Consolidated Set of the GRI Standards 2021?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Step 4 is the only step that directly informs the sustainability reporting process, while the first three steps are ongoing and independent of it.",
      "A": "The first three steps are integral parts of the sustainability reporting process and must be conducted within the reporting period.",
      "C": "All four steps are conducted independently of the sustainability reporting process but collectively form the basis for identifying material topics.",
      "D": "Each step is designed to be replicable and systematic, ensuring compliance with the sustainability reporting requirements.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "102-103",
    "ref_doc": "GRI Standards 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Guidance includes background information, explanations, and examples to help the organization better understand the requirements. The organization is not required to comply with guidance. The Standards may also include recommendations. These are cases where a particular course of action is encouraged but not required. The word ‘should’ indicates a recommendation, and the word ‘can’ indicates a possibility or option. Defined terms are underlined in the text of the GRI Standards and linked to their definitions in the Glossary . The organization is required to apply the definitions in the Glossary. GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 101\n\n[Page 103]\n1. Guidance to determine material topics An organization reporting in accordance with the GRI Standards is required to determine its material topics . When doing this, the organization is also required to use the applicable GRI Sector Standards (see Requirement 3 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 and Box 5 in this Standard). This section describes the four steps that the organization should follow in determining its material topics (see Figure 2). Following the steps in this section helps the organization determine its material topics and report the disclosures in section 2 of this Standard. The steps provide guidance and are not requirements on their own. Figure 2. Process to determine material topics Material topicsTest the material topics with experts and information usersIdentify and assess impacts on an ongoing basis Determine material topics for reporting Assess the signifcance of the impacts3 Test the material topics against the topics in the Sector StandardsUse the Sector Standards to understand the sectors’ contextConsider the topics and impacts described in the Sector StandardsPrioritize the most signifcant impacts for reporting4 Identify actual and potential impacts2 Understand the organization’s context1 The first three steps in the process to determine material topics relate to the organization’s ongoing identification and assessment of impacts . During these steps, the organization identifies and assesses its impacts regularly, as part of its day-to-day activities, and while engaging with relevant stakeholders and experts. These ongoing steps allow the organization to actively identify and manage its impacts as they evolve and as new ones arise. The first three steps are conducted independently of the sustainability reporting process, but they inform the last step. In Step 4, the organization prioritizes its most significant impacts for reporting and, in this way, determines its material topics. In each reporting period , the organization should review its material topics from the previous reporting period to account for changes in the impacts. Changes in impacts can result from changes in the organization’s activities and business relationships . This review helps ensure the material topics represent the organization’s most significant impacts in each new reporting period. The organization should document its process of determining material topics. This includes documenting the approach taken, decisions, assumptions, and subjective judgments made, sources analyzed, and evidence gathered. Accurate records help the organization explain its chosen approach and report the disclosures in section 2 of this Standard. The records facilitate analysis and assurance. See the Verifiability principle in GRI 1 for more information. The approach for each step will vary according to the specific circumstances of the organization, such as its business model; sectors; geographic, cultural, and legal operating context; ownership structure; and the nature of its impacts. Given these specific circumstances, the steps should be systematic, documented, replicable, and used consistently in each reporting period. The organization should document any changes in its approach together with the rationale for those changes and their implications. GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 102",
    "new_id": 30
  },
  {
    "id": 2543,
    "question": "Under which condition can an organization justify omitting a disclosure based on 'information unavailable/incomplete' without providing further explanation of why the information is missing, according to the Consolidated Set of the GRI Standards 2021?",
    "options": {
      "C": "When the organization specifies the exact entities, sites, or geographic locations for which the required information is missing and cannot be reported.",
      "A": "When the organization has not collected data on its other indirect (Scope 3) GHG emissions but plans to do so in the future.",
      "B": "When the required information cannot be obtained from a supplier or is not of adequate quality, and this applies to all entities within the organization's scope.",
      "D": "When the disclosure applies universally to all organizations regardless of size or type, but the organization lacks the relevant item specified in the requirement.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "18",
    "ref_doc": "GRI Standards 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "The organization is only permitted to provide one of the four reasons for omission included in Table 1 of this Standard: Not applicable The organization provides ‘not applicable’ as the reason for omission in the following situations: Legal prohibitions The organization provides ‘legal prohibitions’ as the reason for omission when the law forbids collecting the required information or reporting it publicly. Confidentiality constraints There may be cases where the law does not forbid collecting or reporting the required information, but the organization considers the information confidential and cannot report it publicly. In such cases, the organization provides ‘confidentiality constraints’ as the reason for omission. Information unavailable/incomplete There may be cases where the organization has the item specified in a disclosure or in a requirement in a disclosure, but the information about the item is unavailable or incomplete. In such cases, the organization provides ‘information unavailable/incomplete’ as the reason for omission. For example, information is unavailable for Disclosure 305-3 in GRI 305: Emissions 2016 when the organization has other indirect (Scope 3) greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, but it has not collected data on its other indirect (Scope 3) GHG emissions yet. When the organization cannot report part of the required information it means the information is incomplete. When the reported information does not cover the complete scope required by a disclosure (e.g., the information is missing for certain entities, sites, geographic locations), then the organization is required to provide ‘information unavailable/incomplete’ as the reason for omission. The organization must specify the entities, sites, geographic locations, etc., for which the required information is missing and cannot be reported. The required information, or part of the required information, can be unavailable when, for example, it cannot be obtained or is not of adequate quality to report. This may be the case when the information is collected from another organization, such as a supplier . The reasons ‘confidentiality constraints’ and ‘information unavailable/incomplete’ should only be used in exceptionalWhen a disclosure or a requirement in a disclosure does not apply to the organization based on its characteristics (e.g., size, type). For example, 2-15-b-iii in GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 requires the organization to report whether conflicts of interest relating to the existence of controlling shareholders are disclosed to stakeholders. This requirement does not apply to organizations that do not have shareholders (e.g., foundations). In such cases, the organization is required to explain why the disclosure or the requirement does not apply to the organization. However, there may be cases where a disclosure or a requirement in a disclosure applies to the organization, but the organization does not have in place the item specified in the disclosure or in the requirement (e.g., committee, policy, practice, process). For example, 2-23-b in GRI 2 requires the organization to describe its policy commitment to respect human rights. This expectation applies to every organization. All organizations are expected to have a policy commitment to respect human rights, but not every organization may have developed such a policy commitment yet. If the organization cannot report the required information about an item specified in a disclosure because the item (e.g., committee, policy, practice, process) does not exist, it can comply with the requirement by reporting this to be the case. It does not need to provide the ‘not applicable’ reason for omission. In such cases, the organization can explain the reasons for not having this item or describe any plans to develop it. The disclosure does not require the organization to implement the item (e.g., developing a policy), but to report that the item does not exist.• When a disclosure from the GRI Topic Standards that is listed in the applicable GRI Sector Standards is not relevant to the organization’s impacts in relation to a material topic . In such cases, the organization is required to explain why the disclosure is not relevant to its impacts in relation to the material topic.• GRI 1: Foundation 2021 17",
    "new_id": 31
  },
  {
    "id": 2552,
    "question": "Which scenario best illustrates a potential oversight in an organization's approach to addressing water-related impacts, as described in the Consolidated Set of the GRI Standards 2021?",
    "options": {
      "D": "An organization sets water-related goals based solely on public policy without considering local water stress conditions or future availability projections.",
      "A": "An organization conducts life cycle assessments but fails to include runoff effects caused by its operations in areas with high water stress.",
      "B": "An organization prioritizes stakeholder engagement to steward water resources while excluding upstream suppliers from its water management strategies.",
      "C": "An organization identifies significant water-related impacts in its value chain but focuses exclusively on direct operational discharges rather than broader catchment-level issues.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "341",
    "ref_doc": "GRI Standards 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Disclosure 303-1 Interactions with water as a shared resource The reporting organization shall report the following information:REQUIREMENTS A description of how the organization interacts with water, including how and where water is withdrawn , consumed , and discharged , and the water-related impacts the organization has caused or contributed to, or that are directly linked to its operations, products, or services by its business relationships (e.g., impacts caused by runoff ).a. A description of the approach used to identify water-related impacts, including the scope of assessments, their timeframe, and any tools or methodologies used.b. A description of how water-related impacts are addressed, including how the organization works with stakeholders to steward water as a shared resource, and how it engages with suppliers or customers with significant water-related impacts.c. An explanation of the process for setting any water-related goals and targets that are part of the organization’s approach to managing water and effluents, and how they relate to public policy and the local context of each area with water stress .d. RECOMMENDATIONSThe reporting organization should report the following additional information: 1.2 An overview of water use across the organization’s value chain ; 1.2.1 A list of specific catchments where the organization causes significant water- related impacts.1.2.2 Guidance for Disclosure 303-1 Through its value chain , an organization can affect both the quality as well as the availability of water. If the reporting organization has identified significant water-related impacts in the value chain, which includes activities carried out by the organization, and by entities upstream and downstream from the organization, it is required to report information about these impacts. See Guidance to 3-3-b in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 for more information about reporting an organization’s involvement with negative impacts. The description of how the organization interacts with water can include information on specific catchments where water is withdrawn , consumed , and discharged , and information on what the water is used for in activities carried out by the organization and by entities upstream and downstream from the organization (e.g., for cooling, storage, incorporating in products, growing crops). In the context of this Standard, suppliers with significant water-related impacts may include suppliers of water-intensive commodities or services, suppliers located in areas with water stress , and/or suppliers with significant impacts on the local water environment and the related local communities . If applicable, the organization can describe its environmental impacts caused by runoff , and how they are addressed. For example, runoff can carry high- nutrient and pollution loads due to the organization’s activities, leading to eutrophication and other negative impacts on local waterbodies. Guidance for Disclosure 303-1-b When assessing impacts, it is important that the organization consider its future impacts on water quality and availability, as these factors can change over time. Tools and methodologies for identifying impacts can include life cycle assessments, environmental impact assessments, water footprint assessments, scenario analysis, and stakeholder engagement. If information is estimated or modeled, rather than sourced from direct measurements, the organization can explain its estimation or modeling methods. Guidance for Disclosure 303-1-c Working with stakeholders is critical for an organization to steward water as a shared resource and account for the needs of other water users of the catchment. An organization’s stakeholdersGUIDANCE GRI 303: Water and Effluents 2018 340",
    "new_id": 32
  },
  {
    "id": 2585,
    "question": "Which of the following scenarios would most directly challenge the effectiveness of an occupational health and safety management system in mitigating risks for workers in the oil and gas sector, according to the Consolidated Set of the GRI Standards 2021?",
    "options": {
      "A": "A supplier’s worker unfamiliar with the host organization’s safety practices is injured while operating heavy machinery on the premises.",
      "B": "A worker develops silicosis after prolonged exposure to respirable crystalline silica during hydraulic fracturing operations.",
      "C": "An employee experiences post-traumatic stress disorder following a major incident involving fire and explosion at an offshore rig.",
      "D": "A rotational worker under FIFO arrangements reports increased fatigue due to irregular working hours and interrupted rest.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "156",
    "ref_doc": "GRI Standards 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Topic 11.9 Occupational health and safety Healthy and safe work conditions are recognized as a human right. Occupational health and safety involves the prevention of physical and mental harm to workers and promotion of workers’ health. This topic covers impacts related to workers’ health and safety. Many work-related hazards are associated with activities undertaken in the oil and gas sector, such as working with heavy machinery and exposure to or handling of explosive, flammable, poisonous, or harmful substances. Despite efforts to eliminate work-related hazards and improve workers ’ health and well-being, work-related injuries and ill health , including fatalities, are still prevalent in the sector. Hazards associated with the activities of the oil and gas sector have the potential to result in high-consequence work- related injuries . Transportation incidents, which can occur when workers and equipment are transported to and from wells, offshore rigs and other facilities, are the most common source of fatalities and injuries in the sector. Other major hazards include fire and explosions, which can originate from flammable gases or liquids during oil and gas production and transportation, and electrical hazards associated with high-voltage systems used in exploration and production facilities or equipment. Falling structures, faulty handling of heavy machinery, or malfunctioning electrical, hydraulic, or mechanical installations can result in incidents categorized as ‘struck-by’, ‘caught-in’, or ‘caught- between’. Workers may also be at risk of injuries from slips, trips, and falls when accessing high platforms and equipment. Hazards associated with the oil and gas sector that have the potential to result in ill health can be biological, chemical, ergonomic, or physical in origin. Commonly reported chemical hazards include respirable crystalline silica, which is released during hydraulic fracturing, for example, and can cause silicosis and lung cancer. Hydrogen sulfide released from oil and gas wells and harmful hydrocarbon gases and vapors are other commonly reported hazards. The sector’s activities also involve working in confined spaces, which may contain a high concentration of gases, such as carbon monoxide, methane, and nitrogen, that can lead to poisoning or asphyxiation. Physical and ergonomic hazards in the sector include extreme temperatures, harmful levels of radiation, and harmful levels of machinery noise or vibration, which can cause hearing impairment or loss and musculoskeletal disorders. Biological hazards prevalent in the sector include communicable diseases present in the local community or diseases due to poor hygiene and poor quality of food or water. Hazards related to common employment practices ( topic 11.10 ) in the oil and gas sector can increase the risk of fatigue, strain, or stress and impact physical, psychological, and social health. These practices include fly-in fly-out (FIFO) work arrangements, working and living in different locations, rotational work, long shifts, long travel times, living in the workplace, interrupted rest, irregular working hours, and solitary work. Workers may also experience psychological reactions, such as post-traumatic stress disorder following a major incident. In addition, workplaces characterized by gender imbalance can contribute to increased stress, discrimination , or sexual harassment (see also topic 11.11 Diversity and non-discrimination ). The oil and gas sector makes extensive use of suppliers , some of which may undertake activities considered among the most dangerous. Occupational health and safety management systems may not cover suppliers’ workers in the same way employees are covered. Suppliers’ workers operating on the premises of organizations in the sector may be less familiar with the workplace and the organization’s health and safety practices or less committed to those practices. Other workers in the organization’s supply chain may be subject to lower occupational health and safety standards. GRI 11: Oil and Gas Sector 2021 155",
    "new_id": 33
  },
  {
    "id": 2586,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why an organization’s positive impacts on the environment might still lead to negative outcomes for people and their human rights, as described in the Consolidated Set of the GRI Standards 2021?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Because environmental changes can disrupt ecosystems in ways that indirectly harm communities reliant on those systems.",
      "A": "Because environmental improvements can inadvertently increase economic inequality, which negatively affects vulnerable groups.",
      "C": "Because positive environmental impacts always result in reduced access to natural resources, directly harming local communities.",
      "D": "Because focusing on environmental impacts often diverts organizational resources away from addressing human rights issues.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "11",
    "ref_doc": "GRI Standards 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "2. Key concepts This section explains the concepts that lay the foundation for sustainability reporting. Understanding how these concepts are applied in the GRI Standards is essential for those who collect and prepare information for reporting and those who interpret information that is reported using the Standards. The key concepts covered in this section are: impact, material topics, due diligence, and stakeholder. The purpose of the Standards is to enable organizations to report information about their most significant impacts on the economy, environment, and people, including impacts on their human rights – in the GRI Standards these are referred to as material topics. Due diligence and stakeholder engagement help organizations identify their most significant impacts. 2.1 Impact In the GRI Standards, impact refers to the effect an organization has or could have on the economy, environment, and people, including effects on their human rights , as a result of the organization’s activities or business relationships . The impacts can be actual or potential, negative or positive, short-term or long-term, intended or unintended, and reversible or irreversible. These impacts indicate the organization’s contribution, negative or positive, to sustainable development . The organization’s impacts on the economy refer to the impacts on economic systems at local, national, and global levels. An organization can have an impact on the economy through, for example, its competition practices, its procurement practices, and its taxes and payments to governments. The organization’s impacts on the environment refer to the impacts on living organisms and non-living elements, including air, land, water, and ecosystems. An organization can have an impact on the environment through, for example, its use of energy, land, water, and other natural resources. The organization’s impacts on people refer to the impacts on individuals and groups, such as communities, vulnerable groups , or society. This includes the impacts the organization has on people’s human rights. An organization can have an impact on people through, for example, its employment practices (e.g., the wages it pays to employees), its supply chain (e.g., the working conditions of workers of suppliers), and its products and services (e.g., their safety or accessibility). Individuals or groups that have interests that are affected or could be affected by the organization’s activities are referred to as stakeholders (see section 2.4 in this Standard for more information). The impacts on the economy, environment, and people are interrelated. For example, an organization’s impacts on the economy and environment can result in impacts on people and their human rights. Similarly, an organization’s positive impacts can result in negative impacts and vice versa. For example, an organization's positive impacts on the environment can lead to negative impacts on people and their human rights. 2.2 Material topics An organization may identify many impacts on which to report. When using the GRI Standards, the organization prioritizes reporting on those topics that represent its most significant impacts on the economy, environment, and people, including impacts on their human rights . In the GRI Standards, these are the organization’s material topics. Examples of material topics are anti-corruption, occupational health and safety, or water and effluents. A topic need not be limited to impacts on the economy, the environment, or people; it can cover impacts across all three dimensions. For example, an organization might determine that ‘water and effluents’ is a material topic based on the impacts its water use has on ecosystems and local communities’ access to water. The GRI Standards group impacts into topics, like ‘water and effluents’, to help organizations report cohesively about multiple impacts that relate to the same topic. The process of determining material topics is informed by the organization’s ongoing identification and assessment of impacts. The ongoing identification and assessment of impacts involves engaging with relevant stakeholders and experts and it is conducted independently of the sustainability reporting process. See section 1 in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 for more information on determining material topics. GRI 1: Foundation 2021 10",
    "new_id": 34
  },
  {
    "id": 2614,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between the reporting requirements for child labor and the measures organizations must take to address it, as outlined in the Consolidated Set of the GRI Standards 2021?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The measures reported by organizations must align with both ILO Conventions 138 and 182, but only qualitative data on risk identification is mandated.",
      "A": "Organizations are required to quantify the number of young workers exposed to hazardous work as part of their reporting obligations.",
      "B": "Disclosure 408-1 mandates that organizations report quantitative data regarding child labor incidents in high-risk countries or geographic areas.",
      "D": "Reporting under Disclosure 408-1 focuses exclusively on supplier operations without requiring an assessment of internal organizational risks.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "547-548",
    "ref_doc": "GRI Standards 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "1. Topic management disclosures An organization reporting in accordance with the GRI Standards is required to report how it manages each of its material topics . An organization that has determined child labor to be a material topic is required to report how it manages the topic using Disclosure 3-3 in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 (see clause 1.1 in this section). This section is therefore designed to supplement – and not replace – Disclosure 3-3 in GRI 3 . REQUIREMENTSThe reporting organization shall report how it manages child labor using Disclosure 3- 3 in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 .1.1 GRI 408: Child Labor 2016 546\n\n[Page 548]\n2. Topic disclosures Disclosure 408-1 Operations and suppliers at significant risk for incidents of child labor The reporting organization shall report the following information:REQUIREMENTS Operations and suppliers considered to have significant risk for incidents of: child labor; i. young workers exposed to hazardous work. ii.a. Operations and suppliers considered to have significant risk for incidents of child labor either in terms of: type of operation (such as manufacturing plant) and supplier; i. countries or geographic areas with operations and suppliers considered at risk. ii.b. Measures taken by the organization in the reporting period intended to contribute to the effective abolition of child labor.c. Guidance for Disclosure 408-1 The process for identifying operations and suppliers, as specified in Disclosure 408-1, can reflect the reporting organization’s approach to risk assessment on this issue. It can also draw from recognized international data sources, such as the ILO Information and reports on the application of Conventions and Recommendations (see reference [1] in the Bibliography ). When reporting the measures taken, the organization can refer to the ILO ‘Tripartite Declaration of Principles Concerning Multinational Enterprises and Social Policy’ and Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises for further guidance. In the context of the GRI Standards, a ‘young worker’ is defined as a person above the applicable minimum working age and younger than 18 years of age. Note that Disclosure 408-1 does not require quantitative reporting on child labor or the number of young workers. Rather, it asks for reporting on the operations and suppliers considered to have significant risk for incidents of child labor or young workers exposed to hazardous work. Background Child labor is subject to ILO Conventions 138 ‘Minimum Age Convention’ (ILO Convention 138) and 182 ‘Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention’ (ILO Convention 182). ‘Child labor’ refers to an abuse, which is not to be confused with ‘children working’ or with ‘young persons working’, which may not be abuses as stipulated in ILO Convention 138. The minimum age for working differs by country. ILO Convention 138 specifies a minimum age of 15 years or the age of completion of compulsory schooling (whichever is higher). However, there is an exception for certain countries where economies and educational facilities are insufficiently developed and a minimum age of 14 years might apply. These countries of exception are specified by the ILO in response to special application by the country concerned, and in consultation with representative organizations of employers and workers. ILO Convention 138 stipulates that ‘national laws or regulations may permit the employment or work of persons 13 to 15 years of age on light work which is (a) not likely to be harmful to their health or development; and (b) not such as to prejudice their attendance at school, their participation in vocational orientation or training programmes approved by the competent authority or their capacity to benefit from the instruction received’. While child labor takes many different forms, a priority is to eliminate without delay the worst forms of child labor as defined by Article 3 of ILO Convention This includes all forms of slavery or practices similar to slavery (such as sale, trafficking, forced or compulsory labor, serfdom,GUIDANCE GRI 408: Child Labor 2016 547",
    "new_id": 35
  },
  {
    "id": 2619,
    "question": "Which scenario would most likely fall outside the definition of 'business relationships' as described in the Consolidated Set of the GRI Standards 2021?",
    "options": {
      "D": "An organization partners with a subsidiary it fully controls to achieve shared business objectives.",
      "A": "An organization collaborates with a non-governmental organization to deliver community support, directly linked to its operations.",
      "B": "An organization engages with a third-tier supplier indirectly connected through a first-tier supplier, within its value chain.",
      "C": "State security forces provide protection for an organization’s facilities, creating a direct link to its operations.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "550",
    "ref_doc": "GRI Standards 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Glossary This glossary provides definitions for terms used in this Standard. The organization is required to apply these definitions when using the GRI Standards. The definitions included in this glossary may contain terms that are further defined in the complete GRI Standards Glossary . All defined terms are underlined. If a term is not defined in this glossary or in the complete GRI Standards Glossary , definitions that are commonly used and understood apply. business partner entity with which the organization has some form of direct and formal engagement for the purpose of meeting its business objectives Source: Shift and Mazars LLP, UN Guiding Principles Reporting Framework , 2015; modified Examples: affiliates, business-to-business customers, clients, first-tier suppliers , franchisees, joint venture partners, investee companies in which the organization has a shareholding position Note: Business partners do not include subsidiaries and affiliates that the organization controls. business relationships relationships that the organization has with business partners , with entities in its value chain including those beyond the first tier, and with any other entities directly linked to its operations, products, or services Source: United Nations (UN), Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework , 2011; modified Note: Examples of other entities directly linked to the organization’s operations, products, or services are a non-governmental organization with which the organization delivers support to a local community or state security forces that protect the organization’s facilities. child person under the age of 15 years, or under the age of completion of compulsory schooling, whichever is higher Note 1: Exceptions can occur in certain countries where economies and educational facilities are insufficiently developed, and a minimum age of 14 years applies. These countries of exception are specified by the International Labour Organization (ILO) in response to a special application by the country concerned and in consultation with representative organizations of employers and workers. Note 2: The ILO Minimum Age Convention, 1973, (No. 138), refers to both child labor and young workers. due diligence process to identify, prevent, mitigate , and account for how the organization addresses its actual and potential negative impacts Source: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises , 2011; modified United Nations (UN), Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework , 2011; modified Note: See section 2.3 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 for more information on ‘due diligence’. employee individual who is in an employment relationship with the organization according to national lawB C D E GRI 408: Child Labor 2016 549",
    "new_id": 36
  },
  {
    "id": 2627,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes a scenario where an organization's reported rate of high-consequence work-related injuries would be considered inconsistent with the GRI Standards, according to the Consolidated Set of the GRI Standards 2021?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The organization includes fatalities in both the count of high-consequence injuries and recordable injuries while excluding all commuting incidents.",
      "B": "The organization excludes fatalities in its calculation of high-consequence injuries but includes commuting incidents organized by the organization.",
      "C": "The organization calculates injury rates based on 200,000 hours worked and explicitly states this in its disclosure.",
      "D": "The organization determines hazards causing high-consequence injuries during the reporting period without detailing actions taken to mitigate them.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "481",
    "ref_doc": "GRI Standards 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Disclosure 403-9 Work-related injuries The reporting organization shall report the following information: Compilation requirements Rate of fatalities as a result of work-related injury=Number of fatalities as a result of work-related injury ______________________ Number of hours worked x [200,000 or 1,000,000] REQUIREMENTS For all employees : The number and rate of fatalities as a result of work-related injury ; i. The number and rate of high-consequence work-related injuries (excluding fatalities);ii. The number and rate of recordable work-related injuries ; iii. The main types of work-related injury; iv. The number of hours worked. v.a. For all workers who are not employees but whose work and/or workplace is controlled by the organization: The number and rate of fatalities as a result of work-related injury; i. The number and rate of high-consequence work-related injuries (excluding fatalities);ii. The number and rate of recordable work-related injuries; iii. The main types of work-related injury; iv. The number of hours worked. v.b. The work-related hazards that pose a risk of high-consequence injury, including: how these hazards have been determined; i. which of these hazards have caused or contributed to high-consequence injuries during the reporting period;ii. actions taken or underway to eliminate these hazards and minimize risks using the hierarchy of controls .iii.c. Any actions taken or underway to eliminate other work-related hazards and minimize risks using the hierarchy of controls.d. Whether the rates have been calculated based on 200,000 or 1,000,000 hours worked. e. Whether and, if so, why any workers have been excluded from this disclosure, including the types of worker excluded.f. Any contextual information necessary to understand how the data have been compiled, such as any standards, methodologies, and assumptions used.g. When compiling the information specified in Disclosure 403-9, the reporting organization shall:2.1 exclude fatalities in the calculation of the number and rate of high- consequence work-related injuries;2.1.1 include fatalities as a result of work-related injury in the calculation of the number and rate of recordable work-related injuries;2.1.2 include injuries as a result of commuting incidents only where the transport has been organized by the organization;2.1.3 calculate the rates based on either 200,000 or 1,000,000 hours worked, using the following formulas:2.1.4 GRI 403: Occupational Health and Safety 2018 480",
    "new_id": 37
  },
  {
    "id": 2686,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between an organization's ongoing impact assessment and its sustainability reporting process, as described in the Consolidated Set of the GRI Standards 2021?",
    "options": {
      "B": "While ongoing impact assessments directly determine material topics, they are conducted separately from the sustainability reporting process and inform the final step of prioritization.",
      "A": "The ongoing identification and assessment of impacts are integral parts of the sustainability reporting process and must align with the Sector Standards.",
      "C": "Ongoing impact assessments are optional but recommended for organizations seeking to align their material topics with the Verifiability principle outlined in GRI 1.",
      "D": "The sustainability reporting process replaces the need for ongoing impact assessments by requiring annual reviews of material topics.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "102-103",
    "ref_doc": "GRI Standards 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Guidance includes background information, explanations, and examples to help the organization better understand the requirements. The organization is not required to comply with guidance. The Standards may also include recommendations. These are cases where a particular course of action is encouraged but not required. The word ‘should’ indicates a recommendation, and the word ‘can’ indicates a possibility or option. Defined terms are underlined in the text of the GRI Standards and linked to their definitions in the Glossary . The organization is required to apply the definitions in the Glossary. GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 101\n\n[Page 103]\n1. Guidance to determine material topics An organization reporting in accordance with the GRI Standards is required to determine its material topics . When doing this, the organization is also required to use the applicable GRI Sector Standards (see Requirement 3 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 and Box 5 in this Standard). This section describes the four steps that the organization should follow in determining its material topics (see Figure 2). Following the steps in this section helps the organization determine its material topics and report the disclosures in section 2 of this Standard. The steps provide guidance and are not requirements on their own. Figure 2. Process to determine material topics Material topicsTest the material topics with experts and information usersIdentify and assess impacts on an ongoing basis Determine material topics for reporting Assess the signifcance of the impacts3 Test the material topics against the topics in the Sector StandardsUse the Sector Standards to understand the sectors’ contextConsider the topics and impacts described in the Sector StandardsPrioritize the most signifcant impacts for reporting4 Identify actual and potential impacts2 Understand the organization’s context1 The first three steps in the process to determine material topics relate to the organization’s ongoing identification and assessment of impacts . During these steps, the organization identifies and assesses its impacts regularly, as part of its day-to-day activities, and while engaging with relevant stakeholders and experts. These ongoing steps allow the organization to actively identify and manage its impacts as they evolve and as new ones arise. The first three steps are conducted independently of the sustainability reporting process, but they inform the last step. In Step 4, the organization prioritizes its most significant impacts for reporting and, in this way, determines its material topics. In each reporting period , the organization should review its material topics from the previous reporting period to account for changes in the impacts. Changes in impacts can result from changes in the organization’s activities and business relationships . This review helps ensure the material topics represent the organization’s most significant impacts in each new reporting period. The organization should document its process of determining material topics. This includes documenting the approach taken, decisions, assumptions, and subjective judgments made, sources analyzed, and evidence gathered. Accurate records help the organization explain its chosen approach and report the disclosures in section 2 of this Standard. The records facilitate analysis and assurance. See the Verifiability principle in GRI 1 for more information. The approach for each step will vary according to the specific circumstances of the organization, such as its business model; sectors; geographic, cultural, and legal operating context; ownership structure; and the nature of its impacts. Given these specific circumstances, the steps should be systematic, documented, replicable, and used consistently in each reporting period. The organization should document any changes in its approach together with the rationale for those changes and their implications. GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 102",
    "new_id": 38
  },
  {
    "id": 2749,
    "question": "When reporting on waste-related impacts, under what condition can an organization fully comply with a disclosure requirement without implementing a specific policy or practice, according to the Consolidated Set of the GRI Standards 2021?",
    "options": {
      "C": "If the organization explicitly states that the policy or practice does not exist and reports this fact.",
      "A": "If the organization provides a detailed plan for future implementation of the policy or practice.",
      "B": "If the organization has determined that waste is not a material topic for its operations.",
      "D": "If the required information is confidential or prohibited by legal restrictions.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "400-401",
    "ref_doc": "GRI Standards 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Topic Standards The Topic Standards contain disclosures that the organization uses to report information about its impacts in relation to particular topics. The organization uses the Topic Standards according to the list of material topics it has determined using GRI 3 . Figure 1. GRI Standards: Universal, Sector and Topic Standards Apply all three Universal Standards to your reportingUse the Sector Standards that apply to your sectorsSelect Topic Standards to report specific information on your material topicsSector Standards Universal Standards Topic StandardsGRI Standards Requirements and principles for using the GRI Standards Disclosures about the reporting organization Disclosures and guidance about the organization's material topics Using this Standard This Standard can be used by any organization – regardless of size, type, sector, geographic location, or reporting experience – to report information about its waste-related impacts . This Standard can also be used by organizations that manage waste generated by other organizations, such as public and private waste management organizations. In addition to this Standard, disclosures that relate to this topic can be found in GRI 301: Materials 2016 . An organization reporting in accordance with the GRI Standards is required to report the following disclosures if it has determined waste to be a material topic : See Requirements 4 and 5 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 . Reasons for omission are permitted for these disclosures. If the organization cannot comply with a disclosure or with a requirement in a disclosure (e.g., because the required information is confidential or subject to legal prohibitions), the organization is required to specify the disclosure or the requirement it cannot comply with, and provide a reason for omission together with an explanation in the GRI content index. See Requirement 6 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 for more information on reasons for omission. If the organization cannot report the required information about an item specified in a disclosure because the item (e.g., committee, policy, practice, process) does not exist, it can comply with the requirement by reporting this to be the case. The organization can explain the reasons for not having this item, or describe any plans to develop it. The disclosure does not require the organization to implement the item (e.g., developing a policy), but to report that theDisclosure 3-3 in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 (see clause 1.1 in this Standard); • Any disclosures from this Topic Standard that are relevant to the organization’s waste-related impacts (Disclosure 306-1 through Disclosure 306-5).• GRI 306: Waste 2020 399\n\n[Page 401]\nitem does not exist. If the organization intends to publish a standalone sustainability report, it does not need to repeat information that it has already reported publicly elsewhere, such as on web pages or in its annual report. In such a case, the organization can report a required disclosure by providing a reference in the GRI content index as to where this information can be found (e.g., by providing a link to the web page or citing the page in the annual report where the information has been published). Requirements, guidance and defined terms The following apply throughout this Standard: Requirements are presented in bold font and indicated by the word 'shall'. An organization must comply with requirements to report in accordance with the GRI Standards. Requirements may be accompanied by guidance. Guidance includes background information, explanations, and examples to help the organization better understand the requirements. The organization is not required to comply with guidance. The Standards may also include recommendations. These are cases where a particular course of action is encouraged but not required. The word ‘should’ indicates a recommendation, and the word ‘can’ indicates a possibility or option. Defined terms are underlined in the text of the GRI Standards and linked to their definitions in the Glossary . The organization is required to apply the definitions in the Glossary. GRI 306: Waste 2020 400",
    "new_id": 39
  },
  {
    "id": 2808,
    "question": "Which scenario demonstrates the most accurate application of the guidance for reconciling data, as described in the Consolidated Set of the GRI Standards 2021?",
    "options": {
      "D": "An organization reconciles data for all tax jurisdictions by ensuring the sum equals the amount reported in its audited consolidated financial statements, even though some disclosures are based on earlier reporting periods.",
      "A": "An organization reports total employee remuneration for a tax jurisdiction that matches the sum of remuneration across all jurisdictions, without reference to audited financial statements.",
      "B": "An organization provides data for stateless entities by including their jurisdiction of incorporation and ensures the total tax positions align with amounts reported in its audited consolidated financial statements.",
      "C": "An organization excludes taxes collected from customers when reconciling data because these are not directly tied to employee remuneration or uncertain tax positions.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "302",
    "ref_doc": "GRI Standards 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "information required in Disclosure 207-4 might not be available for reporting until a later point in time. If the information required in Disclosure 207-4 is not available for the time period covered by the most recent audited consolidated financial statements or financial information filed on public record, the organization may report information for the time period covered by the audited consolidated financial statements, or the financial information filed on public record, immediately preceding the most recent ones. Where this time period differs from the reporting period , the organization can specify the reason why. Guidance for clause 2.2.1 For each of the disclosures specified in clause 2.2.1, the data is considered to be reconciled when the sum of this data for all tax jurisdictions equals the amount reported in the organization’s audited consolidated financial statements or in the financial information filed on public record. Guidance for clause 2.2.3 When providing information for stateless entities, the organization can also include their jurisdiction of incorporation. Guidance for clause 2.3.1 Total employee remuneration in a tax jurisdiction can reflect the business value provided by the entities in that jurisdiction to the organization as a whole. Total employee remuneration also represents the basis for calculating taxes withheld and paid on behalf of employees, covered under clause 2.3.2. Guidance for clause 2.3.2 Taxes withheld and paid on behalf of employees refer to taxes withheld by the organization from employee remuneration to be paid to the tax authorities. These can include income taxes, payroll taxes, and social security contributions. Guidance for clause 2.3.3 Taxes collected from customers refer to taxes and duties charged on and collected on the sales of certain products and services. These are paid by the organization to the tax authorities on behalf of customers. Guidance for clause 2.3.4 Examples of industry-related and other taxes or payments to governments include: Guidance for clause 2.3.5 When reporting significant uncertain tax positions for a tax jurisdiction, the organization can report the value of the tax positions in line with its audited consolidated financial statements or the financial information filed on public record. The organization can provide a description of tax positions that have not been agreed with the relevant tax authorities at the end of the time period reported in Disclosure 207-4-c. The description can include the nature of the disagreement and the reasons for any change in tax positions that occurred during the time period, where relevant.industry taxes (e.g., energy tax, airline tax);• property taxes (e.g., land tax);• product taxes (e.g., customs duties, alcohol and tobacco duties);• taxes and duties levied on the supply, use, or consumption of goods and services considered to be harmful to the environment (e.g., vehicle excise duties).• GRI 207: Tax 2019 301",
    "new_id": 40
  },
  {
    "id": 2844,
    "question": "Which scenario would most likely violate the reporting requirements for Disclosure 404-1, as outlined in the Consolidated Set of the GRI Standards 2021?",
    "options": {
      "A": "An organization uses head count to report employee numbers this year but switches to full-time equivalent (FTE) next year without disclosing the change in approach.",
      "B": "An organization calculates average training hours per employee category without distinguishing between full-time and part-time employees, despite having defined employee categories.",
      "C": "An organization excludes on-site coaching by supervisors from its calculation of total training hours but includes externally pursued education paid for partially by the organization.",
      "D": "An organization reports average training hours separately for male and female employees but aggregates all employee categories into a single average.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "501-502",
    "ref_doc": "GRI Standards 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "2. Topic disclosures Disclosure 404-1 Average hours of training per year per employee The reporting organization shall report the following information:REQUIREMENTS Average hours of training that the organization’s employees have undertaken during the reporting period, by: gender; i. employee category . ii.a. RECOMMENDATIONSWhen compiling the information specified in Disclosure 404-1, the reporting organization should:2.1 express employee numbers as either head count or full-time equivalent (FTE), and disclose and apply the approach consistently in the period, and between periods;2.1.1 use data from Disclosure 2-7 in GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 to identify the total number of employees;2.1.2 draw from the information used for Disclosure 405-1 in GRI 405: Diversity and Equal Opportunity 2016 to identify the total number of employees by employee category.2.1.3 Guidance for Disclosure 404-1 This disclosure provides insight into the scale of an organization’s investment in training, and the degree to which the investment is made across the entire employee base. In the context of this Standard, ‘training’ refers to: Training does not include on-site coaching by supervisors. To calculate the information in Disclosure 404-1, the reporting organization can use the following formulas: Average training hours per employee=Total number of training hours provided to employees ___________________________ Total number of employees Average training hours per female=Total number of training hours provided to female employees ___________________________ Total number of female employees GUIDANCE all types of vocational training and instruction;• paid educational leave provided by an organization for its employees;• training or education pursued externally and paid for in whole or in part by an organization;• training on specific topics.• GRI 404: Training and Education 2016 500\n\n[Page 502]\nAverage training hours per male =Total number of training hours provided to male employees ___________________________ Total number of male employees Average training hours per employee category=Total number of training hours provided to each category of employees ___________________________ Total number of employees in category A number of calculations can be undertaken to report on employee categories. These calculations are specific to each organization. GRI 404: Training and Education 2016 501",
    "new_id": 41
  },
  {
    "id": 2845,
    "question": "When assessing the severity of a negative impact, which factor is NOT explicitly mentioned as a determinant in the Consolidated Set of the GRI Standards 2021?",
    "options": {
      "B": "The duration of time over which the impact persists.",
      "A": "The scale of how grave the impact is.",
      "C": "The scope of how widespread the impact is.",
      "D": "The irremediable character indicating difficulty to counteract the harm.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "609",
    "ref_doc": "GRI Standards 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Source: United Nations (UN), Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework , 2011; modified Note: See Guidance to Disclosure 2-25 in GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 for more information on ‘grievance mechanism’. human rights rights inherent to all human beings, which include, at a minimum, the rights set out in the United Nations (UN) International Bill of Human Rights and the principles concerning fundamental rights set out in the International Labour Organization (ILO) Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work Source: United Nations (UN), Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework , 2011; modified Note: See Guidance to 2-23-b-i in GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 for more information on ‘human rights’. impact effect the organization has or could have on the economy, environment, and people, including on their human rights , which in turn can indicate its contribution (negative or positive) to sustainable development Note 1: Impacts can be actual or potential, negative or positive, short-term or long-term, intended or unintended, and reversible or irreversible. Note 2: See section 2.1 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 for more information on ‘impact’. material topics topics that represent the organization’s most significant impacts on the economy, environment, and people, including impacts on their human rights Note: See section 2.2 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 and section 1 in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 for more information on ‘material topics’. mitigation action(s) taken to reduce the extent of a negative impact Source United Nations (UN), The Corporate Responsibility to Respect Human Rights: An Interpretive Guide , 2012; modified Note: The mitigation of an actual negative impact refers to actions taken to reduce the severity of the negative impact that has occurred, with any residual impact needing remediation . The mitigation of a potential negative impact refers to actions taken to reduce the likelihood of the negative impact occurring. remedy / remediation means to counteract or make good a negative impact or provision of remedy Source: United Nations (UN), The Corporate Responsibility to Respect Human Rights: An Interpretive Guide , 2012; modified Examples: apologies, financial or non-financial compensation, prevention of harm through injunctions or guarantees of non-repetition, punitive sanctions (whether criminal or administrative, such as fines), restitution, restoration, rehabilitation severity (of an impact) The severity of an actual or potential negative impact is determined by its scale (i.e., how grave the impact is), scope (i.e., how widespread the impact is), and irremediable character (how hard it is to counteract or make good the resulting harm).H I M R S GRI 414: Supplier Social Assessment 2016 608",
    "new_id": 42
  },
  {
    "id": 2852,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures an implicit limitation on the use of the GRI Standards, as indicated by the Consolidated Set of the GRI Standards 2021?",
    "options": {
      "C": "While the GRI Standards promote sustainability reporting, organizations bear full responsibility for the accuracy and consequences of their reports.",
      "A": "The GRI Standards can be freely adapted or modified by organizations to suit their specific reporting needs without restriction.",
      "B": "Organizations using the GRI Standards are required to seek prior written permission from GRI for any form of reproduction or distribution of reports.",
      "D": "The legal liability for damages arising from the misuse of the GRI Standards lies solely with the Global Sustainability Standards Board (GSSB).",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "373-374",
    "ref_doc": "GRI Standards 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Bibliography This section lists authoritative intergovernmental instruments and additional references used in developing this Standard. Authoritative instruments: Additional references:Ramsar Convention, ‘The Convention on Wetlands of International Importance especially as Waterfowl Habitat’, 1994.1. United Nations (UN) Convention, ‘Convention on Biological Diversity’, 1992. 2. United Nations (UN) Convention, ‘Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna (CITES)’, 1979.3. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), Biosphere Reserves, http://www.unesco.org/new/en/natural-sciences/environment/ecological-sciences/biosphere-reserves/ , accessed on 1 September 2016.4. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), World Heritage Sites List, http://whc.unesco.org/en/list , accessed on 1 September 2016.5. BirdLife International, Important Bird and Biodiversity Areas , http://www.birdlife.org/datazone/site , accessed on 1 September 2016.6. International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), Guidelines for Applying Protected Area Management Categories , 2008.7. International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), Red List of Threatened Species, http://www.iucnredlist.org/ , accessed on 1 September 2016.8. GRI 304: Biodiversity 2016 372\n\n[Page 374]\nGRI 305: Emissions 2016 Topic Standard Effective date This Standard is effective for reports or other materials published on or after 1 July 2018. Responsibility This Standard is issued by the Global Sustainability Standards Board (GSSB) . Any feedback on the GRI Standards can be submitted to gssbsecretariat@globalreporting.org for the consideration of the GSSB. Due Process This Standard was developed in the public interest and in accordance with the requirements of the GSSB Due Process Protocol. It has been developed using multi-stakeholder expertise, and with regard to authoritative intergovernmental instruments and widely held expectations of organizations relating to social, environmental, and economic responsibilities. Legal liability This document, designed to promote sustainability reporting, has been developed by the Global Sustainability Standards Board (GSSB) through a unique multi-stakeholder consultative process involving representatives from organizations and report information users from around the world. While the GRI Board of Directors and GSSB encourage the use of the GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards (GRI Standards) and related Interpretations by all organizations, the preparation and publication of reports based fully or partially on the GRI Standards and related Interpretations are the full responsibility of those producing them. Neither the GRI Board of Directors, GSSB, nor Stichting Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) can assume responsibility for any consequences or damages resulting directly or indirectly from the use of the GRI Standards and related Interpretations in the preparation of reports, or the use of reports based on the GRI Standards and related Interpretations. Copyright and trademark notice This document is copyright-protected by Stichting Global Reporting Initiative (GRI). The reproduction and distribution of this document for information and/or use in preparing a sustainability report is permitted without prior permission from GRI. However, neither this document nor any extract from it may be reproduced, stored, translated, or transferred in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photocopied, recorded, or otherwise) for any other purpose without prior written permission from GRI. Global Reporting Initiative, GRI and logo, GSSB and logo, and GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards (GRI Standards) and logo are trademarks of Stichting Global Reporting Initiative. © 2021 GRI. All rights reserved. ISBN ISBN: 978-90-8866-108-2",
    "new_id": 43
  },
  {
    "id": 2853,
    "question": "Which of the following best reflects the implicit relationship between the organization's measures to eliminate forced labor and the guidance provided by international frameworks, as described in the Consolidated Set of the GRI Standards 2021?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The organization can refer to international frameworks such as the ILO and OECD guidelines to inform its measures, but these are not explicitly mandated in the text.",
      "A": "The organization is required to adopt the ILO Tripartite Declaration as legally binding, ensuring total compliance with forced labor elimination.",
      "B": "International frameworks like the ILO and OECD guidelines serve as optional suggestions that organizations may interpret flexibly without obligation.",
      "C": "Forced labor policies must be formulated exclusively based on internal risk assessments, independent of external frameworks like the ILO or OECD.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "560",
    "ref_doc": "GRI Standards 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "2. Topic disclosures Disclosure 409-1 Operations and suppliers at significant risk for incidents of forced or compulsory labor The reporting organization shall report the following information:REQUIREMENTS Operations and suppliers considered to have significant risk for incidents of forced or compulsory labor either in terms of: type of operation (such as manufacturing plant) and supplier; i. countries or geographic areas with operations and suppliers considered at risk. ii.a. Measures taken by the organization in the reporting period intended to contribute to the elimination of all forms of forced or compulsory labor.b. Guidance for Disclosure 409-1 The process for identifying operations and suppliers, as specified in Disclosure 409-1, can reflect the reporting organization’s approach to risk assessment on this issue. It can also draw from recognized international data sources, such as the ILO Information and reports on the application of Conventions and Recommendations (see reference [1] in the Bibliography ). When reporting the measures taken, the organization can refer to the ILO ‘Tripartite Declaration of Principles Concerning Multinational Enterprises and Social Policy’ and Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises for further guidance. Background Forced or compulsory labor exists globally in a variety of forms. The most extreme examples are slave labor and bonded labor, but debts can also be used as a means of maintaining workers in a state of forced labor. Indicators of forced labor can also include withholding identity papers, requiring compulsory deposits, and compelling workers, under threat of firing, to work extra hours to which they have not previously agreed. Eliminating forced labor remains an important challenge. Forced labor is not only a serious violation of a fundamental human right , it also perpetuates poverty and is a hindrance to economic and human development. The presence and effective implementation of policies for eliminating all forms of forced or compulsory labor are a basic expectation of responsible business conduct. Organizations with multinational operations are required by law in some countries to provide information on their efforts to eradicate forced labor in their supply chains.GUIDANCE 5 5International Labour Organization (ILO), International Labour Standards on Forced labour http://www.ilo.org/global/standards/subjects-covered-by- international-labour-standards/forced-labour/lang--en/index.htm#P23_4987, accessed on 1 September 2016. GRI 409: Forced or Compulsory Labor 2016 559",
    "new_id": 44
  },
  {
    "id": 2855,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the distinction between 'recycling' and 'recovery operation', as described in the Consolidated Set of the GRI Standards 2021?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Recycling exclusively involves reprocessing waste into new materials, while recovery operations include any process that prepares waste to replace new products or materials without energy recovery.",
      "B": "Recovery operations encompass all forms of waste treatment, including energy recovery, whereas recycling is limited to reprocessing components into raw materials only.",
      "C": "Recycling and recovery operations are synonymous terms for transforming waste into reusable materials, with no meaningful distinction between them.",
      "D": "Recovery operations focus solely on preparing items for reuse, while recycling requires converting waste into entirely new products with different purposes.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "668",
    "ref_doc": "GRI Standards 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "reclaimed refers to collecting, reusing, or recycling products and their packaging materials at the end of their useful lives Note 1: Collection and treatment can be carried out by the manufacturer of the product or by a contractor. Note 2: Reclaimed items can include products and their packaging materials that are collected by or on behalf of the organization; separated into raw materials (such as steel, glass, paper, some kinds of plastic) or components; and/or used by the organization or other users. recordable work-related injury or ill health work-related injury or ill health that results in any of the following: death, days away from work, restricted work or transfer to another job, medical treatment beyond first aid, or loss of consciousness; or significant injury or ill health diagnosed by a physician or other licensed healthcare professional, even if it does not result in death, days away from work, restricted work or job transfer, medical treatment beyond first aid, or loss of consciousness Source: United States Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), General recording criteria 1904.7, https://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_ table=STANDARDS&p_id=9638 , accessed on 1 June 2018; modified recovery operation wherein products, components of products, or materials that have become waste are prepared to fulfill a purpose in place of new products, components, or materials that would otherwise have been used for that purpose Source: United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal , 1989; modified Examples: preparation for reuse , recycling Note: In the context of waste reporting, recovery operations do not include energy recovery. recycled input material material that replaces virgin materials, which are purchased or obtained from internal or external sources, and that are not by-products and non-product outputs (NPO) produced by the organization recycling reprocessing of sector or components of products that have become waste, to make new materials Source: United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal , 1989; modified reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions decrease in greenhouse gas ( GHG) emissions or increase in removal or storage of GHG from the atmosphere, relative to baseline emissions Note: Primary effects will result in GHG reductions, as will some secondary effects. An initiative’s total GHG reductions are quantified as the sum of its associated primary effect(s) and any significant secondary effects (which may involve decreases or countervailing increases in GHG emissions). R GRI Standards Glossary 2021 667",
    "new_id": 45
  },
  {
    "id": 2856,
    "question": "Which scenario would contradict the organization's obligation under Disclosure 2-30-b regarding employees not covered by collective bargaining agreements, as outlined in the Consolidated Set of the GRI Standards 2021?",
    "options": {
      "B": "The organization reports that no collective bargaining influences exist for uncovered employees, without providing further clarification.",
      "A": "The organization determines working conditions for uncovered employees based on collective bargaining agreements from other organizations.",
      "C": "The organization explicitly states that uncovered employees' terms of employment are unrelated to any collective bargaining agreements.",
      "D": "The organization applies terms derived from agreements covering its other employees to those not covered by collective bargaining.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "89-90",
    "ref_doc": "GRI Standards 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Disclosure 2-30 Collective bargaining agreements The organization shall:REQUIREMENTS report the percentage of total employees covered by collective bargaining agreements; a. for employees not covered by collective bargaining agreements, report whether the organization determines their working conditions and terms of employment based on collective bargaining agreements that cover its other employees or based on collective bargaining agreements from other organizations.b. This disclosure provides insights into how the organization engages in collective bargaining with its employees. Collective bargaining is a fundamental right at work covered in the International Labour Organization (ILO) Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention [8]. Collective bargaining refers to negotiations that take place between one or more employers or employers' organizations and one or more workers' organizations (e.g., trade unions). The objective of these negotiations is to reach a collective agreement on working conditions and terms of employment (e.g., wages, working time) and to regulate relations between employers and workers . [3] These negotiations are an important means through which employers’ organizations and workers’ organizations can improve working conditions and labor relations. Collective agreements can be made at the level of the organization, at the level of a particular site, at the industry level, and at the national level in countries where this is the practice. Collective agreements can cover specific groups of workers, for example, those performing a specific activity or working at a specific location. If the organization has a statement or policy commitment on freedom of association and collective bargaining, this is reported under 2-23-b-i in this Standard or 3-3-c in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 . See references [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [8], [10], [21], [25], and [26] in the Bibliography . Guidance to 2-30-a The organization is required to report the percentage of its employees whose working conditions and terms of employment are regulated by one or more collective bargaining agreements. The percentage of employees covered by collective bargaining agreements is calculated using the following formula: Number of employees covered by collective bargaining agreements ___________________________________________________ Total number of employees reported under 2-7-ax 100 The employees covered by collective bargaining agreements are those employees to whom the organization is obligated to apply the agreement. This means that if none of the employees are covered by a collective bargaining agreement, the percentage reported is zero. An employee covered by more than one collective bargaining agreement only needs to be counted once. This requirement does not ask for the percentage of employees represented by a works council or belonging to trade unions, which can be different. The percentage of employees covered by collective bargaining agreements can be higher than the percentage of unionized employees when the collective bargaining agreements apply to both union and non-union members. Alternatively, the percentage of employees covered by collective bargaining agreements can be lower than the percentage of unionized employees. This may be the case when there are no collective bargaining agreements available or when the collective bargaining agreements do not cover all unionized employees.GUIDANCE GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 88\n\n[Page 90]\nThe organization can also provide a breakdown of the percentage of employees covered by collective bargaining agreements by region, or provide comparisons with industry benchmarks. Guidance to 2-30-b There may be instances where collective bargaining agreements cover some or none of the organization’s employees. However, the working conditions and terms of employment of these employees may be influenced or determined by the organization based on other collective bargaining agreements, such as agreements that cover other employees or agreements from other organizations. If this is the case, the organization is required to report it under 2-30-b. If this is not the case, and the working conditions and terms of employment of these employees are not influenced or determined based on other collective bargaining agreements, a brief statement of this fact is sufficient to comply with this requirement. GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 89",
    "new_id": 46
  },
  {
    "id": 2857,
    "question": "When prioritizing impacts, which of the following best explains why an organization might focus on severity over likelihood for negative impacts but consider both scale and likelihood for potential positive impacts, as outlined in the Consolidated Set of the GRI Standards 2021?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Negative impacts are inherently irreversible, making their severity the dominant factor, while positive impacts require consideration of both scope and feasibility.",
      "A": "Severity is more easily measurable than likelihood, simplifying the prioritization process.",
      "B": "Likelihood is irrelevant to negative impacts because they are always guaranteed to occur, whereas positive impacts depend entirely on chance.",
      "D": "The organization seeks to minimize legal risks by addressing only severe negative impacts, ignoring other factors like likelihood or scope.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "113-114",
    "ref_doc": "GRI Standards 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "rights impacts, the severity of the impact takes precedence over its likelihood. The significance of an actual positive impact is determined by the scale and scope of the impact, while the significance of a potential positive impact is determined by its scale and scope as well as its likelihood. See section 1 in this Standard for more guidance on assessing the significance of impacts. The organization should explain if it has used a different approach to prioritize its impacts, for example, if it has prioritized potential negative environmental impacts based on severity only. The organization should also describe how it has defined the threshold to determine which topics are material for reporting, and whether it has tested its selection of material topics with potential information users and experts. The organization is required to report whether the highest governance body is responsible for reviewing and approving the reported information, including the organization’s material topics, under Disclosure 2-14 in GRI 2 . The organization should explain any changes to its initial selection of material topics following internal approval and testing with potential information users and experts. For transparency, the organization can provide a visual representation of the prioritization that shows the initial list of topics it has identified and the threshold it has set for reporting. Guidance to 3-1-b Requirement 3-1-b enables the organization to explain how engagement with stakeholders and experts informs the ongoing identification and assessment of its impacts. The organization can report whether and how it has prioritized stakeholders for engagement and the methods used to engage with them. It can also report any conflicting interests that have arisen among different stakeholders and how the organization has resolved these conflicting interests. GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 112\n\n[Page 114]\nDisclosure 3-2 List of material topics The organization shall:REQUIREMENTS list its material topics ; a. report changes to the list of material topics compared to the previous reporting period . b. This disclosure requires information on the organization’s material topics. The process of determining material topics is reported under Disclosure 3-1 in this Standard. The organization is required to include the material topics listed under this disclosure in the GRI content index. If the organization has determined any of the topics included in the applicable Sector Standards as not material, then the organization is required to list them in the content index and explain why they are not material. See Requirement 5 and Requirement 7 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 for more information. Guidance to 3-2-a The organization can group material topics by relevant categories if this helps communicate its impacts . For example, the organization can indicate which of its material topics represent its negative human rights impacts. Guidance to 3-2-b Requirement 3-2-b enables the organization to explain why a topic that it determined as material in the previous reporting period is no longer considered to be material or why a new topic has been determined as material for the current reporting period.GUIDANCE GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 113",
    "new_id": 47
  },
  {
    "id": 2858,
    "question": "When an organization determines that procurement practices are a material topic, which of the following is NOT a permissible justification for omitting required disclosures under the GRI Standards, as outlined in the Consolidated Set of the GRI Standards 2021?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The organization chooses not to report because it believes the disclosure does not align with its sustainability goals.",
      "A": "The required information is confidential and disclosing it would breach legal obligations.",
      "B": "The organization has plans to develop the missing item but currently lacks a relevant policy or process.",
      "C": "The required information has already been publicly disclosed elsewhere, such as on a webpage or in an annual report.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "258-259",
    "ref_doc": "GRI Standards 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Figure 1. GRI Standards: Universal, Sector and Topic Standards Apply all three Universal Standards to your reportingUse the Sector Standards that apply to your sectorsSelect Topic Standards to report specific information on your material topicsSector Standards Universal Standards Topic StandardsGRI Standards Requirements and principles for using the GRI Standards Disclosures about the reporting organization Disclosures and guidance about the organization's material topics Using this Standard This Standard can be used by any organization – regardless of size, type, sector, geographic location, or reporting experience – to report information about its procurement practice-related impacts . An organization reporting in accordance with the GRI Standards is required to report the following disclosures if it has determined procurement practices to be a material topic : See Requirements 4 and 5 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 . Reasons for omission are permitted for these disclosures. If the organization cannot comply with a disclosure or with a requirement in a disclosure (e.g., because the required information is confidential or subject to legal prohibitions), the organization is required to specify the disclosure or the requirement it cannot comply with, and provide a reason for omission together with an explanation in the GRI content index. See Requirement 6 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 for more information on reasons for omission. If the organization cannot report the required information about an item specified in a disclosure because the item (e.g., committee, policy, practice, process) does not exist, it can comply with the requirement by reporting this to be the case. The organization can explain the reasons for not having this item, or describe any plans to develop it. The disclosure does not require the organization to implement the item (e.g., developing a policy), but to report that the item does not exist. If the organization intends to publish a standalone sustainability report, it does not need to repeat information that it has already reported publicly elsewhere, such as on web pages or in its annual report. In such a case, the organization can report a required disclosure by providing a reference in the GRI content index as to where this information can be found (e.g., by providing a link to the web page or citing the page in the annual report where the information has been published). Disclosure 3-3 in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 (see clause 1.1 in this Standard); • Any disclosure from this Topic Standard that is relevant to the organization’s procurement practice-related impacts (Disclosure 204-1).• GRI 204: Procurement Practices 2016 257\n\n[Page 259]\nRequirements, guidance and defined terms The following apply throughout this Standard: Requirements are presented in bold font and indicated by the word 'shall'. An organization must comply with requirements to report in accordance with the GRI Standards. Requirements may be accompanied by guidance. Guidance includes background information, explanations, and examples to help the organization better understand the requirements. The organization is not required to comply with guidance. The Standards may also include recommendations. These are cases where a particular course of action is encouraged but not required. The word ‘should’ indicates a recommendation, and the word ‘can’ indicates a possibility or option. Defined terms are underlined in the text of the GRI Standards and linked to their definitions in the Glossary . The organization is required to apply the definitions in the Glossary. GRI 204: Procurement Practices 2016 258",
    "new_id": 48
  },
  {
    "id": 2859,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why an organization's reporting on habitat areas protected or restored might include locations where operations are still active, as described in the Consolidated Set of the GRI Standards 2021?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Because such areas may meet the criteria for being classified as 'area restored' or 'area protected'.",
      "B": "Because active operations inherently guarantee the success of restoration efforts.",
      "C": "Because regulatory requirements mandate inclusion of all operational sites in biodiversity disclosures.",
      "D": "Because partnerships with third parties automatically qualify any associated site as protected or restored.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "368-369",
    "ref_doc": "GRI Standards 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Disclosure 304-2 Significant impacts of activities, products and services on biodiversity The reporting organization shall report the following information:REQUIREMENTS Nature of significant direct and indirect impacts on biodiversity with reference to one or more of the following: Construction or use of manufacturing plants, mines, and transport infrastructure; i. Pollution (introduction of substances that do not naturally occur in the habitat from point and non-point sources);ii. Introduction of invasive species, pests, and pathogens; iii. Reduction of species; iv. Habitat conversion; v. Changes in ecological processes outside the natural range of variation (such as salinity or changes in groundwater level).vi.a. Significant direct and indirect positive and negative impacts with reference to the following: Species affected; i. Extent of areas impacted; ii. Duration of impacts; iii. Reversibility or irreversibility of the impacts. iv.b. Guidance for Disclosure 304-2 Indirect impacts on biodiversity can include impacts in the supply chain. Areas of impact are not limited to areas that are formally protected and include consideration of impacts on buffer zones, as well as formally designated areas of special importance or sensitivity. Background This disclosure provides the background for understanding (and developing) an organization’s strategy to mitigate significant direct and indirect impacts on biodiversity. By presenting structured and qualitative information, the disclosure enables comparison of the relative size, scale, and nature of impacts over time and across organizations.GUIDANCE GRI 304: Biodiversity 2016 367\n\n[Page 369]\nDisclosure 304-3 Habitats protected or restored The reporting organization shall report the following information:REQUIREMENTS Size and location of all habitat areas protected or restored , and whether the success of the restoration measure was or is approved by independent external professionals.a. Whether partnerships exist with third parties to protect or restore habitat areas distinct from where the organization has overseen and implemented restoration or protection measures.b. Status of each area based on its condition at the close of the reporting period. c. Standards, methodologies, and assumptions used. d. RECOMMENDATIONSWhen compiling the information specified in Disclosure 304-3, the reporting organization should align the information presented in this disclosure with regulatory or license requirements for the protection or restoration of habitats, if applicable.2.2 Guidance for Disclosure 304-3 This disclosure addresses the extent of an organization’s prevention and remediation activities with respect to its impacts on biodiversity. This disclosure refers to areas where remediation has been completed or where the area is actively protected. Areas where operations are still active can be counted if they conform to the definitions of ‘ area restored ’ or ‘area protected ’.GUIDANCE GRI 304: Biodiversity 2016 368",
    "new_id": 49
  },
  {
    "id": 2860,
    "question": "Which of the following most accurately reflects the relationship between indigenous peoples' rights and the oil and gas sector's activities, as described in the Consolidated Set of the GRI Standards 2021?",
    "options": {
      "B": "While the sector can create economic opportunities for indigenous communities, its activities often disrupt their cultural ties and resource access without effective FPIC implementation.",
      "A": "The oil and gas sector's presence inherently violates indigenous peoples' rights, regardless of economic benefits or consultation processes.",
      "C": "Indigenous peoples always benefit from the oil and gas sector’s activities due to employment opportunities and community development programs.",
      "D": "National governments consistently enforce indigenous land rights and ensure free, prior, and informed consent before granting project approvals.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "172",
    "ref_doc": "GRI Standards 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Topic 11.17 Rights of indigenous peoples Indigenous peoples are considered a vulnerable group and are at higher risk of experiencing negative impacts more severely as a result of an organization’s activities. Indigenous peoples have both collective and individual rights, as set out in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and other authoritative international human rights instruments. This topic covers impacts on the rights of indigenous peoples. The presence of the oil and gas sector in proximity to indigenous communities can present economic opportunities and benefits for indigenous peoples through employment, training, and community development programs (see also topic 11.14 Economic impacts ). However, it can also disrupt indigenous peoples’ cultural, spiritual, and economic ties to their lands or natural environments, compromise their rights and well-being, and cause displacement (see also topic 11.16 Land and resource rights ). It can also have an impact on the availability of and access to water, which is a key concern for many indigenous communities. The collective and individual rights of indigenous peoples are recognized in authoritative international instruments. Indigenous peoples also often have a special legal status in national legislation and can be customary or legal owners of lands to which organizations in the oil and gas sector are granted use rights by governments. Before initiating development or other activities that could have potential impacts on lands or resources that indigenous peoples use or own, organizations are expected to seek free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC) from indigenous peoples. This right is recognized in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and allows indigenous peoples to give or withhold consent to a project that may affect them or their territories and to negotiate project conditions [ 314]. However, some national governments may not recognize or enforce indigenous land rights or indigenous peoples’ rights to consent. Documented cases show an absence of good faith consultations and undue pressure on indigenous peoples to accept projects, with opposition to such projects sometimes leading to violence or death (see also topic 11.18 Conflict and security ). Organizations in the sector and indigenous peoples regularly have disputes and conflicts over land ownership and rights. An influx of workers from other areas can result in discrimination toward indigenous peoples regarding access to jobs and opportunities. It can further undermine their social cohesion, well-being, and safety. Impacts that may affect indigenous women more severely than men include risks of prostitution, forced labor , violence, and increased exposure to communicable diseases (see also topic 11.15 Local communities ). The contribution of the oil and gas sector to climate change can also exacerbate negative impacts on indigenous peoples, given their unique relationship with and, at times, dependence on the natural environment. GRI 11: Oil and Gas Sector 2021 171",
    "new_id": 50
  },
  {
    "id": 2861,
    "question": "Which scenario would require the organization to include an incident of non-compliance in its report, assuming it occurred during the reporting period, according to the Consolidated Set of the GRI Standards 2021?",
    "options": {
      "C": "An incident where the organization was fined for a misleading advertisement that exaggerated product benefits.",
      "A": "An incident where the organization received a warning but was later found not at fault after an appeal.",
      "B": "An incident involving a breach of voluntary codes related to sponsorship practices from three years prior, resolved during the reporting period.",
      "D": "An incident where a competitor falsely accused the organization of deceptive marketing, with no formal resolution against the organization.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "640",
    "ref_doc": "GRI Standards 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Disclosure 417-3 Incidents of non-compliance concerning marketing communications The reporting organization shall report the following information: Compilation requirementsREQUIREMENTS Total number of incidents of non-compliance with regulations and/or voluntary codes concerning marketing communications , including advertising, promotion, and sponsorship, by: incidents of non-compliance with regulations resulting in a fine or penalty; i. incidents of non-compliance with regulations resulting in a warning; ii. incidents of non-compliance with voluntary codes. iii.a. If the organization has not identified any non-compliance with regulations and/or voluntary codes, a brief statement of this fact is sufficient.b. When compiling the information specified in Disclosure 417-3, the reporting organization shall:2.2 exclude incidents of non-compliance in which the organization was determined not to be at fault;2.2.1 if applicable, identify any incidents of non-compliance that relate to events in periods prior to the reporting period .2.2.2 Guidance for Disclosure 417-3 The incidents of non-compliance that occur within the reporting period can relate to incidents formally resolved during the reporting period, whether they occurred in periods prior to the reporting period or not. Background Marketing is an important method of communication between organizations and customers, and is subject to many regulations, laws, and voluntary codes, such as the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC)’s Consolidated Code of Advertising and Marketing Communication Practice . An organization is expected to use fair and responsible practices in its business and dealings with customers. Fair and responsible marketing requires the organization to communicate transparently about the economic, environmental, and social impacts of its brands, products, and services. Fair and responsible marketing also avoids any deceptive, untruthful, or discriminatory claims, and does not take advantage of a customers’ lack of knowledge or choices.GUIDANCE GRI 417: Marketing and Labeling 2016 639",
    "new_id": 51
  },
  {
    "id": 2862,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between reporting practices and organizational details, as outlined in the Consolidated Set of the GRI Standards 2021?",
    "options": {
      "D": "While an organization must report its legal name, it may also report a trading name to provide additional clarity.",
      "A": "An organization is required to report its trading name instead of its legal name if they differ.",
      "B": "The recommendation to include regions or specific locations within countries is mandatory for all organizations.",
      "C": "Reporting the nature of ownership is optional but encouraged to enhance transparency.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "47-48",
    "ref_doc": "GRI Standards 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Requirements, guidance and defined terms The following apply throughout the GRI Standards: Requirements are presented in bold font and indicated by the word 'shall'. An organization must comply with requirements to report in accordance with the GRI Standards. Requirements may be accompanied by guidance. Guidance includes background information, explanations, and examples to help the organization better understand the requirements. The organization is not required to comply with guidance. The Standards may also include recommendations. These are cases where a particular course of action is encouraged but not required. The word ‘should’ indicates a recommendation, and the word ‘can’ indicates a possibility or option. Defined terms are underlined in the text of the GRI Standards and linked to their definitions in the Glossary . The organization is required to apply the definitions in the Glossary. GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 46\n\n[Page 48]\n1. The organization and its reporting practices The disclosures in this section provide an overview of the organization, its sustainability reporting practices, and the entities included in its sustainability reporting. Disclosure 2-1 Organizational details The organization shall:REQUIREMENTS report its legal name; a. report its nature of ownership and legal form; b. report the location of its headquarters; c. report its countries of operation. d. Guidance to 2-1-a If the organization uses a commonly known trading name or business name that is different from its legal name, it should report this in addition to its legal name. Guidance to 2-1-b The nature of ownership and the legal form of the organization refers to whether it is publicly or privately owned, and whether it is an incorporated entity, a partnership, a sole proprietorship, or another type of entity such as a nonprofit, an association, or a charity. Guidance to 2-1-c Headquarters are an organization’s global administrative center, the place from which it is controlled or directed. Guidance to 2-1-d If the organization has reported its countries of operation elsewhere, such as in its audited consolidated financial statements or financial information filed on public record, the organization can provide a link or reference to this information. The organization can also report the regions or specific locations within countries (e.g., states, cities) where it has operations, if this provides contextual information for understanding the organization’s impacts . GUIDANCE GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 47",
    "new_id": 52
  },
  {
    "id": 2863,
    "question": "Which statement best captures the relationship between an organization's activities and the vulnerabilities of local communities, as described in the Consolidated Set of the GRI Standards 2021?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The differentiated nature of local communities requires organizations to tailor their stakeholder engagement processes to address specific vulnerabilities.",
      "B": "An organization’s activities are expected to uniformly impact all members of a local community, necessitating standardized engagement processes.",
      "C": "Local communities are only considered vulnerable if they reside adjacent to an organization’s operations, simplifying the identification process.",
      "D": "Organizations are encouraged to focus primarily on economic impacts, as social, cultural, and environmental vulnerabilities are secondary concerns.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "588",
    "ref_doc": "GRI Standards 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Introduction GRI 413: Local Communities 2016 contains disclosures for organizations to report information about their impacts related to local communities , and how they manage these impacts. The Standard is structured as follows: The rest of the Introduction section provides a background on the topic, an overview of the system of GRI Standards and further information on using this Standard. Background on the topic This Standard addresses the topic of local communities. In the GRI Standards, local communities are defined as individuals or groups of individuals living or working in areas that are affected or that could be affected by the organization’s activities. The local community can range from those living adjacent to the organization's operations to those living at a distance. An organization’s activities and infrastructure can have significant economic, social, cultural, and/or environmental impacts on local communities. Where possible, organizations are expected to anticipate and avoid negative impacts on local communities. Establishing a timely and effective stakeholder identification and engagement process is important to help organizations understand the vulnerability of local communities and how these might be affected by the organization’s activities. Due to the heterogeneous nature of local communities, an organization is expected to consider the differentiated nature of communities and the distinct and specific vulnerabilities these groups can suffer as a result of the organization’s activities. These concepts are covered in key instruments of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and the United Nations: see the Bibliography . System of GRI Standards This Standard is part of the GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards (GRI Standards). The GRI Standards enable an organization to report information about its most significant impacts on the economy, environment, and people, including impacts on their human rights , and how it manages these impacts. The GRI Standards are structured as a system of interrelated standards that are organized into three series: GRI Universal Standards, GRI Sector Standards, and GRI Topic Standards (see Figure 1 in this Standard). Universal Standards: GRI 1, GRI 2 and GRI 3 GRI 1: Foundation 2021 specifies the requirements that the organization must comply with to report in accordance with the GRI Standards. The organization begins using the GRI Standards by consulting GRI 1 . GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 contains disclosures that the organization uses to provide information about its reporting practices and other organizational details, such as its activities, governance, and policies. GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 provides guidance on how to determine material topics . It also contains disclosures that the organization uses to report information about its process of determining material topics, its list of material topics, and how it manages each topic. Sector Standards The Sector Standards provide information for organizations about their likely material topics. The organization uses the Sector Standards that apply to its sectors when determining its material topics and when determining what to report for each material topic. Section 1 contains a requirement, which provides information about how the organization manages its impacts related to local communities.• Section 2 contains two disclosures, which provide information about the organization’s impacts related to local communities.• The Glossary contains defined terms with a specific meaning when used in the GRI Standards. The terms are underlined in the text of the GRI Standards and linked to the definitions.• The Bibliography lists authoritative intergovernmental instruments and additional references used in developing this Standard.• GRI 413: Local Communities 2016 587",
    "new_id": 53
  },
  {
    "id": 2864,
    "question": "Which scenario most accurately reflects a situation where worker participation and worker consultation could both occur but are distinct processes, according to the Consolidated Set of the GRI Standards 2021?",
    "options": {
      "B": "A committee of worker representatives collaborates with management to co-create policies, while another group provides feedback on proposed changes without decision-making authority.",
      "A": "A trade union representative is elected by workers to exclusively negotiate terms of employment on their behalf.",
      "C": "Workers elect a representative who solely organizes workplace safety drills without engaging in decision-making discussions.",
      "D": "An ergonomic workstation redesign is implemented entirely by management after reviewing anonymous worker complaints.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "675",
    "ref_doc": "GRI Standards 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "worker participation workers ’ involvement in decision-making Note 1: Worker participation might be carried out through workers’ representatives . Note 2: Worker participation and worker consultation are two distinct terms with specific meanings. See definition of ‘ worker consultation ’. worker representative person who is recognized as such under national law or practice, whether they are: Source: International Labour Organization (ILO), Workers' Representatives Convention , 1971 (No. 135) work-related hazard source or situation with the potential to cause injury or ill health Source: International Labour Organization (ILO) Guidelines on Occupational Safety and Health Management Systems, 2001; modified International Organization for Standardization. ISO 45001:2018. Occupational health and safety management systems — Requirements with guidance for use. Geneva: ISO, 2018; modified Definitions that are based on or come from the ISO 14046:2014 and ISO 45001:2018 standards are reproduced with the permission of the International Organization for Standardization, ISO. Copyright remains with ISO. Note: Hazards can be: work-related incident occurrence arising out of or in the course of work that could or does result in injury or ill health Source: International Organization for Standardization. ISO 45001:2018. Occupational health and safety management systems — Requirements with guidance for use. Geneva: ISO, 2018; modified Definitions that are based on or come from the ISO 14046:2014 and ISO 45001:2018 standards are reproduced with the permission of the International Organization for Standardization, ISO. Copyright remains with ISO. Note 1: Incidents might be due to, for example, electrical problems, explosion, fire; overflow, overturning, leakage, flow; breakage, bursting, splitting; loss of control, slipping, stumbling and falling; body movement without stress; body movement under/with stress; shock, fright; workplace violence or harassment (e.g., sexual harassment). Note 2: An incident that results in injury or ill health is often referred to as an ‘accident’. An incident that has the potential to result in injury or ill health but where none occurs is often referred to as a ‘ close call ', ‘near-miss’, or ‘near-hit’.a trade union representative, namely, a representative designated or elected by trade unions or by members of such unions; or• an elected representative, namely, a representative who is freely elected by the workers of the undertaking in accordance with provisions of national laws, regulations, or collective agreements, whose functions do not include activities which are recognized as the exclusive prerogative of trade unions in the country concerned.• physical (e.g., radiation, temperature extremes, constant loud noise, spills on floors or tripping hazards, unguarded machinery, faulty electrical equipment);• ergonomic (e.g., improperly adjusted workstations and chairs, awkward movements, vibration);• chemical (e.g., exposure to solvents, carbon monoxide, flammable materials, or pesticides);• biological (e.g., exposure to blood and bodily fluids, fungi, bacteria, viruses, or insect bites);• psychosocial (e.g., verbal abuse, harassment, bullying);• related to work-organization (e.g., excessive workload demands, shift work, long hours, night work, workplace violence).• GRI Standards Glossary 2021 674",
    "new_id": 54
  },
  {
    "id": 2865,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects a nuanced implication of the text regarding stakeholder engagement and sustainability, as described in the Consolidated Set of the GRI Standards 2021?",
    "options": {
      "C": "An organization’s responsibility to stakeholders includes addressing both current and potential future impacts, aligning with the principle of sustainable development.",
      "A": "Stakeholders are only those who currently experience direct impacts from an organization’s activities, excluding potential future effects.",
      "B": "The concept of severity is irrelevant to assessing stakeholder concerns since it focuses solely on environmental impacts.",
      "D": "Supply chain entities are not considered stakeholders unless they have a direct business relationship with the organization.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "415",
    "ref_doc": "GRI Standards 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Examples: preparation for reuse , recycling Note: In the context of waste reporting, recovery operations do not include energy recovery. recycling reprocessing of sector or components of products that have become waste, to make new materials Source: United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal , 1989; modified severity (of an impact) The severity of an actual or potential negative impact is determined by its scale (i.e., how grave the impact is), scope (i.e., how widespread the impact is), and irremediable character (how hard it is to counteract or make good the resulting harm). Source: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), OECD Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Business Conduct , 2018; modified United Nations (UN), The Corporate Responsibility to Respect Human Rights: An Interpretive Guide , 2012; modified Note: See section 1 in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 for more information on ‘severity’. stakeholder individual or group that has an interest that is affected or could be affected by the organization’s activities Source: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), OECD Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Business Conduct , 2018; modified Examples: business partners , civil society organizations, consumers, customers, employees and other workers , governments, local communitie s, non-governmental organizations, shareholders and other investors, suppliers , trade unions, vulnerable groups Note: See section 2.4 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 for more information on ‘stakeholder’. supplier entity upstream from the organization (i.e., in the organization’s supply chain ), which provides a product or service that is used in the development of the organization’s own products or services Examples brokers, consultants, contractors, distributors, franchisees, home workers , independent contractors, licensees, manufacturers, primary producers, sub- contractors, wholesalers Note: A supplier can have a direct business relationship with the organization (often referred to as a first-tier supplier) or an indirect business relationship. supply chain range of activities carried out by entities upstream from the organization, which provide products or services that are used in the development of the organization’s own products or services sustainable development / sustainability development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs Source: World Commission on Environment and Development, Our Common Future , 1987 Note: The terms ‘sustainability’ and ‘sustainable development’ are used interchangeably in the GRI Standards. value chain range of activities carried out by the organization, and by entities upstream and downstream from the organization, to bring the organization’s products or services from their conception toS V GRI 306: Waste 2020 414",
    "new_id": 55
  },
  {
    "id": 2866,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why an organization might develop internal water quality standards even in locations without local discharge requirements, according to the Consolidated Set of the GRI Standards 2021?",
    "options": {
      "D": "To address potential impacts on ecosystems, wildlife, and human health where no regulatory framework exists.",
      "A": "To align with sector-specific standards that are universally applicable regardless of regional regulations.",
      "B": "To ensure compliance with national water stress assessment tools as a substitute for missing local guidelines.",
      "C": "To prioritize withdrawal sources based on total dissolved solids in areas identified as having water stress.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "343-344",
    "ref_doc": "GRI Standards 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Disclosure 303-2 Management of water discharge- related impacts The reporting organization shall report the following information:REQUIREMENTS A description of any minimum standards set for the quality of effluent discharge, and how these minimum standards were determined, including: how standards for facilities operating in locations with no local discharge requirements were determined;i. any internally developed water quality standards or guidelines; ii. any sector-specific standards considered; iii. whether the profile of the receiving waterbody was considered. iv.a. Guidance for Disclosure 303-2 Minimum standards are those that go beyond regulatory requirements in controlling the quality of effluent discharge. Water quality refers to the physical, chemical, biological, and taste-related characteristics of water. It is a measure of water suitability for a given purpose or function, including its use as a human right . Water quality standards help uphold water quality in order to protect ecosystems, wildlife, and human health and welfare, and can be based on water properties, such as temperature or pH value. The specific choice of water quality standards and parameters can vary depending on an organization’s procucts, services, and facility locations, and can depend on national and/or regional regulations, as well as the profile of the receiving waterbody.GUIDANCE GRI 303: Water and Effluents 2018 342\n\n[Page 344]\n2. Topic disclosures Disclosure 303-3 Water withdrawal The reporting organization shall report the following information: Compilation requirementsREQUIREMENTS Total water withdrawal from all areas in megaliters, and a breakdown of this total by the following sources, if applicable: Surface water ; i. Groundwater ; ii. Seawater ; iii. Produced water ; iv. Third-party water . v.a. Total water withdrawal from all areas with water stress in megaliters, and a breakdown of this total by the following sources, if applicable: Surface water; i. Groundwater; ii. Seawater; iii. Produced water; iv. Third-party water, and a breakdown of this total by the withdrawal sources listed in i-iv.v.b. A breakdown of total water withdrawal from each of the sources listed in Disclosures 303-3-a and 303-3-b in megaliters by the following categories: Freshwater (≤1,000 mg/L Total Dissolved Solids); i. Other water (>1,000 mg/L Total Dissolved Solids). ii.c. Any contextual information necessary to understand how the data have been compiled, such as any standards, methodologies, and assumptions used.d. When compiling the information specified in Disclosure 303-3, the reporting organization shall use publicly available and credible tools and methodologies for assessing water stress in an area.2.1 RECOMMENDATIONSThe reporting organization should report the following additional information: 2.2 A breakdown of total water withdrawal in megaliters by withdrawal source categories listed in Disclosure 303-3, at each facility in areas with water stress;2.2.1 Total water withdrawal in megaliters by suppliers with significant water-related impacts in areas with water stress.2.2.2 Background The volume of water withdrawal from areas with water stress can indicate an organization’s impacts in sensitive locations. To learn more about locations where water-related impacts might be significant, and where actions to address them are most needed, the reporting organization can also report the information requested in Disclosure 303-3 for each facility in areas with water stress. This can give stakeholders more confidence in the organization’s water stewardship efforts and practices. Guidance for Disclosure 303-3 For an example of how to present information on requirements in Disclosure 303-3, see Table 1. Surface water includes collected or harvested rainwater. Third-party water includes water supplied by municipal water networks or other organizations.GUIDANCE GRI 303: Water and Effluents 2018 343",
    "new_id": 56
  },
  {
    "id": 2867,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the implications of the Interpretation Statement regarding clause 2.1 in GRI 401: Employment 2016, as outlined in the Consolidated Set of the GRI Standards 2021?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Organizations can choose their own methodology for calculating turnover rates but are advised to describe their chosen measurements and calculation bases clearly.",
      "B": "Organizations are required to use total employee numbers at the end of the reporting period as the sole basis for calculating turnover rates, per the Accuracy principle.",
      "C": "Organizations must follow a prescribed methodology for calculating turnover rates but should provide explanatory notes if they deviate from it.",
      "D": "Organizations are prohibited from using ratios or normalized data when reporting employee turnover rates under any circumstances.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "450-451",
    "ref_doc": "GRI Standards 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Standard Interpretations Standard Interpretation 1 to GRI 401: Employment 2016 on calculating the rates of new employee hires and employee turnover Responsibility This Standard Interpretation is issued by the Global Sustainability Standards Board (GSSB) . Any feedback on the GRI Standards and related Interpretations can be submitted to gssbsecretariat@globalreporting.org for the consideration of the GSSB. Relevant section Clause 2.1 in GRI 401: Employment 2016 Issue Disclosure 401-1 New employee hires and employee turnover in GRI 401: Employment 2016 requires organizations to report the total numbers and rates of new employee hires and employee turnover during the reporting period, by age group, gender and region. Clause 2.1 in GRI 401 further requires organizations to use the total employee numbers at the end of the reporting period to calculate the rates of new employee hires and employee turnover. Feedback from users of the GRI Standards indicated that the required methodology in clause 2.1 is incorrect. Interpretation Statement An organization is not required to comply with clause 2.1 in GRI 401: Employment 2016 (‘The reporting organization shall use the total employee numbers at the end of the reporting period to calculate the rates of new employee hires and employee turnover’). The organization is free to choose the methodology for calculating these rates. The organization is recommended to adequately describe data measurements and bases for calculations (see the Accuracy principle in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 ). When using ratios or normalized data, the organization is recommended to report total numbers or absolute data and provide explanatory notes (see the Comparability principle in GRI 1 ). Effective date This Standard Interpretation is effective for reports or other materials published on or after 1 July 2018. GRI 401: Employment 2016 449\n\n[Page 451]\nGRI 402: Labor/Management Relations 2016 Topic Standard Effective date This Standard is effective for reports or other materials published on or after 1 July 2018. Responsibility This Standard is issued by the Global Sustainability Standards Board (GSSB) . Any feedback on the GRI Standards can be submitted to gssbsecretariat@globalreporting.org for the consideration of the GSSB. Due Process This Standard was developed in the public interest and in accordance with the requirements of the GSSB Due Process Protocol. It has been developed using multi-stakeholder expertise, and with regard to authoritative intergovernmental instruments and widely held expectations of organizations relating to social, environmental, and economic responsibilities. Legal liability This document, designed to promote sustainability reporting, has been developed by the Global Sustainability Standards Board (GSSB) through a unique multi-stakeholder consultative process involving representatives from organizations and report information users from around the world. While the GRI Board of Directors and GSSB encourage the use of the GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards (GRI Standards) and related Interpretations by all organizations, the preparation and publication of reports based fully or partially on the GRI Standards and related Interpretations are the full responsibility of those producing them. Neither the GRI Board of Directors, GSSB, nor Stichting Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) can assume responsibility for any consequences or damages resulting directly or indirectly from the use of the GRI Standards and related Interpretations in the preparation of reports, or the use of reports based on the GRI Standards and related Interpretations. Copyright and trademark notice This document is copyright-protected by Stichting Global Reporting Initiative (GRI). The reproduction and distribution of this document for information and/or use in preparing a sustainability report is permitted without prior permission from GRI. However, neither this document nor any extract from it may be reproduced, stored, translated, or transferred in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photocopied, recorded, or otherwise) for any other purpose without prior written permission from GRI. Global Reporting Initiative, GRI and logo, GSSB and logo, and GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards (GRI Standards) and logo are trademarks of Stichting Global Reporting Initiative. © 2021 GRI. All rights reserved. ISBN 978-90-8866-113-6",
    "new_id": 57
  },
  {
    "id": 2868,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the implications of how an organization should address and report on its material topics, considering both its internal decision-making processes and external obligations, as described in the Consolidated Set of the GRI Standards 2021?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Negative impacts must be prioritized independently of positive impacts, and addressing one does not compensate for the other, even when grouped under the same topic.",
      "A": "An organization may exclude a topic from reporting if it lacks sufficient data, as long as it discloses this limitation to stakeholders.",
      "C": "The approval of material topics by the organization’s highest governance body is optional if senior executives have validated the selection through external assurance.",
      "D": "Grouping impacts into topics such as ‘water and effluents’ allows an organization to offset negative impacts with positive ones within the same category.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "110",
    "ref_doc": "GRI Standards 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "organization cannot use difficulty in reporting on a topic or the fact that it does not yet manage the topic as criteria to determine whether or not to report on the topic. In cases where the organization does not manage a material topic, it can report the reasons for not doing so or any plans to manage the topic to comply with the requirements in Disclosure 3-3 Management of material topics in this Standard. While some topics can cover both negative and positive impacts, it may not always be possible to compare the two. Additionally, negative impacts cannot be offset by positive impacts. The organization should therefore prioritize negative impacts separately from positive impacts. Even if the organization has not prioritized an actual or potential negative impact for reporting, it may still be responsible for addressing the impact in line with applicable laws, regulations, or authoritative intergovernmental instruments. See section 2.3 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 for more information. Box 4. Grouping impacts into topics Grouping impacts into topics, like ‘water and effluents’, helps the organization report in a cohesive way about multiple impacts related to the same topic. The organization can group impacts into topics according to general categories that relate to a business activity, stakeholder category, type of business relationship , or an economic or environmental resource. For example, an organization’s activities result in water pollution, which causes negative impacts on both ecosystems and local communities’ access to safe drinking water. The organization can group these impacts into the topic of ‘water and effluents’ as both impacts relate to its use of water. The organization can refer to the topics in the GRI Topic Standards and the GRI Sector Standards. These topics provide a useful reference for understanding the range of impacts that can be covered in each topic. For impacts or topics that the GRI Standards do not cover, the organization can refer to other sources, such as authoritative intergovernmental instruments or industry standards. Testing the material topics The organization should test its selection of material topics against the topics in the applicable GRI Sector Standards. This helps the organization ensure that it has not overlooked any topics that are likely to be material for its sectors. The organization should also test its selection of material topics with potential information users and experts who understand the organization or its sectors and have insight into one or more of the material topics. This can help the organization validate the threshold it has set to determine which topics are material to report. Examples of experts the organization can consult are academics, consultants, investors, lawyers, national institutions, and non-governmental organizations. The organization should seek external assurance to assess the quality and credibility of its process of determining material topics. See section 5.2 in GRI 1 for more information on seeking external assurance. This testing process results in a list of the organization’s material topics. Approval of the material topics The organization’s highest governance body should review and approve the list of material topics . If such a body does not exist, the list should be approved by a senior executive or group of senior executives in the organization. Determining what to report for each material topic Once the organization has determined its material topics , it needs to determine what to report for each material topic. See Requirement 4 and Requirement 5 in GRI 1 for information about how to report on material topics. GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 109",
    "new_id": 58
  },
  {
    "id": 2869,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between an organization's sustainability reporting and its financial materiality judgments, as described in the Consolidated Set of the GRI Standards 2021?",
    "options": {
      "C": "While sustainability reporting provides critical input for identifying financial risks and opportunities, it remains independent of financial considerations and prioritizes public interest.",
      "A": "Sustainability reporting is primarily a tool for predicting immediate financial risks, ensuring that all reported impacts are financially material at the time of reporting.",
      "B": "An organization can deprioritize reporting on certain material topics if they are deemed not financially material, as financial implications are central to sustainability reporting.",
      "D": "The GRI Standards require organizations to focus exclusively on negative impacts that have already become financially material, ignoring those that may only affect reputation or operations.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "12",
    "ref_doc": "GRI Standards 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Box 1. Sustainability reporting and financial and value creation reporting The GRI Standards enable organizations to report information about the most significant impacts of their activities and business relationships on the economy, environment, and people, including impacts on their human rights . Such impacts are of primary importance to sustainable development and to organizations’ stakeholders , and they are the focus of sustainability reporting. The impacts of an organization’s activities and business relationships on the economy, environment, and people can have negative and positive consequences for the organization itself. These consequences can be operational or reputational, and therefore in many cases financial. For example, an organization’s high use of non-renewable energy contributes to climate change and could, at the same time, result in increased operating costs for the organization due to legislation that seeks to shift energy use toward renewable sources. Even if not financially material at the time of reporting, most, if not all, of the impacts of an organization’s activities and business relationships on the economy, environment, and people will eventually become financially material issues. Therefore, the impacts are also important for those interested in the organization's financial performance and long-term success. Understanding these impacts is a necessary first step in determining related financially material issues for the organization. Sustainability reporting is therefore crucial for financial and value creation reporting. Information made available through sustainability reporting provides input for identifying financial risks and opportunities related to the organization’s impacts and for financial valuation. This, in turn, helps to make financial materiality judgments about what to recognize in financial statements. While the impacts of the organization’s activities and business relationships on the economy, environment, and people may become financially material, sustainability reporting is also highly relevant in its own right as a public interest activity. Sustainability reporting is independent of the consideration of financial implications. It is therefore important for the organization to report on all the material topics that it has determined using the GRI Standards. These material topics cannot be deprioritized on the basis of not being considered financially material by the organization. 2.3 Due diligence In the GRI Standards, due diligence refers to the process through which an organization identifies, prevents, mitigates , and accounts for how it addresses its actual and potential negative impacts on the economy, environment, and people, including impacts on their human rights . The organization should address potential negative impacts through prevention or mitigation. It should address actual negative impacts through remediation in cases where the organization identifies it has caused or contributed to those impacts. The way the organization is involved with negative impacts (i.e., whether it causes or contributes to the impacts, or whether the impacts are directly linked by its business relationships ) determines how the organization should address the impacts. It also determines whether the organization has a responsibility to provide for or cooperate in the remediation of the impacts. The organization should: If it is not feasible to address all identified impacts on the economy, environment, and people at once, the organization should prioritize the order in which to address potential negative impacts based on their severity and likelihood. In the case of potential negative human rights impacts, the severity of the impact takes precedence over its likelihood. See section 1 in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 for more information.avoid causing or contributing to negative impacts through its own activities, and address such impacts when they occur by providing for or cooperating in their remediation through legitimate processes; • in the case of negative impacts that are directly linked to the organization’s operations, products, or services by its business relationships, seek to prevent or mitigate these impacts even if it has not contributed to them. The organization is not responsible for providing for or cooperating in the remediation of these impacts, but it can play a role in doing so.• GRI 1: Foundation 2021 11",
    "new_id": 59
  },
  {
    "id": 2870,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why the organization is required to document its process for determining material topics, according to the implicit reasoning in the Consolidated Set of the GRI Standards 2021?",
    "options": {
      "D": "To ensure that the process can be replicated and consistently applied in future reporting periods.",
      "A": "To comply with mandatory legal requirements applicable across all sectors.",
      "B": "To provide evidence that the organization has followed all recommendations outlined in the GRI Standards.",
      "C": "To allow external stakeholders to directly engage in the prioritization of impacts.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "102-103",
    "ref_doc": "GRI Standards 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Guidance includes background information, explanations, and examples to help the organization better understand the requirements. The organization is not required to comply with guidance. The Standards may also include recommendations. These are cases where a particular course of action is encouraged but not required. The word ‘should’ indicates a recommendation, and the word ‘can’ indicates a possibility or option. Defined terms are underlined in the text of the GRI Standards and linked to their definitions in the Glossary . The organization is required to apply the definitions in the Glossary. GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 101\n\n[Page 103]\n1. Guidance to determine material topics An organization reporting in accordance with the GRI Standards is required to determine its material topics . When doing this, the organization is also required to use the applicable GRI Sector Standards (see Requirement 3 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 and Box 5 in this Standard). This section describes the four steps that the organization should follow in determining its material topics (see Figure 2). Following the steps in this section helps the organization determine its material topics and report the disclosures in section 2 of this Standard. The steps provide guidance and are not requirements on their own. Figure 2. Process to determine material topics Material topicsTest the material topics with experts and information usersIdentify and assess impacts on an ongoing basis Determine material topics for reporting Assess the signifcance of the impacts3 Test the material topics against the topics in the Sector StandardsUse the Sector Standards to understand the sectors’ contextConsider the topics and impacts described in the Sector StandardsPrioritize the most signifcant impacts for reporting4 Identify actual and potential impacts2 Understand the organization’s context1 The first three steps in the process to determine material topics relate to the organization’s ongoing identification and assessment of impacts . During these steps, the organization identifies and assesses its impacts regularly, as part of its day-to-day activities, and while engaging with relevant stakeholders and experts. These ongoing steps allow the organization to actively identify and manage its impacts as they evolve and as new ones arise. The first three steps are conducted independently of the sustainability reporting process, but they inform the last step. In Step 4, the organization prioritizes its most significant impacts for reporting and, in this way, determines its material topics. In each reporting period , the organization should review its material topics from the previous reporting period to account for changes in the impacts. Changes in impacts can result from changes in the organization’s activities and business relationships . This review helps ensure the material topics represent the organization’s most significant impacts in each new reporting period. The organization should document its process of determining material topics. This includes documenting the approach taken, decisions, assumptions, and subjective judgments made, sources analyzed, and evidence gathered. Accurate records help the organization explain its chosen approach and report the disclosures in section 2 of this Standard. The records facilitate analysis and assurance. See the Verifiability principle in GRI 1 for more information. The approach for each step will vary according to the specific circumstances of the organization, such as its business model; sectors; geographic, cultural, and legal operating context; ownership structure; and the nature of its impacts. Given these specific circumstances, the steps should be systematic, documented, replicable, and used consistently in each reporting period. The organization should document any changes in its approach together with the rationale for those changes and their implications. GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 102",
    "new_id": 60
  },
  {
    "id": 2871,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between the organization's risk assessment procedures for corruption and its anti-corruption training initiatives, as outlined in the Consolidated Set of the GRI Standards 2021?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The timing and frequency of anti-corruption training are directly informed by the results of the organization’s risk assessment procedures, which include factors such as location, activity, and sector.",
      "B": "The organization's risk assessment procedures for corruption are exclusively used to identify high-risk individuals for termination.",
      "C": "Risk assessment procedures determine the criteria for tailoring communication and training on anti-corruption, but they do not influence the timing or frequency of the training.",
      "D": "Anti-corruption training is provided universally to all employees and business partners, irrespective of the outcomes of the risk assessment procedures.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "268-269",
    "ref_doc": "GRI Standards 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Requirements, guidance and defined terms The following apply throughout this Standard: Requirements are presented in bold font and indicated by the word 'shall'. An organization must comply with requirements to report in accordance with the GRI Standards. Requirements may be accompanied by guidance. Guidance includes background information, explanations, and examples to help the organization better understand the requirements. The organization is not required to comply with guidance. The Standards may also include recommendations. These are cases where a particular course of action is encouraged but not required. The word ‘should’ indicates a recommendation, and the word ‘can’ indicates a possibility or option. Defined terms are underlined in the text of the GRI Standards and linked to their definitions in the Glossary . The organization is required to apply the definitions in the Glossary. GRI 205: Anti-corruption 2016 267\n\n[Page 269]\n1. Topic management disclosures An organization reporting in accordance with the GRI Standards is required to report how it manages each of its material topics . An organization that has determined anti-corruption to be a material topic is required to report how it manages the topic using Disclosure 3-3 in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 (see clause 1.1 in this section). This section is therefore designed to supplement – and not replace – Disclosure 3-3 in GRI 3 . REQUIREMENTSThe reporting organization shall report how it manages anti-corruption using Disclosure 3-3 in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 .1.1 RECOMMENDATIONSThe reporting organization should disclose the following information: 1.2 The organization’s risk assessment procedures for corruption , including the criteria used in the risk assessment, such as location, activity, and sector;1.2.1 How the organization identifies and manages have conflicts of interest that employees or persons linked to the organization’s activities, products, or services may Conflicts of interest for the highest governance body are covered in Disclosure 2-15 of GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 ;1.2.2 How the organization ensures that charitable donations and sponsorships (financial and in-kind) that are made to other organizations are not used as a disguised form of bribery. Recipients of charitable donations and sponsorships (financial and in-kind) can include not-for-profit organizations, religious organizations, private organizations, and events;1.2.3 The extent to which communication and training on anti-corruption is tailored to those governance body members, employees, business partners, and other persons that have been identified as having a high risk of incidents of corruption;1.2.4 At which stage the training on anti-corruption for governance body members, employees, business partners and other persons that have been identified as having a high risk of incidents of corruption is provided (e.g., when new employees join the organization or when relationships with new business partners are established); and the frequency of the training (e.g., annually or biannually);1.2.5 Whether the organization participates in collective action to combat corruption , including:1.2.6 the strategy for the collective action activities; 1.2.6.1 a list of the collective action initiatives in which the organization participates;1.2.6.2 a description of the main commitments of these initiatives. 1.2.6.3 Guidance for clauses 1.2.4 and 1.2.5 In the context of this GRI Standard, the term ‘business partners’ includes, among others, suppliers, agents, lobbyists and other intermediaries, joint venture and consortia partners, governments, customers, and clients.GUIDANCE GRI 205: Anti-corruption 2016 268",
    "new_id": 61
  },
  {
    "id": 2872,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the relationship between 'material topics' and 'sustainable development', as implied in the Consolidated Set of the GRI Standards 2021?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Material topics encompass all organizational impacts, whether positive or negative, that could influence sustainable development.",
      "A": "Material topics are exclusively those impacts that positively contribute to sustainable development.",
      "C": "Material topics are limited to environmental impacts since they directly affect future generations’ ability to meet their needs.",
      "D": "Material topics refer only to economic impacts, as these are the primary drivers of sustainable development.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "230-231",
    "ref_doc": "GRI Standards 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "human rights rights inherent to all human beings, which include, at a minimum, the rights set out in the United Nations (UN) International Bill of Human Rights and the principles concerning fundamental rights set out in the International Labour Organization (ILO) Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work Source: United Nations (UN), Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework , 2011; modified Note: See Guidance to 2-23-b-i in GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 for more information on ‘human rights’. impact effect the organization has or could have on the economy, environment, and people, including on their human rights , which in turn can indicate its contribution (negative or positive) to sustainable development Note 1: Impacts can be actual or potential, negative or positive, short-term or long-term, intended or unintended, and reversible or irreversible. Note 2: See section 2.1 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 for more information on ‘impact’. material topics topics that represent the organization’s most significant impacts on the economy, environment, and people, including impacts on their human rights Note: See section 2.2 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 and section 1 in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 for more information on ‘material topics’. supplier entity upstream from the organization (i.e., in the organization’s supply chain ), which provides a product or service that is used in the development of the organization’s own products or services Examples brokers, consultants, contractors, distributors, franchisees, home workers , independent contractors, licensees, manufacturers, primary producers, sub- contractors, wholesalers Note: A supplier can have a direct business relationship with the organization (often referred to as a first-tier supplier) or an indirect business relationship. supply chain range of activities carried out by entities upstream from the organization, which provide products or services that are used in the development of the organization’s own products or services sustainable development / sustainability development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs Source: World Commission on Environment and Development, Our Common Future , 1987 Note: The terms ‘sustainability’ and ‘sustainable development’ are used interchangeably in the GRI Standards. value chain range of activities carried out by the organization, and by entities upstream and downstream from the organization, to bring the organization’s products or services from their conception to their end use Note 1: Entities upstream from the organization (e.g., suppliers ) provide products or services that are used in the development of the organization’s own products or services. Entities downstream from the organization (e.g., distributors, customers) receive products or services from the organization. Note 2: The value chain includes the supply chain .H I M S V GRI 201: Economic Performance 2016 229\n\n[Page 231]\nworker person that performs work for the organization Examples: employees , agency workers, apprentices, contractors, home workers, interns, self- employed persons, sub-contractors, volunteers, and persons working for organizations other than the reporting organization, such as for suppliers Note: In the GRI Standards, in some cases, it is specified whether a particular subset of workers is required to be used. W Bibliography GRI 201: Economic Performance 2016 230",
    "new_id": 62
  },
  {
    "id": 2873,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes the relationship between the GRI Universal Standards and the Sector Standards in terms of their role in determining material topics, as outlined in the Consolidated Set of the GRI Standards 2021?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The Universal Standards provide a general framework for reporting, while the Sector Standards specify which topics are material based on industry context.",
      "A": "The Universal Standards replace the need for Sector Standards by offering comprehensive guidance applicable to all industries.",
      "B": "The Sector Standards independently determine material topics without requiring consultation of the Universal Standards.",
      "D": "The Universal Standards define material topics, whereas the Sector Standards merely suggest optional disclosures.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "533",
    "ref_doc": "GRI Standards 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Introduction GRI 407: Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining 2016 contains disclosures for organizations to report information about their impacts related to freedom of association and collective bargaining , and how they manage these impacts. The Standard is structured as follows: The rest of the Introduction section provides a background on the topic, an overview of the system of GRI Standards and further information on using this Standard. Background on the topic This Standard addresses the topic of freedom of association and collective bargaining. Freedom of association is a human right as defined by international declarations and conventions. In this context, freedom of association refers to the right of employers and workers to form, to join and to run their own organizations without prior authorization or interference by the state or any other entity. The right of workers to collectively bargain the terms and conditions of work is also an internationally recognized human right. Collective bargaining refers to all negotiations that take place between one or more employers or employers' organizations, on the one hand, and one or more workers' organizations (e.g., trade unions), on the other, for determining working conditions and terms of employment or for regulating relations between employers and workers. These concepts are covered in key instruments of the International Labour Organization, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, and the United Nations: see the Bibliography . System of GRI Standards This Standard is part of the GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards (GRI Standards). The GRI Standards enable an organization to report information about its most significant impacts on the economy, environment, and people, including impacts on their human rights , and how it manages these impacts. The GRI Standards are structured as a system of interrelated standards that are organized into three series: GRI Universal Standards, GRI Sector Standards, and GRI Topic Standards (see Figure 1 in this Standard). Universal Standards: GRI 1, GRI 2 and GRI 3 GRI 1: Foundation 2021 specifies the requirements that the organization must comply with to report in accordance with the GRI Standards. The organization begins using the GRI Standards by consulting GRI 1 . GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 contains disclosures that the organization uses to provide information about its reporting practices and other organizational details, such as its activities, governance, and policies. GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 provides guidance on how to determine material topics . It also contains disclosures that the organization uses to report information about its process of determining material topics, its list of material topics, and how it manages each topic. Sector Standards The Sector Standards provide information for organizations about their likely material topics. The organization uses the Sector Standards that apply to its sectors when determining its material topics and when determining what to report for each material topic. Topic Standards The Topic Standards contain disclosures that the organization uses to report information about its impacts in relation to particular topics. The organization uses the Topic Standards according to the list of material topics it has determined using GRI 3 .Section 1 contains a requirement, which provides information about how the organization manages its impacts related to freedom of association and collective bargaining.• Section 2 contains one disclosure, which provides information about the organization’s impacts related to freedom of association and collective bargaining.• The Glossary contains defined terms with a specific meaning when used in the GRI Standards. The terms are underlined in the text of the GRI Standards and linked to the definitions.• The Bibliography lists authoritative intergovernmental instruments used in developing this Standard. • 1 1This definition is based on the International Labour Organization (ILO) Convention 154, ‘Collective Bargaining Convention’, 1981. GRI 407: Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining 2016 532",
    "new_id": 63
  },
  {
    "id": 2874,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the implicit relationship between the GSSB's responsibility for issuing the Standard and the legal liability disclaimer in the document, as described in the Consolidated Set of the GRI Standards 2021?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The legal liability disclaimer underscores that while the GSSB issues the Standard, the responsibility for its application and outcomes lies solely with the users of the Standard.",
      "A": "The GSSB assumes full legal responsibility for any consequences arising from the use of the Standard, as it is the issuing body.",
      "B": "The legal liability disclaimer exists because the GSSB prioritizes multi-stakeholder expertise over legal enforceability when developing Standards.",
      "C": "The GSSB’s role in issuing the Standard is purely ceremonial, and the legal liability disclaimer confirms that the GSSB has no real authority.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "542-543",
    "ref_doc": "GRI Standards 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "GRI 408: Child Labor 2016 Topic Standard Effective date This Standard is effective for reports or other materials published on or after 1 July 2018. Responsibility This Standard is issued by the Global Sustainability Standards Board (GSSB) . Any feedback on the GRI Standards can be submitted to gssbsecretariat@globalreporting.org for the consideration of the GSSB. Due Process This Standard was developed in the public interest and in accordance with the requirements of the GSSB Due Process Protocol. It has been developed using multi-stakeholder expertise, and with regard to authoritative intergovernmental instruments and widely held expectations of organizations relating to social, environmental, and economic responsibilities. Legal liability This document, designed to promote sustainability reporting, has been developed by the Global Sustainability Standards Board (GSSB) through a unique multi-stakeholder consultative process involving representatives from organizations and report information users from around the world. While the GRI Board of Directors and GSSB encourage the use of the GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards (GRI Standards) and related Interpretations by all organizations, the preparation and publication of reports based fully or partially on the GRI Standards and related Interpretations are the full responsibility of those producing them. Neither the GRI Board of Directors, GSSB, nor Stichting Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) can assume responsibility for any consequences or damages resulting directly or indirectly from the use of the GRI Standards and related Interpretations in the preparation of reports, or the use of reports based on the GRI Standards and related Interpretations. Copyright and trademark notice This document is copyright-protected by Stichting Global Reporting Initiative (GRI). The reproduction and distribution of this document for information and/or use in preparing a sustainability report is permitted without prior permission from GRI. However, neither this document nor any extract from it may be reproduced, stored, translated, or transferred in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photocopied, recorded, or otherwise) for any other purpose without prior written permission from GRI. Global Reporting Initiative, GRI and logo, GSSB and logo, and GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards (GRI Standards) and logo are trademarks of Stichting Global Reporting Initiative. © 2021 GRI. All rights reserved. ISBN 978-90-8866-119-8\n\n[Page 543]\nContents Introduction 3 1. Topic management disclosures 6 2. Topic disclosures 7 Disclosure 408-1 Operations and suppliers at significant risk for incidents of child labor7 Glossary 9 Bibliography 12 GRI 408: Child Labor 2016 542",
    "new_id": 64
  },
  {
    "id": 2875,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes why a grievance mechanism, as indirectly alluded to in the text, would be insufficient if it only addressed impacts after they became actual and irreversible, according to the Consolidated Set of the GRI Standards 2021?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Because addressing impacts solely after they occur ignores the necessity of preventing or mitigating potential and reversible negative effects.",
      "B": "Because grievance mechanisms are only designed to address economic and environmental impacts, not human rights issues.",
      "C": "Because impacts that are potential or reversible do not require any mitigation strategies under international frameworks.",
      "D": "Because grievance mechanisms are intended exclusively for impacts on indigenous peoples, excluding broader societal concerns.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "582",
    "ref_doc": "GRI Standards 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Source: United Nations (UN), Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework , 2011; modified Note: See Guidance to Disclosure 2-25 in GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 for more information on ‘grievance mechanism’. human rights rights inherent to all human beings, which include, at a minimum, the rights set out in the United Nations (UN) International Bill of Human Rights and the principles concerning fundamental rights set out in the International Labour Organization (ILO) Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work Source: United Nations (UN), Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework , 2011; modified Note: See Guidance to 2-23-b-i in GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 for more information on ‘human rights’. impact effect the organization has or could have on the economy, environment, and people, including on their human rights , which in turn can indicate its contribution (negative or positive) to sustainable development Note 1: Impacts can be actual or potential, negative or positive, short-term or long-term, intended or unintended, and reversible or irreversible. Note 2: See section 2.1 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 for more information on ‘impact’. indigenous peoples indigenous peoples are generally identified as: Source: International Labour Organization (ILO), Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention , 1989 (No. 169) material topics topics that represent the organization’s most significant impacts on the economy, environment, and people, including impacts on their human rights Note: See section 2.2 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 and section 1 in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 for more information on ‘material topics’. mitigation action(s) taken to reduce the extent of a negative impact Source United Nations (UN), The Corporate Responsibility to Respect Human Rights: An Interpretive Guide , 2012; modified Note: The mitigation of an actual negative impact refers to actions taken to reduce the severity of the negative impact that has occurred, with any residual impact needing remediation . The mitigation of a potential negative impact refers to actions taken to reduce the likelihood of the negative impact occurring. remedy / remediation means to counteract or make good a negative impact or provision of remedyH I tribal peoples in independent countries whose social, cultural and economic conditions distinguish them from other sections of the national community, and whose status is regulated wholly or partially by their own customs or traditions or by special laws or regulations;• peoples in independent countries who are regarded as indigenous on account of their descent from the populations which inhabited the country, or a geographical region to which the country belongs, at the time of conquest or colonization or the establishment of present state boundaries and who, irrespective of their legal status, retain some or all of their own social, economic, cultural and political institutions.• M R GRI 411: Rights of Indigenous Peoples 2016 581",
    "new_id": 65
  },
  {
    "id": 2876,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes why the reporting organization might terminate relationships with certain suppliers, according to the disclosure requirements in the Consolidated Set of the GRI Standards 2021?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Suppliers that fail to meet communicated performance expectations after multiple improvement attempts.",
      "A": "Suppliers identified as having any actual or potential negative social impacts.",
      "C": "Suppliers located in regions with high risks of child labor or forced labor, regardless of their specific actions.",
      "D": "Suppliers for whom no assessment has been conducted but are assumed to have significant negative social impacts.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "607",
    "ref_doc": "GRI Standards 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Disclosure 414-2 Negative social impacts in the supply chain and actions taken The reporting organization shall report the following information:REQUIREMENTS Number of suppliers assessed for social impacts. a. Number of suppliers identified as having significant actual and potential negative social impacts.b. Significant actual and potential negative social impacts identified in the supply chain . c. Percentage of suppliers identified as having significant actual and potential negative social impacts with which improvements were agreed upon as a result of assessment.d. Percentage of suppliers identified as having significant actual and potential negative social impacts with which relationships were terminated as a result of assessment, and why.e. RECOMMENDATIONSWhen compiling the information specified in Disclosure 414-2, the reporting organization should, where it provides appropriate context on significant impacts, provide a breakdown of the information by:2.1 the location of the supplier; 2.1.1 the significant actual and potential negative social impact. 2.1.2 Guidance for Disclosure 414-2 Negative impacts include those that are either caused or contributed to by an organization, or that are directly linked to its operations, products, or services by its relationship with a supplier. Assessments for social impacts can include the topics covered in other GRI Topic Standards (e.g., GRI 401: Employment 2016 , GRI 403: Occupational Health and Safety 2018 , GRI 408: Child Labor 2016 , GRI 409: Forced or Compulsory Labor 2016 ). Assessments can be made against agreed performance expectations that are set and communicated to the suppliers prior to the assessment. Assessments can be informed by audits, contractual reviews, two-way engagement, and complaint and grievance mechanisms . Improvements can include changing an organization’s procurement practices, the adjustment of performance expectations, capacity building, training, and changes to processes. Background This disclosure informs stakeholders about an organization’s awareness of significant actual and potential negative social impacts in the supply chain.GUIDANCE GRI 414: Supplier Social Assessment 2016 606",
    "new_id": 66
  },
  {
    "id": 2877,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the implicit relationship between the GRI Standards' structure and the role of due diligence in managing supplier social impacts, as described in the Consolidated Set of the GRI Standards 2021?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Due diligence is an underlying expectation across the GRI Standards, with the Topic Standards specifying disclosures that reflect its implementation in supply chain management.",
      "A": "Due diligence is exclusively addressed in the Sector Standards, which guide organizations on material topics related to social impacts.",
      "B": "The Universal Standards outline specific procedures for conducting due diligence, while the Topic Standards merely provide supplementary information.",
      "D": "Due diligence is only indirectly referenced in the Glossary and Bibliography sections, leaving its practical application to external instruments.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "602",
    "ref_doc": "GRI Standards 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Introduction GRI 414: Supplier Social Assessment 2016 contains disclosures for organizations to report information about their social impacts in their supply chain , and how they manage these impacts. The disclosures enable an organization to provide information on its approach to preventing and mitigating negative social impacts in its supply chain. The Standard is structured as follows: The rest of the Introduction section provides a background on the topic, an overview of the system of GRI Standards and further information on using this Standard. Background on the topic This Standard addresses the topic of supplier social assessment. An organization may be involved with negative social impacts either through its own activities or as a result of its business relationships with other parties. Due diligence is expected of an organization in order to prevent, mitigate, and address actual and potential negative social impacts in the supply chain . These include negative impacts the organization either causes or contributes to, or that are directly linked to its operations, products, or services by its relationship with a supplier. These concepts are covered in key instruments of the United Nations: see the Bibliography . Suppliers can be assessed for a range of social criteria, including human rights (such as child labor and forced or compulsory labor); employment practices; health and safety practices; industrial relations; incidents (such as of abuse, coercion or harassment); wages and compensation; and working hours. Some of these criteria are covered in other GRI Topic Standards (e.g., GRI 401: Employment 2016 , GRI 403: Occupational Health and Safety 2018 , GRI 408: Child Labor 2016 , GRI 409: Forced or Compulsory Labor 2016 ). System of GRI Standards This Standard is part of the GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards (GRI Standards). The GRI Standards enable an organization to report information about its most significant impacts on the economy, environment, and people, including impacts on their human rights , and how it manages these impacts. The GRI Standards are structured as a system of interrelated standards that are organized into three series: GRI Universal Standards, GRI Sector Standards, and GRI Topic Standards (see Figure 1 in this Standard). Universal Standards: GRI 1, GRI 2 and GRI 3 GRI 1: Foundation 2021 specifies the requirements that the organization must comply with to report in accordance with the GRI Standards. The organization begins using the GRI Standards by consulting GRI 1 . GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 contains disclosures that the organization uses to provide information about its reporting practices and other organizational details, such as its activities, governance, and policies. GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 provides guidance on how to determine material topics . It also contains disclosures that the organization uses to report information about its process of determining material topics, its list of material topics, and how it manages each topic. Sector Standards The Sector Standards provide information for organizations about their likely material topics. The organization uses the Sector Standards that apply to its sectors when determining its material topics and when determining what to report for each material topic. Topic Standards The Topic Standards contain disclosures that the organization uses to report information about its impacts in relationSection 1 contains a requirement, which provides information about how the organization manages its social impacts in its supply chain.• Section 2 contains two disclosures, which provide information about the organization’s supplier assessment and social impacts in its supply chain.• The Glossary contains defined terms with a specific meaning when used in the GRI Standards. The terms are underlined in the text of the GRI Standards and linked to the definitions.• The Bibliography lists authoritative intergovernmental instruments and additional references used in developing this Standard.• GRI 414: Supplier Social Assessment 2016 601",
    "new_id": 67
  },
  {
    "id": 2878,
    "question": "Which of the following accurately reflects a distinction between business partners and entities in business relationships, based on obligations and connections to organizational operations, as described in the Consolidated Set of the GRI Standards 2021?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Business partners engage in direct and formal engagements for meeting business objectives, whereas business relationships encompass broader links to operations without necessarily involving control or formal engagement.",
      "A": "Business partners are limited to first-tier suppliers, while business relationships extend to include subsidiaries and affiliates controlled by the organization.",
      "B": "Entities within business relationships are always directly linked to the organization’s products or services, but business partners are connected only through informal agreements.",
      "C": "Business relationships exclusively involve non-governmental organizations, while business partners consist solely of state security forces.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "229",
    "ref_doc": "GRI Standards 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Glossary This glossary provides definitions for terms used in this Standard. The organization is required to apply these definitions when using the GRI Standards. The definitions included in this glossary may contain terms that are further defined in the complete GRI Standards Glossary . All defined terms are underlined. If a term is not defined in this glossary or in the complete GRI Standards Glossary , definitions that are commonly used and understood apply. business partner entity with which the organization has some form of direct and formal engagement for the purpose of meeting its business objectives Source: Shift and Mazars LLP, UN Guiding Principles Reporting Framework , 2015; modified Examples: affiliates, business-to-business customers, clients, first-tier suppliers , franchisees, joint venture partners, investee companies in which the organization has a shareholding position Note: Business partners do not include subsidiaries and affiliates that the organization controls. business relationships relationships that the organization has with business partners , with entities in its value chain including those beyond the first tier, and with any other entities directly linked to its operations, products, or services Source: United Nations (UN), Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework , 2011; modified Note: Examples of other entities directly linked to the organization’s operations, products, or services are a non-governmental organization with which the organization delivers support to a local community or state security forces that protect the organization’s facilities. defined benefit plan post-employment benefit plan other than a defined contribution plan defined contribution plan post-employment benefit plan under which an entity pays fixed contributions into a separate entity (a fund) and will have no legal or constructive obligation to pay further contributions if the fund does not hold sufficient assets to pay all employee benefits relating to employee service in the current and prior periods employee individual who is in an employment relationship with the organization according to national law or practice financial assistance direct or indirect financial benefits that do not represent a transaction of goods and services, but which are an incentive or compensation for actions taken, the cost of an asset, or expenses incurred Note: The provider of financial assistance does not expect a direct financial return from the assistance offered. full coverage plan assets that meet or exceed plan obligations greenhouse gas (GHG) gas that contributes to the greenhouse effect by absorbing infrared radiationB D E F G GRI 201: Economic Performance 2016 228",
    "new_id": 68
  },
  {
    "id": 4698,
    "question": "Which scenario would require disclosure under FB-AB-270a.3 but not under FB-AB-270a.4, as outlined in the Alcoholic Beverages – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "A company pays restitution as part of a deferred prosecution agreement for deceptive marketing practices related to nutrient content claims.",
      "B": "A company implements a new training program to ensure compliance with labelling laws after settling a lawsuit over misleading health claims.",
      "C": "A company launches an initiative to promote responsible alcohol consumption through targeted regional campaigns.",
      "D": "A company revises its product labels to correct misbranding issues identified during regulatory enforcement proceedings.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "16",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Alcoholic Beverages.pdf",
    "source_text": "2.2 the cost to remedy the issue; 2.3 corrective actions; and 2.4 any other significant outcomes (for example, legal proceedings, fines or settlements). FB-AB-270a.3. Total amount of monetary losses as a result of legal proceedings associated with marketing or labelling practices 1The entity shall disclose the total amount of monetary losses incurred during the reporting period resulting from legal proceedings associated with marketing or labelling practices, such as those related to enforcement of applicable jurisdictional laws and regulations on nutrient content claims, health claims, other unfair or deceptive claims or misbranded labelling. 2The legal proceedings shall include any adjudicative proceeding involving the entity, whether before a court, a regulator, an arbitrator or otherwise. 3The losses shall include all monetary liabilities to the opposing party or to others (whether as the result of settlement, verdict after trial or otherwise), including fines and other monetary liabilities incurred during the reporting period as a result of civil actions (for example, civil judgements or settlements), regulatory proceedings (for example, penalties, disgorgement or restitution) and criminal actions (for example, criminal judgements, penalties or restitution) brought by any entity (for example, governmental, business or individual). 4The scope of monetary losses shall exclude legal and other fees and expenses incurred by the entity in its defence. 5The scope of the disclosure shall include legal proceedings associated with the enforcement of applicable jurisdictional laws or regulations. Note to FB-AB-270a.3 1The entity shall briefly describe the nature (for example, judgement or order issued after trial, settlement, guilty plea, deferred prosecution agreement or non-prosecution agreement) and context (for example, nutrient content claims, health claims or misbranded labelling) of all monetary losses resulting from legal proceedings. 2The entity shall describe any corrective actions it has implemented in response to the legal proceedings. This may include specific changes in operations, management, processes, products, business partners, training or technology. FB-AB-270a.4. Description of efforts to promote responsible consumption of alcohol 1 The entity shall describe its efforts to promote the responsible consumption of alcohol, including: 1.1 the scope of its efforts, such as whether strategies, plans or engagement targets vary by business unit, region or beverage product; SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES |16",
    "new_id": 69
  },
  {
    "id": 4734,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes why an entity might choose water management practices that result in trade-offs, such as increased energy production or greenhouse gas emissions, as outlined in the Alcoholic Beverages – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Because the entity believes the trade-offs are outweighed by benefits in reducing water withdrawals and improving discharge quality.",
      "A": "Because the entity prioritizes regulatory compliance over all other considerations, including lifecycle impacts.",
      "C": "Because the chosen practices are part of a broader strategy to reduce aquatic impingements, despite potential trade-offs.",
      "D": "Because the entity is required to disclose these trade-offs but has no obligation to justify its choices.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "12-13",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Alcoholic Beverages.pdf",
    "source_text": "3.1 Effects include those associated with costs, revenue, liabilities, continuity of operations and reputation. 4The entity shall discuss its short- and long-term strategies or plans to mitigate water management risks, which include: 4.1 The scope of its strategy, plans, goals or targets, such as how they relate to various business units, geographies or water-consuming operational processes. 4.2 Any water management goals or targets it has prioritised, and an analysis of performance against those goals or targets. 4.2.1 Goals and targets include those associated with reducing water withdrawals, reducing water consumption, reducing water discharges, reducing aquatic impingements, improving the quality of water discharges and regulatory compliance. 4.3 The activities and investments required to achieve the plans, goals or targets, and any risks or limiting factors that might affect achievement of the plans or targets. 4.4 Disclosure of strategies, plans, goals or targets shall be limited to activities that were ongoing (active) or reached completion during the reporting period. 5For water management targets, the entity shall additionally disclose: 5.1 Whether the target is absolute or intensity-based, and the metric denominator if it is an intensity-based target. 5.2 The time lines for the water management activities, including the start year, the target year and the base year. 5.3 The mechanism(s) for achieving the target, including: 5.3.1 Efficiency efforts, such as the use of water recycling or closed-loop systems; 5.3.2 Product innovations, such as redesigning products or services to require less water; 5.3.3 Process and equipment innovations, such as those that enable the reduction of aquatic impingements or entrainments; 5.3.4 and 5.3.5 Collaborations or programmes in place with the community or other organisations. 5.4 The entity shall discuss whether its water management practices result in any additional life cycle impacts or trade-offs in its organisation, including trade-offs in land use, energy production and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and why the entity chose these practices despite life cycle trade-offs. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES |12\n\n[Page 13]\n6The entity shall discuss whether its water management practices result in any additional lifecycle impacts or tradeoffs in its organisation, including trade-offs in land use, energy production and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and why the entity chose these practices despite lifecycle tradeoffs. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES |13",
    "new_id": 70
  },
  {
    "id": 4735,
    "question": "Which of the following statements accurately reflects a necessary condition for an entity to meet its obligations regarding compostable packaging, as implied by the interplay between definitions and implementation standards in the Alcoholic Beverages – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Compliance with ISO 14855-1 is sufficient for an entity to claim its packaging is recoverable through biodegradation and composting under controlled conditions.",
      "A": "An entity must ensure that all its compostable packaging fully degrades into CO2, water, inorganic compounds, and biomass at a rate slower than other known compostable materials.",
      "B": "An entity is required to use ASTM D6400 exclusively for labeling plastics designed for anaerobic composting in municipal facilities.",
      "D": "The entity must demonstrate alignment with both material-specific compostability criteria and lifecycle optimization strategies to minimize environmental impact.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "20-21",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Alcoholic Beverages.pdf",
    "source_text": "3.3 A material is defined as ‘compostable ’ if it undergoes degradation by biological processes during composting to yield CO 2, water, inorganic compounds and biomass at a rate consistent with other known compostable materials and that leaves no visible, distinguishable or toxic residue. Compostable plastics are defined further by ASTM Standard D6400, Standard Specification for Labeling of Plastics Designed to be Aerobically Composted in Municipal or Industrial Facilities . 3.4 The entity shall calculate the percentage as the weight of recyclable, reusable or compostable packaging divided by the total weight of all packaging used by the entity. 4The entity may disaggregate the disclosure requested above by major packaging substrate (for example, wood fibre, glass, metal and petroleum-based). FB-AB-410a.2. Discussion of strategies to reduce the environmental impact of packaging throughout its lifecycle 1The entity shall discuss its strategies to reduce the environmental impact of the packaging of its products throughout its lifecycle, such as optimising packaging weight and volume for a given application or using alternative materials, including those that are recycled, recyclable, reusable, compostable or degradable. 2The entity shall describe its use of recycled and renewable packaging including supply availability, consumer preferences and packaging durability requirements. 3The entity shall describe its use of recyclable and compostable packaging including regulations, packaging end- of-life commitments, consumer demand and packaging durability. 4Relevant disclosures may include discussion of the: 4.1 implementation of ISO 18602, Packaging and the environment —Optimization of the packaging system , which includes criteria for minimisation of packaging weight and optimisation to the amount needed for safety, hygiene and consumer acceptance of the packed product; 4.2 implementation of ISO 18604, Packaging and the environment —Material recycling , which includes criteria for recyclable packaging; 4.3 implementation of ISO 14855-1, Determination of the ultimate aerobic biodegradability of plastic materials under controlled composting conditions —Method by analysis of evolved carbon dioxide —Part 1: General method ; ASTM D6400, Standard Specification for Labeling of Plastics Designed to be Aerobically Composted in Municipal or Industrial Facilities ; or ASTM D6868, Standard Specification for Labeling of End Items that Incorporate Plastics and Polymers as Coatings or Additives with Paper and Other Substrates Designed to be Aerobically Composted in Municipal or Industrial Facilities ; which include criteria for packaging recoverable through biodegradation and composting; 4.4 implementation of ISO 14021, Environmental labels and declarations — Self-declared environmental claims (Type II environmental labelling) , which includes criteria for renewable and recycled material content claims; or SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES |20\n\n[Page 21]\n4.5 performance on The Consumer Goods Forum ’s Global Protocol on Packaging Sustainability 2.0 metrics for ‘Packaging Weight and Optimization ’ and ‘Assessment and Minimization of Substances Hazardous to the Environment ’. 5The entity may, if relevant, discuss any packaging-related targets and performance against those targets. Examples of such targets may include: 5.1 reducing packaging footprints; 5.2 reducing packaging weight, either in total or on a per-unit basis; and 5.3 increasing recycled, recyclable, reusable, renewable, compostable or degradable content. 6The entity may discuss its use of Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) analysis to reduce environmental impacts and maximise product efficiency, including weight reduction and transportation efficiency. 6.1 Improvements to the environmental efficiency of packaging products may be discussed in terms of LCA functional unit service parameters (time, extent and quality of function). SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES |21",
    "new_id": 71
  },
  {
    "id": 4736,
    "question": "Which scenario would disqualify an entity from claiming renewable energy under the outlined framework in the Alcoholic Beverages – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The entity consumes renewable electricity generated on-site but sells the associated RECs and GOs to a third party.",
      "A": "The entity purchases renewable energy through a PPA that explicitly includes RECs or GOs, which are retained and retired on behalf of the entity.",
      "B": "The entity uses biomass materials certified by the Forest Stewardship Council as part of its energy sourcing strategy.",
      "C": "The entity relies on the renewable portion of the grid mix that is outside its direct control or influence.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "9",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Alcoholic Beverages.pdf",
    "source_text": "3.3 The scope of renewable energy includes renewable fuel the entity consumed, renewable energy the entity directly produced and renewable energy the entity purchased, if purchased through a renewable power purchase agreement (PPA) that explicitly includes renewable energy certificates (RECs) or Guarantees of Origin (GOs), a Green ‐e Energy Certified utility or supplier programme, or other green power products that explicitly include RECs or GOs, or for which Green ‐e Energy Certified RECs are paired with grid electricity. 3.3.1 For any renewable electricity generated on-site, any RECs and GOs shall be retained (not sold) and retired or cancelled on behalf of the entity for the entity to claim them as renewable energy. 3.3.2 For renewable PPAs and green power products, the agreement shall explicitly include and convey that RECs and GOs be retained or replaced and retired or cancelled on behalf of the entity for the entity to claim them as renewable energy. 3.3.3 The renewable portion of the electricity grid mix that is outside of the control or influence of the entity is excluded from the scope of renewable energy. 3.4 For the purposes of this disclosure, the scope of renewable energy from biomass sources is limited to materials certified to a third-party standard (for example, Forest Stewardship Council, Sustainable Forest Initiative, Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification or American Tree Farm System), materials considered eligible sources of supply according to the Green-e Framework for Renewable Energy Certification, Version 1.0 (2017) or Green-e regional standards, or materials eligible for an applicable jurisdictional renewable portfolio standard. 4The entity shall apply conversion factors consistently for all data reported under this disclosure, such as the use of HHVs for fuel usage (including biofuels) and conversion of kilowatt hours (kWh) to GJ (for energy data including electricity from solar or wind energy). SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES |9",
    "new_id": 72
  },
  {
    "id": 6675,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the implicit relationship between engagement activities and portfolio management as described for asset owners and managers, as outlined in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Engagement activities are undertaken to enhance data availability and risk assessment capabilities, indirectly supporting better positioning of portfolios during energy transitions.",
      "B": "Engagement activities are primarily aimed at directly reducing the carbon footprint of investee companies rather than improving data availability.",
      "C": "Asset owners and managers use engagement activities to exclusively focus on aligning investee companies with low-carbon energy transitions.",
      "D": "The primary purpose of engagement activities is to ensure legal compliance with climate-related financial disclosure standards.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "34",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD WS 4.pdf",
    "source_text": "34Risk Management Disclose how the company identifies, assesses, and manages climate -related risks Asset Owners Recommended disclosure a) Asset owners should describe , where appropriate, engagement activity with investee companies to encourage better disclosure and practices related to climate -related risks to improve data availability and asset owners’ ability to assess climate -related risks. Recommended disclosure b) Asset owners should describe how they consider the positioning of their total portfolio with respect to the transition to a low -carbon energy supply, production, and use . This could include explaining how asset owners actively manage their portfolios’ positioning in relation to this transition. Asset Managers Recommended disclosure a) Asset managers should describe , where appropriate, engagement activity with investee companies to encourage better disclosure and practices related to climate -related risks in order to improve data availability and asset managers’ ability to assess climate -related risks. Asset managers should also describe how they identify and assess material climate -related risks for each product or investment strategy. This might include a description of the resources and tools used in the process. Recommended disclosure b) Asset managers should describe how they manage material climate -related risks for each product or investment strategy.Supplemental Risk Management Guidance for the Financial Sector (continued) Source: TCFD, Annex : Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate -related Financial Disclosures , 2021",
    "new_id": 73
  },
  {
    "id": 6677,
    "question": "Which of the following most accurately reflects a relationship or implication regarding how companies should address climate-related risks and opportunities based on the recommended disclosures, as described in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "B": "The resilience of a company’s strategy under different climate-related scenarios must be described, including its alignment with a 2°C or lower scenario, as part of evaluating climate-related risks.",
      "A": "The board’s oversight is considered sufficient for addressing climate-related risks without detailing specific management processes.",
      "C": "Companies are expected to integrate their processes for managing climate-related risks into their overall risk management but are not required to disclose this integration.",
      "D": "Disclosing Scope 1, Scope 2, and, if appropriate, Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions is mandatory only when they directly affect short-term financial planning.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "5-6",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD WS 4.pdf",
    "source_text": "5Core Elements of the TCFD Recommendations Governance Strategy Risk Management Metrics and TargetsStrategy Disclose the actual and potential impacts of climate -related risks and opportunities on the company’s businesses, strategy, and financial planning Risk Management Disclose the processes used by the company to identify, assess, and manage climate -related risks Metrics and Targets Disclose the metrics and targets used to assess and manage relevant climate -related risks and opportunitiesGovernance Disclose the company’s governance around climate -related risks and opportunitiesIntroduction to the Risk Management Recommendation In this session, we will discuss the Risk Management recommendation Note: The Task Force uses the term “companies” to refer to entities with public debt or equity as well as asset managers and asset owners, including public - and private -sector pension plans, endowments, and foundations. Source: TCFD, Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate -related Financial Disclosures , 2017\n\n[Page 6]\n6Source: TCFD, Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate -related Financial Disclosures , 2017 Introduction to the Risk Management Recommendation (continued) The Task Force’s Risk Management recommendation is supported by three recommended disclosures Governance Strategy Risk Management Metrics and Targets Disclose the company’s governance around climate -related risks and opportunities.Disclose the actual and potential impacts of climate -related risks and opportunities on the company’s businesses, strategy, and financial planning where such information is material.Disclose how the company identifies, assesses, and manages climate -related risks.Disclose the metrics and targets used to assess and manage relevant climate -related risks and opportunities where such information is material. Recommended Disclosures Recommended Disclosures Recommended Disclosures Recommended Disclosures a)Describe the board’s oversight of climate -related risks and opportunities.a)Describe the climate -related risks and opportunities the company has identified over the short, medium, and long term.a)Describe the company’s processes for identifying and assessing climate -related risks.a)Disclose the metrics used by the company to assess climate - related risks and opportunities in line with its strategy and risk management process. b)Describe management’s role in assessing and managing climate - related risks and opportunities.b)Describe the impact of climate - related risks and opportunities on the company’s businesses, strategy, and financial planning.b)Describe the company’s processes for managing climate - related risks.b)Disclose Scope 1, Scope 2, and, if appropriate, Scope 3 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and the related risks. c) Describe the resilience of the company’s strategy, taking into consideration different climate - related scenarios, including a 2 °C or lower scenario.c)Describe how processes for identifying, assessing, and managing climate -related risks are integrated into the company’s overall risk management.c)Describe the targets used by the company to manage climate - related risks and opportunities and performance against targets.",
    "new_id": 74
  },
  {
    "id": 6678,
    "question": "Which statement accurately captures the primary purpose of the Task Force's Risk Management Integration and Disclosure guidance, as outlined in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "C": "To help companies integrate climate-related risks into their existing processes while aligning with TCFD recommendations.",
      "A": "To mandate that all companies adopt uniform climate-related risk management frameworks.",
      "B": "To provide a comprehensive list of all possible climate-related risks companies may face globally.",
      "D": "To eliminate the need for companies to assess geographic and activity-based variations in climate risks.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "23-24",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD WS 4.pdf",
    "source_text": "23Background The Task Force developed Risk Management Integration and Disclosure guidance to address specific issues identified by preparers in implementing its Risk Management recommendation 23As part of its 2019 status report, the Task Force conducted a survey to better understand companies’ efforts to implement the TCFD recommendations and associated challenges and found the following: •75% of companies surveyed indicated the Risk Management recommendation is difficult to implement and •several of these companies indicated they do not have processes for identifying, assessing, or managing climate - related risks .Recommended Disclosures a)Describe the company’s processes for identifying and assessing climate - related risks. b)Describe the company ’s processes for managing climate -related risks. c)Describe how processes for identifying, assessing, and managing climate - related risks are integrated into the company ’s overall risk management.Task Force published four recommendations in 2017, with one on Risk Management For risk management, the Task Force recommends companies disclose how they identify, assess, and manage climate -related risks. The recommendation is accompanied by three recommended disclosures, as shown below.Task Force conducted survey in late 2018 The Task Force developed guidance on Risk Management Integration and Disclosure to help address some of the issues companies identified. The guidance is aimed at companies that are interested in integrating climate -related risks into their existing risk management processes and disclosing information on their risk management processes in alignment with the TCFD recommendations. Task Force developed risk management guidance in 2020\n\n[Page 24]\n24Unique Characteristics The unique characteristics of climate -related risks are summarized here —understanding these is critical to understanding how climate -related risks may affect a company. 1. Different effects based on geography and activities 2. Longer time horizons and long -lived effects 3. Novel and uncertain nature4. Changing magnitude and non -linear dynamics 5. Complex relationships and systemic effects•To understand the unique characteristics of climate -related risks, it is important to understand possible implications of climate change. •Possible implications of continued warming of the Earth are wide ranging, affecting infrastructure, energy, food, water supplies, etc. •For companies, this means climate change can affect their facilities and operations, supply and distribution chains, employees, and customers.Unique Characteristics of Climate -Related Risks At the heart of integrating climate -related risks into existing risk management processes is a solid understanding of the unique characteristics of these risks Possible implications of temperature increases Source: TCFD, Guidance on Risk Management Integration and Disclosure , 2020",
    "new_id": 75
  },
  {
    "id": 6679,
    "question": "Which of the following most accurately reflects a necessary condition for companies to effectively disclose their processes for identifying and assessing climate-related risks, as implied by the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Guidance on Metrics, Targets, and Transition Plans?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Companies should integrate considerations of existing and emerging regulatory requirements into their risk assessment processes.",
      "A": "Companies must prioritize climate-related risks over all other types of risks when determining their significance.",
      "B": "Companies are required to develop entirely new risk classification frameworks specifically for climate-related risks.",
      "C": "Companies need only describe the potential size and scope of risks without defining terminology or referencing frameworks.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "11-12",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD WS 4.pdf",
    "source_text": "11Structure of the Risk Management Recommendation Overview Section The overview of each of the three recommended disclosures under the Risk Management recommendation will follow the structure provided below i. Describing the guidance for all sectors associated with the recommended disclosure iii. Providing examples of reporting that align with the recommended disclosure ii. Drilling down into specific elements of the recommended disclosure\n\n[Page 12]\n12Risk Management Disclose how the company identifies, assesses, and manages climate -related risks All Sectors Recommended Disclosure a) Describe the company’s processes for identifying and assessing climate - related risks. Companies should describe their risk management processes for identifying and assessing climate -related risks. An important aspect of this description is how companies determine the relative significance of climate -related risks in relation to other risks. Companies should describe whether they consider existing and emerging regulatory requirements related to climate change (e.g., limits on emissions) as well as other relevant factors considered. Companies should also consider disclosing the following: processes for assessing the potential size and scope of identified climate -related risks and definitions of risk terminology used or references to existing risk classification frameworks used.Recommended Disclosure Risk Management a) The first recommended disclosure under the Risk Management recommendation —Risk Management a) —asks companies to disclose their processes for identifying and assessing climate - related risks Source: TCFD, Annex : Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate -related Financial Disclosures , 2021",
    "new_id": 76
  },
  {
    "id": 6689,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the rationale for why an organization might conclude it has no environmental opportunities with substantive effects, while still aligning with the disclosure expectations outlined in the CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 1-6?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The organization is currently evaluating potential opportunities and has not yet reached a definitive conclusion regarding their impact.",
      "B": "The organization has determined that environmental opportunities exist but lacks the internal resources to evaluate them fully.",
      "C": "The organization believes that environmental opportunities are not relevant to its financial performance or strategic priorities.",
      "D": "The organization has adopted a standardized procedure to identify opportunities but found none anticipated to have a substantive effect.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "187-188",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 1-6.pdf",
    "source_text": "186 • Some of the options for compliance include emissions reductions strategies, efficiency upgrades, purchase of allowances and the purchase of carbon credits. • Depending on how long your company has been regulated by a carbon pricing system, efficiency upgrades may not provide the amount of reductions necessary to comply with regulations. If that is the case for your company, then you are also encouraged to detail your company’s long-term compliance and regulatory risk management strategy; including the specific metric(s) or mechanism(s) used – for example, a dedicated carbon risk management team or the use of an internal carbon price. If you use an internal carbon price, please make note of this here and provide specific details the subsequent question (5.10.1). Tags Authority Type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level CC Questionnaire Sector Question level All except FS\n\n[Page 188]\n187 Opportunity disclosure (3.6) Have you identified any environmental opportunities which have had a substantive effect on your organization in the reporting year, or are anticipated to have a substantive effect on your organization in the future? Question details Change from last year No change Rationale It is crucial for investors and data users to know whether your organization has identified any environmental opportunities within your direct operations or across your value chain with the potential to have substantive effects on your organization. This includes both opportunities which have already had an effect in the reporting year, as well as opportunities which may have an effect in the future. If no environmental opportunities with substantive effects have been identified as part of your assessment, it is equally crucial for data users to understand how and why your organization has concluded that you are not presented with any opportunities. Ambition The organization discloses environmental opportunities which have had or are anticipated to have a substantive effect on its business activities, value chain, financial position (e.g., assets and liabilities), financial performance (e.g., revenue or expenditure) and cash flows. Response options Please complete the following table 0 1 2 3 Environmental issue Environmental opportunities identified Primary reason why your organization does not consider itself to have environmental opportunities Please explain Climate change Select from: • Yes, we have identified opportunities, and some/all are being realized • Yes, we have identified opportunities but are unable to realize them • No Select from: • Opportunities exist, but none anticipated to have a substantive effect on organization • Evaluation in progress • Lack of internal resources, capabilities, or expertise (e.g., due to organization size) • No standardized procedure • Not an immediate strategic priority • Judged to be unimportant or not relevant • Other, please specify Text field [maximum 2,500 characters] Forests Water",
    "new_id": 77
  },
  {
    "id": 6700,
    "question": "Which of the following best reflects why an organization might not align its shareholder voting with environmental strategy, according to the principles and rationale provided in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 1-6?",
    "options": {
      "B": "The organization lacks shareholder voting rights in any of its investments due to holding non-voting shares.",
      "A": "Shareholder voting is deemed irrelevant because divestment alone sufficiently promotes sustainable practices.",
      "C": "The organization prioritizes internal resource allocation over environmental issues, viewing voting as unimportant.",
      "D": "Standardized procedures for voting are absent, preventing alignment with the overall environmental strategy.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "440-441",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 1-6.pdf",
    "source_text": "439 Tags Authority type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level CC, F, W Questionnaire sector Question level FS Shareholder Voting [FS only] Section Overview This section asks organizations in the financial services sector to disclose how aligned their shareholders’ voting on their investment portfolios is with the organization’s overall environmental strategy. In addition, this section requests organizations to demonstrate how they support introducing environmental shareholder resolutions into their business strategy and investment portfolios. (5.15) Does your organization exercise voting rights as a shareholder on environmental issues? Question details Question dependencies This question only appears if you select “Yes” in response to column 1 “Activity undertaken” for the rows “Investing (Asset manager)” and/or “Investing (Asset owner)” of 1.10. Change from last year No change Rationale Active ownership is a key tool for positively affecting the real economy because divestment alone leaves investors without a voice to promote sustainable practices. Alongside their investee engagement activities, investors can influence their investee companies on environmental issues by exercising their voting rights. Data users are interested in understanding how aligned shareholders’ voting decisions across the investment portfolio are with the overall environmental strategy and how they support environmental shareholder resolutions. Ambition Investors exercise their right for shareholder voting on environmental issues. Response options 1 2 3 Exercise voting rights as a shareholder on environmental issues Primary reason for not exercising voting rights as a shareholder on environmental issues Explain why you do not exercise voting rights on environmental issues Select from: • Yes • No, but we plan to in the next two years • No, and we do not plan to in the next two years Select from: • Lack of internal resources, capabilities, or expertise (e.g., due to organization size) • No standardized procedure • Not an immediate strategic priority • Judged to be unimportant or not relevant • Other, please specify Text field [maximum 2,500 characters]\n\n[Page 441]\n440 • No, as we do not have shareholder voting rights in any of our investments [Fixed row] Requested content Exercise voting rights as a shareholder on environmental issues (column 1) • Select “Yes” if you exercise your voting rights as a shareholder, including directly and indirectly (e.g., through an external service provider) on environmental issues. • You will have the opportunity to provide further details on how you have exercised your voting rights in the following question. • Select “No, as we do not have shareholder voting rights in any of our investments” if voting rights are not applicable for your investments, e.g.: non-voting shares. Explain why you do not exercise voting rights on environmental issues (column 3) • Provide an explanation specific to your organization explaining why you do not exercise voting rights on environmental issues, and outline any plans to do so in the future. Tags Authority type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level CC, F, W Questionnaire sector Question level FS (5.15.1) Provide details of your shareholder voting record on environmental issues. Question details Question dependencies This question only appears if you select “Yes” in column 1 “Exercise voting rights as a shareholder on environmental issues” of 5.15. Change from last year No change Rationale Active ownership is a key tool for positively affecting the real economy because divestment alone leaves investors without a voice to promote sustainable practices. Alongside their investee engagement activities, investors can influence their investee companies on environmental issues, by exercising their voting rights. Data users are interested in understanding how aligned shareholders’ voting decisions across the investment portfolio are with the overall environmental strategy and how they support environmental shareholder resolutions. Ambition Investors exercise their right for shareholder voting on environmental issues. The entity shall describe how the outcomes of its proxy voting and engagement activities inform its investment decision-making process. Response options",
    "new_id": 78
  },
  {
    "id": 6712,
    "question": "Which statement accurately captures the relationship between the geodetic system requirement and the rationale for reporting total assets value in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 1-6?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The WGS 84 system is specified to ensure compatibility with tools like Google Maps, while asset values are requested in market value to align financial disclosures with global mapping standards.",
      "A": "Geolocation data must follow WGS 84 to standardize spatial references, whereas total assets reporting serves to contextualize an organization’s environmental disclosures without requiring geospatial alignment.",
      "B": "Both geolocation data and total assets figures depend on the WGS 84 framework to maintain consistency in how organizations report physical and financial metrics across sectors.",
      "D": "The use of WGS 84 for geolocation ensures precision in identifying facilities, just as providing net releasable value estimates guarantees accuracy when market values are unavailable.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "23-24",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 1-6.pdf",
    "source_text": "22 • If you are unable to provide geolocation data for any facilities, please use this column to explain your coverage and any plans to collect this data in future. Explanation of terms • Latitude and longitude: geographic coordinates that specify, respectively, the north-south and east-west position, of a point on the Earth's surface. These coordinates are expressed as angular measures and thus, latitude can vary from 0 to +/-90 and longitude from 0 to +/-180. Additional information • The geodetic system that should be used is the WGS 84, which is the system used by GPS (Global Positioning System), Google Maps, Google Earth and most major web applications providing coordinates to users. • If you wish to find geo-location data for your facilities, there are various web tools for obtaining latitude and longitude coordinates according to WGS84, e.g. iTouchMap allows you to enter an address or identify a location on a map and will return the latitude and longitude coordinates. Tags Authority Type Supply chain Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level W only Questionnaire Sector Question level All (except FS) (1.9) What was the size of your organization based on total assets value at the end of the reporting period? Question details Change from last year No change Rationale This question helps data users interpret how your responses relate to your operations by providing context on your financing and/or activities disclosed via CDP in relation to your total activities. Response options Numeric field [enter a number from 0-999,999,999,999,999] Requested content General • Provide the figure of your total gross value of assets owned, assets under management (AUM), assets under advisory and assets insured, reported in the currency selected in question 1.2. • The value figure should be reported as the market value at the end of the reporting year. • When market value is unavailable, you should report the latest net releasable value estimate of those assets. • The total assets figure should include uncalled commitments (e.g. in private equity or infrastructure) and policyholders’ funds, off-balance-sheet assets and their portion of joint venture (JV) assets (where relevant). Tags Authority Type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level All\n\n[Page 24]\n23 Questionnaire Sector Question level FS",
    "new_id": 79
  },
  {
    "id": 6748,
    "question": "Which implication about the selection of language and currency in the questionnaire is most consistent with the CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 1-6",
    "options": {
      "D": "The choice of currency impacts all financial disclosures except revenue figures reported during questionnaire setup, which are standardized in USD regardless of the selected currency.",
      "A": "Organizations must submit responses exclusively in English to ensure scoring, as no other languages are considered valid.",
      "B": "Non-Latin American Spanish speakers should select Latin American Spanish for scoring purposes, while financial disclosures are unaffected by language choice.",
      "C": "Selecting a non-supported language or currency invalidates both the response's eligibility for scoring and its comparability across financial metrics.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "12",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 1-6.pdf",
    "source_text": "10 Module 1: Introduction Module Overview This module requests information about your organization’s disclosure to CDP and will help data users interpret your responses in the context of your business operations, timeframe, and reporting boundary. The information provided here should apply consistently to your responses throughout the questionnaire and be complete and accurate as it may determine response options presented in subsequent modules. For this reason, you should respond to every question in this module and save your response before accessing the rest of the questionnaire. Sector-specific content Additional questions on organizational activities for the following high-impact sectors: Agricultural commodities, Capital goods, Cement, Chemicals, Coal, Construction, Electric Utilities, Financial services, Food, Beverage & Tobacco, Metals & Mining, Oil & Gas, Paper & Forestry, Real Estate, Steel, Transport original equipment manufacturers (OEMS), and Transport services.\n\n[Page 12]\n11 Introduction (1.1) In which language are you submitting your response? Question details Change from last year No change Response options Select from: • English • Latin American Spanish • Brazilian Portuguese • Japanese • Chinese • Other, please specify Requested content General • Note that CDP only considers responses submitted in English, Latin American Spanish, Brazilian Portuguese, Japanese or Chinese for scoring. Therefore, organizations responding in non-Latin American Spanish and non-Brazilian Portuguese should select Latin American Spanish and Brazilian Portuguese. Tags Authority Type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level All Questionnaire Sector Question level All (1.2) Select the currency used for all financial information disclosed throughout your response. Question details Change from last year Modified guidance Rationale CDP encourages organizations to report financial figures associated with dependencies, impacts, risks, and opportunities. Establishing a single currency will facilitate the collection of comparable financial information. This will benefit investors and other data users when assessing the costs and benefits reported by your organization. Response options Select from: • Currency drop-down list Requested content General • The currency you select will be applied to all financial information reported in your disclosure. • Note: this does not include the revenue reported in questionnaire setup, which is collected in only USD. • For example, if you select Euros(€), this will determine the currency applied to the figure you give for the financial metric reported elsewhere e.g., question 3.1.2.",
    "new_id": 80
  },
  {
    "id": 6749,
    "question": "Which scenario would most likely result in the erasure of previously entered data for dependent questions in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 1-6 Section 1.8?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Amending the response from 'No, this is confidential data' to 'Yes, for some facilities' without altering other inputs.",
      "B": "Providing geolocation data for all facilities after initially selecting 'No, not currently but we intend to provide it within the next two years'.",
      "C": "Changing the response from 'Yes, for some facilities' to 'Yes, for all facilities' while maintaining consistent facility identifiers.",
      "D": "Selecting 'No, we do not have this data and have no plans to collect it' after previously indicating 'Yes, for all facilities'.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "21-22",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 1-6.pdf",
    "source_text": "20 Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level All Questionnaire Sector Question level All (1.8) Are you able to provide geolocation data for your facilities? Question details Question dependencies Your response to 1.8 will determine if subsequent questions are presented in this section. If your response to 1.8 is amended, data in those dependent questions may be erased. In this case, be sure to re-enter data for all relevant questions. The guidance for each question indicates if it is a dependent question. Change from last year No change Rationale This information will be useful for requesting members to link your data with water stress maps, and the types of risk exposure in those water stressed areas. Response options Please complete the following table: 1 2 Are you able to provide geolocation data for your facilities? Comment Select from: • Yes, for all facilities • Yes, for some facilities • No, not currently but we intend to provide it within the next two years • No, we do not have this data and have no plans to collect it • No, this is confidential data Text field [maximum 1,000 characters] [Fixed row] Requested content Comment (column 2) (optional) • If you select \"Yes, for some facilities\" in column 1, please indicate an approximate proportion. Explanation of terms • Facilities: may be used throughout this questionnaire as a broad term and not restricted to a particular site or grouping of fixed buildings and factories. For example, if your organization is in the extractive industries, you might normally collate business information for assets or business units, and so you may wish to define “facility” information in this way. Tags Authority Type Supply chain Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level W only Questionnaire Sector Question level All (except FS)\n\n[Page 22]\n21 (1.8.1) Please provide all available geolocation data for your facilities. Question details Question dependencies This question only appears if you select “Yes, for all facilities” or “Yes, for some facilities” in response to 1.8. Change from last year No change Rationale This information will be useful for requesting members to link CDP data with maps which show areas of greater water stress, and the types of risk exposure in those water stressed areas. Response options Please complete the following table. You are able to add rows using the “Add Row” button at the bottom of the table. 1 2 3 4 Identifier Latitude Longitude Comment Text field [maximum 500 characters] Numerical field [enter a number from 0 to +/-90.000000 using a maximum of six decimal places] Numerical field enter a number from 0 to +/-180.000000 using a maximum of six decimal places] Text field [maximum 1,000 characters] [Add row] Requested content General • Include all your facilities if possible. • Please comment on the completeness of this dataset. Use the “Comment” column of row 1 (Facility 1) for this. If you responded “Yes, for some” in 1.8, include any plans to improve your coverage. Identifier (column 1) • This is optional. Use this field if you have a company-specific identifier for your facilities (such as a facility name or code). Latitude (column 2) • Enter the latitude coordinates for the facility reported in column 1. Your response should be in the format of decimal degrees and can range from 0 to +/-90.000000. • If you are disclosing for a cluster of facilities, (in accordance with the guidance for 9.3), you may provide the coordinates for the facility with the largest total withdrawal volumes. Longitude (column 3) • Enter the longitude coordinates for the facility reported in this row. Your response should be in the format of decimal degrees and can range from 0 to +/-180.000000. • If you are disclosing for a cluster of facilities (in accordance with the guidance for 9.3), you may provide the coordinates for the facility with the largest total withdrawal volumes. Comment (column 4) (optional) • If the ‘facility’ is an aggregate of multiple locations, ensure that you state this and explain how your methodology for aggregating facilities was applied here.",
    "new_id": 81
  },
  {
    "id": 6769,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between investment in infrastructure and the operational status of tailings dams across the described locations in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 1-6?",
    "options": {
      "B": "The $33 million investment in Cerro San Javier was primarily aimed at expanding tailings storage capacity rather than ensuring compliance with EHS procedures.",
      "A": "The St. Joseph I dam's rehabilitation was prioritized due to its continued operational necessity, justifying the $21 million investment.",
      "C": "The $28 million invested in the Loa river basin's Cerro Chico area was unrelated to tailings dam safety but focused solely on increasing Copper-gold extraction efficiency.",
      "D": "The Torrico valley project’s future tailings storage tasks depend on initial underground operations, with no prior investments allocated for dam-related infrastructure.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "123",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 1-6.pdf",
    "source_text": "122 Canada - Saguenay (Riviere) 1 2 This is one of our longest-running operations and we have started the planning for its closure. Our largest tailings dam, St.Joseph I, has already been decommissioned and rehabilitation project is underway with an investment of $21 mn. In the second tailings dam St. Joseph II the engineering works to decommission have already started. The remaining tailings storage task, Riviere I, is operational until full project operational closure. Canada - Athabasca river basin, Mackenzie 2 1 Our open-pit, heap leach operations in the Crewe area, Saskatchewan, reached its planned capacity in 2017. The operations are expected to continue until 2025. Further exploration work aims at increasing the resource and reserve base. United States of America - Colorado 1 0 The Torrico valley project started exploration development operations in 2015 to exploit the San Florian-Willies deposit. We expect a capacity of 8,000 tonnes per day underground operation by 2020. After initial operations of 6 years, the facility will develop additional tailings storage tasks. Peru - Majes 3 1 In the Majes river basin we have two operations, in San David municipality and Cerro San Javier respectively. The latter was acquired in 2010 after integration of the subsidiary “Oros del Peru S.A.”. The integration involved an investment of $33 mn in renewed infrastructure and capacitation in order for the operation to meet our EHS procedures. Chile - Loa 2 0 In 2012 we started an evaluation process to expand and improve the main existing tailings dam facility in the Cerro Chico area with an investment of $28 mn. This allowed us to expand our Copper-gold operations. Tags Corporate Authority All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level W only Questionnaire Sector Question level MM/CO (2.6.1) Do you evaluate and classify the tailings dams under your control according to the consequences of their failure to human health and ecosystems? Question details Question dependencies This question only appears if you report that you have any active or inactive tailings dams in 2.6. Change from last year No change Rationale Evaluating potential losses or damages to human health and ecosystems, irrespective of the perceived probability of failure, provides evidence to investors and other data users that an organization has an awareness of the severe risks as well as potential liabilities associated with poor management of tailings dams. It also helps data users interpret the disclosed information on management procedures for these tasks (dams). If your organization responded to the Investor Mining and Tailings Safety Initiative 2019 disclosure request, you may find it useful to draw on that submission when completing these questions. Response options Please complete the following table:",
    "new_id": 82
  },
  {
    "id": 6778,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the reasoning behind the exclusion of certain revenues in the alignment assessment in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 1-6?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Revenues from equipment used in both ICE and EVs were excluded due to their classification as neutral, despite potential contributions to sustainability.",
      "A": "Revenues from internal combustion engine vehicles were excluded because they are incompatible with evolving regulatory frameworks.",
      "B": "Revenues from electric vehicles were excluded if they failed to meet the Aquaculture Act of Sweden’s criteria for alignment.",
      "D": "Revenues from all vehicle types were included unless explicitly prohibited by the CBI Taxonomy screening criteria.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "320",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 1-6.pdf",
    "source_text": "319 8 9 10 11 12 Percentage share of selected financial metric planned to align in 2025 (%) Percentage share of selected financial metric planned to align in 2030 (%) Percentage share of financial metric that is taxonomy-eligible in the reporting year Percentage share of financial metric that is taxonomy-non-eligible in the reporting year Details of the methodology or framework used to assess alignment with your organization’s climate transition 4 30 N/A N/A Our automobile manufacturing business currently produces both vehicles with internal combustion engines and electric vehicles. We have accounted as ‘aligned’ the revenue generated from sales of electric vehicles, that have met the screening criteria for private passenger transport established under the CBI Taxonomy. We estimate that our revenue from EVs will increase in the future due to regulatory requirements and shifting consumer preferences. To estimate the percentage share in 2025 and 2030 we modelled the results from a recent consumer survey. To estimate the demand of EV vehicles in different jurisdictions we carried out a policy analysis and modelled the emergence of future regulations. In our calculation we excluded revenues from ICE vehicles and revenues from sales of equipment used in both ICE and EVs, as we classed such equipment as neutral. Company B response 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Methodology or framework used to assess alignment Taxonomy under which information is being reported Objective under which alignment is being reported Indicate whether you are also reporting eligibility information for the selected objective Financial metric Amount of selected financial metric that is aligned in the reporting year (currency) Percentage share of selected financial metric aligned in the reporting year (%) Other please specify: bespoke methodology using Aquaculture Act of Sweden and the principle of do no significant harm of the EU N/A N/A N/A CAPEX 200,000 6",
    "new_id": 83
  },
  {
    "id": 6797,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why an organization's selection of activities in the electric utilities value chain could lead to data being erased in dependent questions if amended, as outlined in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 1-6?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Because changes in selected activities alter the contextual framework used to interpret greenhouse gas emissions and water usage.",
      "A": "Because selecting 'Electricity generation' automatically invalidates responses related to 'Transmission'.",
      "B": "Because amending the response triggers a reset due to incompatible dependencies across all subsequent question options.",
      "C": "Because any amendment would contradict previously provided definitions of terms like 'Distribution' or 'Electricity purchasing'.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "36-37",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 1-6.pdf",
    "source_text": "35 Select all aspects of production within your organizational boundary. If your organization purchases the product but does not produce it, do not select it. Tags Authority Type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level CC,W Questionnaire Sector Question level CH (1.15) Which real estate and/or construction activities does your organization engage in? Question details Change from last year No change Rationale Information about the activities your organization engages in helps data users to contextualize and interpret your responses. Selections made in this question will drive the subsequent questions. Response options Select all that apply from the following options: • New construction or major renovation of buildings • Buildings management • Other real estate or construction activities, please specify Requested content General • Select all real estate and/or construction activities your organization engages in. Explanation of terms • Buildings management: refers to both managed and indirectly managed assets where construction work has been completed. Managed assets or buildings are those for which the landlord is determined to have “operational control”, where operational control is defined as having the ability to introduce and implement operating policies, health and safety policies, and/or environmental policies. Where a tenant has the greatest authority to introduce and implement such policies, the tenant has operational control, meaning that the asset is indirectly managed. • Major renovations: alterations that affect more than 50 percent of the total building floor area or cause relocation of more than 50 percent of regular building occupants. • New construction: development of new buildings and additions to existing buildings that affect usable space. Tags Authority Type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level CC Questionnaire Sector Question level CN, RE\n\n[Page 37]\n36 (1.16) In which part of the electric utilities value chain does your organization operate? Question details Question dependencies Your response to this question determines which questions will be shown throughout the questionnaire and which response options will be listed within these questions. If your response to 1.16 is amended, data in those dependent questions may be erased. Change from last year No change Rationale Business activities within the electric utilities sector are directly related to greenhouse gas emissions and water usage. Disclosing the activities that these organizations engage in provides data users with the contextual information necessary to understand and evaluate how they assess and manage climate- and water-related dependencies, impacts, risks, and opportunities. This also enables data users to make more accurate cross-organizational and cross-industry comparisons. Response options Grouped option (multi-select group; multi-select option) Electric utilities value chain • Distribution • Electricity generation • Electricity purchasing • Transmission Other divisions • Battery storage • Coal mining • Gas extraction and production • Gas storage, transmission and distribution • Microgrids • Smart grids/demand response Requested content General Select all the aspects of the electric utilities value chain and/or other divisions that your organization operates in. Explanation of terms Distribution (Electric utilities): the delivery of electricity to retail customers (including homes, businesses, etc.). Distribution (low voltage) is the lower-voltage electrical distribution of power from distribution substations to final customer, usually below 35kV. In contrast to the transmission system, the distribution system usually is radial, meaning that there is only one path from the distribution substation to a given consumer. Electricity generation: the process of producing electric energy by transforming other forms of energy. Electricity purchasing: the process of purchasing electricity in the wholesale market or via contractual instruments (e.g. PPAs) in order to sell it. Transmission: the movement or transfer of electricity over an interconnected group of lines and associated equipment between points of supply and points at which it is transformed for delivery to consumers or is delivered to other electric systems. Transmission (high voltage) relates to transmitting electric power from generation",
    "new_id": 84
  },
  {
    "id": 6815,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the reason why CDP emphasizes using existing industry taxonomies and frameworks to determine whether a product or service is low-carbon as outlined in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 1-6?",
    "options": {
      "A": "To standardize the evaluation process by comparing emissions across the product's life cycle against a business-as-usual scenario.",
      "B": "To ensure that products meet an organization’s internal financial planning goals without considering external benchmarks.",
      "C": "To guarantee that the product or service aligns with sector-specific strategies for achieving net-zero emissions by 2050.",
      "D": "To allow organizations flexibility in defining their own baselines, independent of industry standards or comparisons.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "351",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 1-6.pdf",
    "source_text": "350 Average % of total R&D investment planned over the next 5 years (column 5) • Enter the low-carbon R&D investment figure planned for the selected technology area as a percentage of your organization’s total R&D investment planned over the next 5 years. • This figure can be calculated with the following formula, where X is your reporting year: ! (planned investment in year X+1)+ (planned investment in year X+2)+(planned investment in year X+3)+(planned investment in year X+4)+(planned investment in year X+5) (total planned R&D in year X+1)+ (total planned R&D in year X+2)+(total planned R&D in year X+3)+(total planned R&D in year X+4)+(total planned R&D in year X+5)=∗100 • The sum of figures entered in this column for all rows should not exceed 100%. • If you do not have any low-carbon R&D investment planned over the next 5 years for the selected technology area, enter “0” in this column. • It is acknowledged that the figure entered for this column will be estimates. You may, for example, estimate planned low-carbon R&D investment for a technology area based on your organization’s strategy, financial planning, and/or climate transition plan. Assumptions underlying these estimates should be disclosed in the final column “Explain how…”. • If you are unable to disaggregate your investments by technology area, enter the percentage that best represents your total planned investment in low-carbon R&D as a percentage of your organization’s total R&D investment planned over the next 5 years • Note that “the next 5 years” start from the end of the reporting year as reported in 1.4 e.g. if your reporting year in1.4 is from 01/01/2022 to 31/12/2022, then the next 5 years will be from 01/01/2023 to 31/12/2027. Explain how your R&D investment in this technology area is aligned with your climate commitments and/or climate transition plan (column 6) • For example, if relevant, explain how the technology area your organization has invested in is key to your sector’s transition to net-zero emissions by 2050 or earlier, and/or how it relates to key performance indicators within your climate transition plan. Explain why your organization has chosen to invest in this low-carbon technology area over other technologies relevant to your sector. • You may also wish to provide further details of your investments in low-carbon R&D, their trend, and any other pertinent information relating to the technology. • If you are unable to disclose investments relating to specific low-carbon technologies, you may wish to explain your organization’s general approach to low-carbon R&D and how it relates to your climate commitments and/or, if relevant, your organization’s climate transition plan in this column. Explanation of terms Low-carbon product or service: CDP broadly defines a low-carbon product/service as a product or service which has comparatively lower emissions across its entire life cycle (i.e. from material acquisition through to product end-of-life) when compared to a baseline (business-as-usual) scenario or reference product of a similar function. Note that a product can only be considered low-carbon if its production and use does not prevent and/or contributes to reaching net-zero by 2050 or sooner. To define whether the product or service is low-carbon, CDP encourages the use of existing industry taxonomies and frameworks such",
    "new_id": 85
  },
  {
    "id": 6828,
    "question": "Under what circumstances would an insurer be required to report both the portfolio value and the % of revenue associated with it, while also ensuring compliance with the stipulations regarding total assets as outlined in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 1-6?",
    "options": {
      "B": "When 'Yes' is selected in column 1 for any row, and 'Yes, both the portfolio value and the % of revenue associated with it' or 'Yes, the value of the portfolio based on total assets' is chosen in column 3, provided the total gross asset value does not exceed the disclosed figure in 1.9.",
      "A": "When 'Yes' is selected in column 1 for any row, and either 'Yes, both the portfolio value and the % of revenue associated with it' or 'Yes, the % of revenue associated with the portfolio' is chosen in column 3.",
      "C": "When 'Yes' is selected in column 1 for any row, and 'Yes, both the portfolio value and the % of revenue associated with it' is chosen in column 3, irrespective of the total gross asset value disclosed in 1.9.",
      "D": "When 'Yes' is selected in column 1 for any row, and 'Yes, the value of the portfolio based on total assets' is chosen in column 3, without regard to the inclusion of off-balance-sheet assets.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "27",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 1-6.pdf",
    "source_text": "26 o General (non-life): typically defined as any insurance that is not determined to be life and/or health insurance. It is also referred to as “Property and casualty” insurance in some regions. o Life and/or health: life insurance is a type of insurance that pays out upon the death of an insured person, and health (or medical) insurance is a type of insurance that covers the cost of medical care. • CDP recognizes that some questions are not relevant to insurers that provide only life and/or health insurance, and so your selection here determines which response options related to due diligence, exclusion policies and portfolio impact will appear. Therefore, if you are an insurer providing only life and/or health insurance, select only the “Life and/or health” option. • Please note that this is relevant to your insurance underwriting activities only. You are still required to respond to all questions relevant to your investing activities. Reporting the portfolio value and % of revenue associated with the portfolio (column 3) • This column is only presented if “Yes” is selected in column 1 “Activity undertaken” for any row. Portfolio value based on total assets (column 4) • This column is only presented if either “Yes, both the portfolio value and the % of revenue associated with it” or “Yes, the value of the portfolio based on total assets” are selected in column 3 “Reporting the portfolio value and % of revenue associated with the portfolio”. • Provide the figure of your total gross value of assets owned, assets under management (AUM), assets under advisory and/or assets insured, reported in the currency selected in 1.2 for each one of your portfolios. • The value figure should be reported as the market value at the end of the reporting year. • When market value is unavailable, you should report the latest net releasable value estimate of those assets. • The total assets figure should include uncalled commitments (e.g. in private equity or infrastructure) and policyholders’ funds, off-balance-sheet assets and their portion of joint venture (JV) assets (where relevant). • The sum of the total gross value of assets for all reported portfolios should not exceed the value disclosed in 1.9. It may, however, be smaller than the value disclosed in 1.9 if you undertake activities other than reported in the portfolios in this question. % of revenue (column 5) • This column is only presented if either \"Yes, both the portfolio value and the % of revenue associated with it\" or \"Yes, the % of revenue associated with the portfolio\" are selected in column 3 \"Reporting the portfolio value and % revenue associated with the portfolio\". • Provide the proportion of your organization’s total revenue associated with each portfolio you have. Type of clients (column 6) • This column is only presented if “Yes” is selected in column 1 “Activity undertaken” for any row. Select all the different clients you work with in the relevant portfolio.",
    "new_id": 86
  },
  {
    "id": 6834,
    "question": "Which scenario is most likely to lead to both a disruption in production capacity and an increased cost of capital, while also being explicitly tied to environmental concerns within the provided industries as outlined in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 1-6?",
    "options": {
      "C": "A lack of availability and increased cost of certified sustainable materials combined with scarcity of land resources.",
      "A": "A sudden rise in risk-based pricing of insurance policies due to uncertain environmental risks.",
      "B": "The inability to attract co-financiers because of poorly managed sanitation practices.",
      "D": "An unsuccessful investment in new technologies aimed at reducing fertilizer and pesticide use.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "144",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 1-6.pdf",
    "source_text": "143 • Unsuccessful investment in new technologies • Other technology risk, please specify Market • Changing customer behavior • Contraction of insurance markets, leaving clients exposed and changing the risk parameters of the credit [FS only] • Inability to attract co-financiers and/or investors due to uncertain risks related to the environment [FS only] • Inadequate access to water, sanitation, and hygiene services [W only] • Increased costs and/or uncertainties related to the cost of virgin plastics [P only] • Lack of availability and/or increased cost of certified sustainable material [C, F, P only] • Lack of availability and/or increased cost of raw materials [F only] • Lack of availability and/or increased cost of recycled or renewable content [C, W, F, P only] • Leakage markets [F only] • Limited visibility of embedded commodities [F only] • Loss of clients due to a fund’s poor environmental performance outcomes (e.g. if a fund has suffered climate-related write-downs) [CC-FS only] • Rise in risk-based pricing of insurance policies (beyond demand elasticity) [FS only] • Uncertainty about commodity origin and/or legality [F only] • Uncertainty in market signals • Other market risk, please specify • Increased levels of macro or microplastic leakage to air, soil, freshwater and/or marine bodies [P only] • Increased severity of extreme weather events • Limited area for disposing solid waste [M-B only] • Land loss to desertification [F only] • Leaching of hazardous substances from plastics [P only] • Ocean acidification • Operations in or adjacent to areas important for biodiversity [M-B only] • Permafrost thawing [C, W only] • Poorly managed sanitation [W only] • Precipitation or hydrological variability • Rationing of municipal water supply [W only] • Reserves located in or adjacent to areas important for biodiversity [M-B only] • Saline intrusion [F, W only] • Scarcity of land resources [F only] • Sea level rise • Seasonal supply variability [F, W only] • Soil degradation • Soil erosion • Solifluction • Temperature variability • Threatened species in or near mining operation [M-B only] • Water stress • Other chronic physical risk, please specify Primary financial effect of the risk (column 12) • Brand damage • Change in revenue mix and sources • Closure of operations • Constraint to growth • Decrease in shareholder value • Decreased access to capital • Decreased asset value or asset useful life leading to write-offs, asset impairment or early retirement of existing assets • Decreased revenues due to reduced demand for products and services • Decreased revenues due to reduced production capacity • Delays in securing operating licenses • Devaluation of collateral and potential for stranded, illiquid assets [FS only] • Disruption in production capacity • Disruption to sales • Disruption in upstream value chain • Disruption to workforce management and planning • Fines, penalties or enforcement orders • Increased capital expenditures • Increased compliance costs • Increased cost of capital • Increased credit risk • Increased direct costs • Increased indirect [operating] costs • Increased insurance claims liability [FS only] • Increased insurance premiums • Increased production costs • Litigation • Loss of license to operate • Mine closure [MM, CO, M-B only] • Reduced availability of insurance on assets in “high-risk” locations • Reduced profitability of investment portfolios [FS only] • Upfront costs to adopt/deploy new practices and processes • Other, please specify Primary response to risk (column 27) Agricultural practices • Adopt alternative crop management strategies to reduce fertilizer and pesticide use [W-AC/FB only] Infrastructure, technology and spending • Adopt water efficiency, water reuse, recycling and conservation practices [W only]",
    "new_id": 87
  },
  {
    "id": 6839,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between CAPEX reporting requirements for expansion activities and the assumptions underlying their estimation as outlined in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 1-6?",
    "options": {
      "D": "CAPEX figures in column 2 are definitive and exclude reliance on estimates, whereas column 3 inherently requires assumptions due to its forward-looking nature.",
      "A": "The sum of all percentages in column 3 can exceed 100% if multiple expansion activities are planned simultaneously.",
      "B": "Assumptions used to estimate CAPEX in column 4 must align with both financial planning and climate transition strategies, but not necessarily with upstream activity costs.",
      "C": "If no CAPEX is planned for an expansion activity over the next five years, the corresponding entry in column 3 should explicitly state the reasons for the zero value.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "360",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 1-6.pdf",
    "source_text": "359 • Enter your organization’s CAPEX in the reporting year for the expansion activity (as reported in column 1) as a percentage of your organization’s total CAPEX in the reporting year. • The sum of figures entered in this column for all rows should not exceed 100%. • If there was no CAPEX associated with an expansion activity in the reporting year, enter “0” for the corresponding row(s). CAPEX planned over the next 5 years for this expansion activity as % of total CAPEX planned over the next 5 years (column 3) • Enter your organization’s CAPEX planned for the expansion activity as a percentage of your organization’s total CAPEX planned over the next 5 years. • The sum of figures entered in this column for all rows should not exceed 100%. • If you do not have any CAPEX planned for over the next 5 years for an expansion activity, enter “0” for the corresponding row(s). • It is acknowledged that the figure entered for this column will be estimates. You may, for example, estimate planned CAPEX for an expansion activity based on your organization’s strategy, financial planning, and/or climate transition plan. Assumptions underlying these estimates should be disclosed in column 4. • Note that “the next 5 years” start from the end of the reporting year as reported in 1.4 e.g. if your reporting year in 1.4 is from 01/01/2022 to 31/12/2022, then the next 5 years will be from 01/01/2023 to 31/12/2027. Explain your CAPEX calculations, including any assumptions (column 4) • Explain how you calculated the figure reported in column 2 “CAPEX in the reporting year for this expansion activity as % of total CAPEX in the reporting year”. • Explain how you estimated the figure reported in column 4 “CAPEX planned over the next 5 years for this expansion activity as % of total CAPEX planned over the next 5 years”. Briefly describe any assumptions on which your estimation is based. Requested content – [sector] only (if applicable) Exploration of new oil field [OG only] (Row 1) • Enter the CAPEX associated with the exploration and construction of new oil fields. This refers to any CAPEX associated with upstream activities (i.e., exploration and surveys, appraisals, field evaluations, infrastructure development, production) on greenfield sites. See Explanation of Terms for more information. Exploration of new natural gas fields [OG only] (Row 2) • Enter the CAPEX associated with the exploration and construction of new natural gas fields. This refers to any CAPEX associated with upstream activities (i.e., exploration and surveys, appraisals, field evaluations, infrastructure development, production) on greenfield sites. See Explanation of Terms for more information. Expansion of existing oil fields [OG only] (Row 3) • Enter the CAPEX associated with the expansion/extension of existing oil fields. This refers to any CAPEX associated with restoring or enhancing the operating capacity of a brownfield site for upstream activities, including project phases and expansions of existing fields/sites to increase gross total production beyond the current forecast or that facilitate enhanced recovery/production of existing assets (e.g., additional well tie-ins, injection enhanced recovery). This includes any Phase 2",
    "new_id": 88
  },
  {
    "id": 6841,
    "question": "Which scenario coverage option should a financial services company select if its analysis includes both direct operational risks and portfolio-related activities like lending and insurance underwriting, but explicitly excludes investment activities as described in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 1-6?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Company-wide",
      "B": "Portfolio",
      "C": "Company-wide excluding portfolio",
      "D": "Organization-wide",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "287",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 1-6.pdf",
    "source_text": "286 o Policies in the jurisdictions covered by the scenario; o Macroeconomic trends; o National- or regional-level variables (e.g. local weather patterns, demographics, land use, infrastructure and availability of natural resources); o Developments in technology and; o Energy usage and mix. • Discuss the assumptions your organization has made on the severity or intensity of the driving forces identified in column 10 “Driving forces in scenario”. • Highlight the uncertainties and constraints that may affect the outcomes of the scenario analysis. • If the scenario does not cover your entire organization, provide further details of the coverage. Rationale for choice of scenario (column 11) • Describe why the chosen scenario is relevant to the resilience of your organization's business strategy, and how it aligns with critical assumptions in your organization's strategy and financial planning. • If disclosing on climate change, include why the scenarios are relevant to assessing your organization’s resilience to climate-related changes, developments or uncertainties. Specify if any of the climate-related scenarios used were aligned with the latest international agreement on climate change. • Provide further details on the sources of the scenarios used, including data sources and models used if applicable. • Financial services sector companies should state if your organization uses environmental scenario analysis to understand the impact of environmental issues on lending, financial intermediary, investment and/or insurance underwriting activities, in addition to operational activities. Requested content – [sector] (if applicable) Note for companies in the financial services sector • Note that “Organization-wide” in column 3 “Scenario coverage” refers to the reporting boundary as disclosed in the introduction module. Financial services sector companies using scenario analysis on their portfolios should select “Portfolio”, even when the scenario covers all financial activities and portfolios. In column “Scenario coverage”, select “Company-wide” if referring to direct operations AND portfolio activities related to lending, investing and or insurance. Select “Company-wide excluding portfolio” if referring only to your direct operations and nothing related to your lending, insurance and investing activities. • Both physical and transition pathway risks should be considered in your scenario analysis. • Banks: o Banks are encouraged to use the Network for Greening the Financial System (NGFS) scenarios framework. • Insurance companies: o Insurance companies that perform climate-related scenario analysis on their underwriting activities should provide the following information: § Information on the time frames used for the climate-related scenarios, including short-, medium-, and long-term milestone; and § Companies with substantial exposure to weather-related perils should consider a greater than 2°C scenario to account for physical effects of climate change.",
    "new_id": 89
  },
  {
    "id": 6848,
    "question": "Which scenario accurately reflects the relationship between 'embedded soy' and the stages of 'processing' and 'manufacturing' as described in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 1-6?",
    "options": {
      "B": "A company manufacturing leather goods selects the processing stage since the raw hides processed into leather inherently contain embedded soy used during cattle rearing.",
      "A": "An organization producing crude palm oil from crushed fruit is directly responsible for embedded soy because it uses soy derivatives in its refining processes.",
      "C": "A bakery using soybean oil in its products accounts for embedded soy under manufacturing, as the soy was indirectly sourced through animal feed prior to becoming an ingredient.",
      "D": "A fast-food chain selling beef burgers must consider embedded soy at the manufacturing stage due to soy being indirectly sourced via cattle feed before slaughtering.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "55",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 1-6.pdf",
    "source_text": "54 • Embedded soy: indirectly sourced soy used in animal feed during the production of an animal product, e.g., meat, farmed fish, dairy, eggs, or other animal products as ingredients. The concept of embedded soy allows organizations to account for the impact of soy from sourcing animal products despite the organization not sourcing soy or soy products directly. Soy is ‘embedded’ when it is indirectly sourced and is not physically present in the end product (adapted from WWF, 2022 and CGF, 2016). • Manufacturing: the series of actions, methods, and techniques that transform raw or processed materials into final products ready for human use/consumption. o In palm oil and soybean value chain, this stage may include the refining of oil into shortening and the use of ingredients in the manufacture of bakery products. o For timber products, the manufacturing stage involves the secondary processing of wood into multiple products. This may include furniture, flooring, plywood, and boards, as well as other building materials. For pulp and paper, this may include the conversion of pulp to printing and writing paper, newsprint, tissue, container boards, and packaging. o Organizations may manufacture cattle products into products containing beef (e.g., retail meat products, fast food, byproducts including glycerin/gelatin) and leather products for various industries (e.g., footwear, clothing, furniture and car upholstery) (adapted from Global Canopy, 2018 and AFi, 2024). • Metric ton (alternatively “metric tonne”): relates to a unit of mass equal to 1000 kilograms. This unit of mass is often referred to as the “metric” ton to distinguish it from the non-metric units of the short ton (US ton, 907kg) and long ton (Imperial ton, 1016kg). • Processing: the series of actions that transform raw materials from their natural state to an initial processed state in preparation for market or further processing/manufacturing. o Organizations involved in the production of crude palm oil from crushed fruit or the production of soybean oil and soybean meal from soybean would select this activity. Further processing activities in the form of refining and fractionation should be considered in the manufacturing stage. o In the case of timber products, organizations whose activities include the initial processing of timber products in mills (i.e., sawmills, plywood and veneer mills, pulp, and paper mills) would select this stage. o For cattle products, this stage primarily involve the slaughtering of cattle and the processing of raw hide into leather (adapted from Global Canopy, 2018 and AFi, 2024). • Produced volume: the proportion of the \"Disclosure volume\" that is produced by your organization e.g., commodities grown, reared or harvested on land owned, managed or controlled. • Production: the first stage in the upstream value chain, often entailing the production of raw agricultural and forest products by farm owners, smallholders, and communities. Vertically integrated companies are also involved in producing activities if they own or manage land used for production (adapted from Global Canopy, 2018 and AFi, 2024). • Sourced volume: the proportion of the \"Disclosure volume\" that is consumed, sourced, purchased and/or used by your organization for processing, trading or used as an input for manufacturing and/or packaging. This includes the commodity volume contained within manufactured goods sold by retailers in addition to the volume of soy embedded in animal products. • Total commodity volume: the total volume of a commodity produced and/or sourced (including used, purchased and consumed) by your organization regardless of whether this volume is included or excluded from your disclosure. • Trading: purchasing and selling raw or primary processed agricultural or forestry materials to domestic or export markets. This includes shipments, transport, and storage of the commodities (adapted from Global Canopy, 2018 and AFi, 2024).",
    "new_id": 90
  },
  {
    "id": 6849,
    "question": "Which scenario best illustrates a situation where an organization's monitoring mechanisms would be considered insufficient according to CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 1-6?",
    "options": {
      "C": "An organization mandates certification for hazardous substance substitution but does not specify any additional monitoring mechanism.",
      "A": "An organization relies solely on supplier self-assessment and first-party verification for compliance with water withdrawal reduction.",
      "B": "An organization uses on-site third-party audits but excludes suppliers who lack data on environmental requirements from compliance calculations.",
      "D": "An organization employs a grievance mechanism and supplier scorecards while excluding new suppliers without environmental data from reporting.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "409",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 1-6.pdf",
    "source_text": "408 • Monitoring and reduction of Product Carbon Footprint (PCF)/ product life-cycle emissions [CC only] • No deforestation or conversion of other natural ecosystems [F only] • No development on peat regardless of depth [F only] • Provision of fully-functioning, safely managed WASH services to all employees [W only] • Purchasing of low-carbon or renewable energy [CC only] • Substitution of hazardous substances with less harmful substances • Total water withdrawal volumes reduction [W only] • Waste and resource reduction and material circularity • Other, please specify Requested content General • In your calculations for this question, do not include new or potential suppliers for whom you do not have data on environmental requirements. • Note that columns 4, 6 and 8 request the percentage of suppliers the specific requirement applies to, whilst columns 5, 7 and 9 request the percentage of suppliers you have confirmed are compliant with the requirement. Environmental requirement (column 2) • Select the option that best describes the environmental requirement that suppliers have to meet. If the environmental requirement is part of a supplier code of conduct or supplier selection process, select the option that best describes what is required by the code of conduct or supplier selection process. • If you select “Compliance with an environmental certification”, specify the environmental certification in column 13 “Comment”. Mechanisms for monitoring compliance with this environmental requirement (column 3) • Select the types of monitoring mechanisms that your organization has in place to assess compliance with the environmental requirement selected in column 2 “Environmental requirement”. • Details on some of the types of monitoring mechanisms are provided below: o Certification: Requires suppliers to obtain certification to demonstrate compliance. o Supplier self-assessment: Suppliers assess compliance themselves. o First-party verification: Compliance verified by your organization, by personnel not involved in the design or implementation of assessed operations. o Second-party verification: Compliance verified by related entity with interest in assessed organization or operation (e.g., business customer of a production/processing operation, contractor that provides services in addition to verification). o Off-site third-party audit: Compliance verified off-site by third party (e.g., desktop audit). o On-site third-party audit: Compliance verified on-site by third party (e.g., inspection). o Grievance mechanism/Whistleblowing hotline: Compliance monitored through a reporting mechanism which enables the reporting of supplier non-compliance. o Supplier scorecard or rating: Compliance monitored through a scorecard or rating system.",
    "new_id": 91
  },
  {
    "id": 6850,
    "question": "Which scenario most accurately reflects the implications of not addressing non-compliance with environmental requirements by external asset managers as outlined in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 1-6?",
    "options": {
      "D": "An organization lacks a policy for addressing non-compliance but still includes environmental requirements in its selection process, leading to inconsistent enforcement.",
      "A": "An organization avoids establishing a policy for non-compliance because voluntary commitments are deemed less critical than regulatory standards.",
      "B": "An organization with no environmental requirements in its selection process identifies non-compliance as a key reason for future policy development.",
      "C": "An organization enforces strict penalties for non-compliance without first requiring environmental criteria during the selection process.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "437",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 1-6.pdf",
    "source_text": "436 Requested content External asset managers have to meet specific environmental requirements as part of the selection process and engagement (column 1) • Select “Yes” if the external asset managers that are part of your selection process and engagement have to meet specific environmental requirements. Policy in place for addressing external asset manager non-compliance (column 2) • This column is only shown if “Yes” is selected in column 1 “External asset managers have to meet specific environmental requirements as part of the selection process and engagement”. • Select “Yes, we have a policy in place for addressing non-compliance” if you have an established policy to manage external asset managers who do not adhere to the environmental requirements within your selection process and engagement. Explain why environmental requirements are not included in selection process and engagement with external asset managers (column 4) • Your response should be specific to your organization and include why your organization does not consider environmental requirements when selecting and engaging with asset managers. • Briefly describe any plans you may have to address this in the future. Explanation of terms • External asset manager: wealth or investment manager that works independently from the reporting organization in the financial sector. • Non- compliance: the state of not complying with or fulfilling (or only partially complying with or fulfilling) a given environmental requirement, standard, commitment, or target. In this context non-fulfilment of voluntary commitments, non-compliance with applicable environmental requirements, and adverse impacts to internationally recognized human rights are all considered instances of non-compliance (Adapted from AFi, 2024). Tags Authority type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level CC, F, W Questionnaire sector Question level FS (5.14.1) Provide details of the environmental requirements that external asset managers have to meet as part of your organization’s selection process and engagement. Question details Question dependencies This question only appears if you select “Yes” in column 1 “External asset managers have to meet specific environmental requirements as part of the selection process and engagement” of 5.14. Change from last year No change Rationale For asset owners and managers working with external funds (third parties), the external asset managers have a significant effect on investment strategies and objectives. Including environmental requirements into the selection of and engagement with external asset",
    "new_id": 92
  },
  {
    "id": 6851,
    "question": "When reporting under the EU Taxonomy for Sustainable Activities, which scenario would require an organization to split a single economic activity into two separate rows in their disclosure as described in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 1-6?",
    "options": {
      "A": "When the activity partially meets the criteria prescribed under the taxonomy for some facilities but not others.",
      "B": "When the activity is fully taxonomy-aligned across all organizational facilities.",
      "C": "When the activity is classified as taxonomy-eligible but lacks third-party verification or assurance.",
      "D": "When the activity corresponds to one of the newly added activities following the 2023 amendment to the Climate Delegated Act.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "327-328",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 1-6.pdf",
    "source_text": "326 • Engineering activities and related technical consultancy dedicated to adaptation to Climate change • Flood risk prevention and protection infrastructure • Forest management electrical transmission and distribution that result in or enable a substantial contribution to climate change mitigation • Manufacturing of aircraft • Underground permanent geological storage of CO2 • Urban and suburban transport, road passenger transport\n\n[Page 328]\n327 Requested content General • This question requests information on the numerical amount and percentage of your organization’s total turnover, CAPEX, and, where applicable, OPEX in the reporting year which, in relation to a selected activity, is: o Taxonomy-aligned: meets the criteria prescribed under a sustainable finance taxonomy; o Taxonomy-eligible but not aligned: does not meet the criteria prescribed under a sustainable finance taxonomy; • Note that the information provided in this question should be limited to activities which are eligible (or aligned) under a sustainable finance taxonomy (i.e., activities which are eligible to be classified as environmentally sustainable under the taxonomy). • If you are disclosing information under the EU Taxonomy for Sustainable Activities, you should report each of Revenue/Turnover, CAPEX, and, where applicable, OPEX for your selected activities. • If you have obtained third party verification/assurance for your taxonomy-alignment data, you will have the opportunity to indicate this in 5.4.3 and 13.1. • See “Explanation of terms” for more information. Economic activity (column 1) • Select the option that best describes the activity for which you are disclosing financial information on taxonomy-eligibility or -alignment. • The list of economic activities corresponds to the classification of environmentally sustainable economic activities included within the Climate Delegated Act to the EU Taxonomy Regulation. Organizations reporting against taxonomies other than the EU Taxonomy should select the closest approximation of the activity for which you wish to report information, based on their given description within the Climate Delegated Act. Whilst the EU Taxonomy list of activities are largely based on the Nomenclature of Economic Activities (NACE), note that these references are only indicative and not exhaustive. Therefore, even in the absence of a NACE sector reference in the Climate Delegated Act, an economic activity that you wish to report on may yet match the activity description laid out by the Act and be eligible for reporting. • If an activity comprises elements that are both taxonomy-aligned and taxonomy-eligible but not aligned (e.g., the activity meets the criteria prescribed under the taxonomy for some of your organization’s facilities but not others), add two separate rows for that activity. In one row, provide financial information for the proportion that is taxonomy-aligned, and in the other, provide financial information for the proportion that is taxonomy-eligible but not aligned. Select the relevant option in column 3 to indicate which type of taxonomy alignment you are reporting for each row. • Organizations disclosing information under the EU Taxonomy for Sustainable Activities may also report eligibility figures for each financial metric if their activities correspond to any of the 12 new activities added following a 2023 amendment to the Climate Delegated Act. Taxonomy under which information is being reported (column 2) • If you wish to provide financial information on your organization’s alignment with an activity-level sustainable finance taxonomy that is not listed, select “Other, please specify” and provide the name of the taxonomy. Taxonomy Alignment (column 3)",
    "new_id": 93
  },
  {
    "id": 6852,
    "question": "When reporting alignment against the EU Taxonomy for Sustainable Activities, which statement accurately reflects the conditions under which an organization must report financial metrics separately by environmental objective as outlined in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 1-6?",
    "options": {
      "B": "An organization must report turnover, CAPEX, and, if relevant, OPEX separately by environmental objective, regardless of whether its financial statements use the term 'revenue' instead of 'turnover'.",
      "A": "An organization must only report turnover and CAPEX separately by environmental objective if its reporting year aligns with the calendar year.",
      "C": "An organization is required to report turnover, CAPEX, and OPEX separately by environmental objective, but only if it operates exclusively within Europe or Asia.",
      "D": "An organization should aggregate all financial metrics into a single total figure per environmental objective unless it uses the term 'sales' in its financial disclosures.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "317",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 1-6.pdf",
    "source_text": "316 • Organizations disclosing alignment against the EU Taxonomy for Sustainable Activities should select “Yes” if they wish to report the share of their financial metrics that are eligible and non-eligible per objective under the EU Taxonomy. Financial metric (column 5) • Add a row for each financial metric you would like to provide information for, or select “Other, please specify” to provide information for a financial metric that is not listed. • You can make your response more granular by adding multiple rows and selecting “Other, please specify”. For example, if in addition to total OPEX, you wish to report several distinct categories of OPEX (e.g., utilities, business travel, R&D expenses, etc.) separately, you may do so by adding multiple rows and using “Other, please specify” to specify the relevant OPEX category. • Organizations disclosing alignment against the EU Taxonomy for Sustainable Activities should add a separate row to provide figures for turnover, CAPEX and if relevant, OPEX associated with each environmental objective separately, and a total across all objectives. Note that as per the EU Taxonomy Technical Expert Group Report (TEG), “turnover” and “revenue” are often used interchangeably, and in some contexts, may mean the same thing, despite there being some technical differences. The term turnover is most commonly used in Europe and Asia, while the use of the terms revenues or sales is more common in the United States. Revenue disclosures can therefore be considered as turnover wherever appropriate. Amount of selected financial metric that is aligned in the reporting year (column 6) • Enter the spending/revenue that you consider to be aligned with your organization’s climate transition (i.e., as per your chosen methodology/framework as indicated in column 1 “Methodology or framework...”) for this financial metric as an absolute monetary value in the reporting year. • This figure should be based on your organization-wide financial statement for the reporting year, consistent with your reporting boundary as disclosed in 1.5, and in the same currency that you selected in question 1.2 for all financial information disclosed throughout your response. • Unless your organization is disclosing alignment against a sustainable finance taxonomy which requires data to be provided for a specific reporting year, the figure provided in this column should be consistent with the reporting year defined by your answer to 1.4. • Organizations disclosing alignment against the EU Taxonomy for Sustainable Activities should provide this figure for a January to December reporting period. If you are disclosing information under the EU Taxonomy for Sustainable Activities, the figure reported in this column should meet the requirements of Article 3 of the EU Taxonomy Regulation. Percentage share of selected financial metric aligned in the reporting year (%) (column 7) • Enter the spending/revenue that you consider to be aligned with your organization’s climate transition (i.e., as per your chosen methodology/ framework as indicated in column 1 “Methodology or framework...”) for this financial metric as a percentage of your total spending/revenue for this financial metric in the reporting year. • This figure should be based on your organization-wide financial statement for the reporting year, consistent with your reporting boundary as disclosed in 1.5. • Unless your organization is disclosing alignment against a sustainable finance taxonomy which requires data to be provided for a specific reporting year, the figure provided in this column should be consistent with the reporting year defined by your answer to 1.4.",
    "new_id": 94
  },
  {
    "id": 6853,
    "question": "When assessing the magnitude of an environmental opportunity's financial benefit, which factor would most directly challenge an organization's ability to apply a standardized metric across different businesses as outlined in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 1-6?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The proportion of business units affected by the opportunity varies significantly between organizations.",
      "A": "Shareholder or customer responses are too unpredictable to quantify consistently.",
      "B": "The size of the effect on individual business units cannot be compared due to differing organizational structures.",
      "D": "Measurement uncertainty is too high for any organization to reliably assess magnitude.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "196",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 1-6.pdf",
    "source_text": "195 • Provide further context on the opportunity driver, including more detail on the exact nature, location, and/or regulation of the effect concerned, as well as any notable geographic/regional examples. • Include information on how the opportunity links to any of the organization’s risks, as reported in 3.1.1. • Include organization-specific detail, such as references to activities, programs, products, services, methodologies, or operating locations specific to your organization’s business or operations. Primary financial effect of the opportunity (current or anticipated) (column 10) • This column refers to the potential financial effect that the opportunity could have on your organization. The financial effects of environmental opportunities on organizations are not always clear or direct, and for many organizations there might be more than one financial effect associated with an environmental opportunity. • Select the option that you deem to have the biggest effect. You can provide additional details on other financial effects in column 24 “Explanation of financial effect figures”. Magnitude (column 13) • The magnitude describes the extent to which the effect, if it occurred, would affect your business. This should consider the business as a whole and therefore the magnitude can reflect both the opportunity and the extent to which it applies throughout the organization. • An assessment of the ‘magnitude’ of the potential financial benefit arising from an absolute value will vary in scale and metric from organization to organization so it is not possible for CDP to accurately define the terms for magnitude. For example, two organizations may report a potential financial effect figure of $500,000. For organization A this could represent a 1% increase in profits, but a 15% increase in revenue for organization B. Therefore, organizations are asked to determine magnitude on a qualitative 5-point scale from High to Low. • Factors to consider include: o The proportion of business units affected. o The size of the effect on those business units; and o The potential for shareholder or customer response. • If the financial effect has not been assessed by your organization, select “Unknown”. Effect / Anticipated effect of the opportunity on the financial position, financial performance and cash flows of the organization [in the reporting year / in the selected time horizons] (column 14 & 15) • These columns appear dependent on selections in column 11 “Time horizon over which…”. • Provide details on the effects of the opportunity on financial position (e.g. assets and liabilities), financial performance (e.g., revenue or expenditure) and cash flows of your organization: o Examples of reasons why no quantitative figure can be included are: “the effects are not separately identifiable” or “the level of measurement uncertainty is too high such that quantitative information about this opportunity would not be useful”. o In the latter case, this column should also be used to provide a description of the financial effect in relative terms (for example as a percentage relative to a stated or publicly available figure) or give a qualitative estimate of the financial effect. Otherwise, if you have no information about the financial effect, please state “The effect has not been quantified financially”. Quantitative information could include:",
    "new_id": 95
  },
  {
    "id": 6854,
    "question": "Which scenario best aligns with the conditions under which an investee engagement strategy would be considered successful according to CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 1-6?",
    "options": {
      "D": "An asset owner achieves a 10% rise in investees obtaining SBTi validation for their emissions reduction targets after providing training and support.",
      "A": "An asset manager reports a 5% increase in investees setting emissions targets, regardless of whether they achieve Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) validation.",
      "B": "An organization demonstrates a 20% reduction in product use-phase GHG emissions without engaging in any targeted or untargeted investee strategies.",
      "C": "A portfolio divests from all high-risk sectors, leading to an overall decrease in reported scope 3 emissions by 15%.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "402",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 1-6.pdf",
    "source_text": "401 • This column only appears if “Climate change” is selected in column 1 “Environmental issues covered by the engagement strategy”. • Only include the percentage of investee-related scope 3 emissions reported in 12.1.1/12.1.3 that are attributable to investees participating in the activity selected in this row. % of investing (Asset managers) portfolio covered in relation to total portfolio value (column 4) • Provide the proportion your portfolio covered by the engagement process/strategy based on the total portfolio value, as reported in question 1.10. % of investing (Asset owners) portfolio covered in relation to total portfolio value (column 5) • Provide the proportion of your portfolio covered by the engagement strategy based on the total portfolio value, as reported in question 1.10. Explain the rationale for the coverage of your engagement (column 6) • Explain how and why investees were chosen for the engagement selected in column 2 “Type and details of engagement”, e.g., proportion of revenue generated, geographic location, etc. • Investee engagement can be either untargeted (undertaken generally with all investees or undertaken with a selection of investees without a basis for the selection) or targeted at specific investees, such as investees in a particular sector with increased environmental risks relative to other sectors. There is a place for both, but targeted engagement may be more effective at driving change in the real economy. Describe how you communicate your engagement strategy to your clients and/or to the public (column 7) • Briefly describe the process you have for communicating your engagement strategy, including whether it is publicly available, whether you communicate progress and outcomes of engagements with investees or the public and, if so, how. Roles of individuals at the portfolio organizations the entity seeks to engage with (column 10) • Select all options which represent the roles in the portfolio organizations you aim to engage with as part of your environmental engagement strategy. Effect of engagement, including measures of success (column 11) • Discuss the impact of this engagement and how you measure its success. • Include a threshold at which you consider your effect to be successful with regard to the measure of success. For example, if you select “Provide training, support, and best practices on how to set science-based targets,” the measure of success could be a 10% increase in clients obtaining validation of their emissions reduction targets by the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi). • Define the coverage of your investment portfolio based on the portfolio value represented by investees participating in this engagement activity. • Include a description of any engagement activity you undertake with investee organizations to manage environmental risks in your investment portfolio. • Provide examples of positive outcomes achieved. For example, this could include investees reducing product use-phase GHG emissions or increasing renewable energy procurement. • The description should be organization-specific and include details on the impact of the environmental investee engagement strategy.",
    "new_id": 96
  },
  {
    "id": 6855,
    "question": "Which scenario accurately reflects the conditions under which baseline biodiversity data is considered 'available' as defined in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 1-6?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Data is collected, properly stored, and accessible without restrictions, regardless of whether it has been shared externally.",
      "B": "Data collected during the assessment is stored but accessible only to internal stakeholders.",
      "C": "Data was shared with regulatory agencies and is documented in a publicly available Environmental Impact Statement.",
      "D": "Data is mentioned in a Strategic Environmental Assessment but not directly accessible to stakeholders.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "84",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 1-6.pdf",
    "source_text": "83 • Select the option that best reflects the nature of the assessment performed by your organization. Types of assessments are based on IFC (2012) and are listed according to the level of complexity, from most to least complex. Scope defined by (column 4) • Select all options that influenced the definition of the scope and extent of your biodiversity-related assessment. Provide further details on how the scope of the assessment was defined in column 8 “Please explain”. Aspects considered (column 5) • Select all options that are covered by your assessment of biodiversity impacts. Baseline biodiversity data available (column 6) • Select “Yes” if baseline biodiversity data was collected as part of the assessment, is properly stored and readily accessible. • Note that data does not need to be shared with regulatory agencies or more broadly to be considered available. Environmental Impact Statement publicly available (column 7) • The Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is considered to be publicly available if it is accessible to all stakeholders and interested parties (e.g., available on the organization’s website or at any other unrestricted site). • Select “Yes” if that is the case and use column 8 “Please explain” to provide details on how the EIS can be accessed. • If your organization does not have an EIS, or if the EIS is not publicly available, select “No”. Please explain (column 8) • Provide any additional information related to the assessment of biodiversity impacts prior to the project development, e.g. local regulatory context, challenges related to data availability and whether there is a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) in place. • As sharing baseline biodiversity data is considered to be a best practice, if your baseline biodiversity data was shared in some way provide details here. Explanation of terms • Baseline biodiversity data: data on biodiversity values (specific species, habitats or ecosystems, and ecosystem services) occurring at a site, their current condition, and trends before a project commences (Adapted from Gullison et al., 2015). • Cumulative impacts: the overall impacts occurring in the project landscape caused by the project and non-project activities (related and unrelated to the project), generally including clusters of projects, land use change trends, and/or foreseeable developments (Hardner et al., 2015). • Direct impacts: the physical footprint of project activities (including project infrastructure and the incremental transportation and energy infrastructure required to support it) plus the area affected by emissions and effluents (Hardner et al., 2015). • Ecosystem services: the contributions of ecosystems to the benefits that are used in economic and other human activity (TNFD, 2023). • Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA): the process of identifying, predicting, evaluating and mitigating the biophysical, social, and other relevant effects of development proposals prior to major decisions being taken and commitments made (IAIA, 2009). • Environmental Impact Statement (EIS): a physical report on the EIA process and findings. The EIS should provide a clear, jargon-free review of potential impacts and how they have been and will be mitigated. The report often forms the basis of public consultation activities and is the document that is presented to regulatory authorities and others, as the basis for decision making (IFC, 2012).",
    "new_id": 97
  },
  {
    "id": 6857,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the implicit relationship between project finance and trade finance as described in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 1-6?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Project finance is typically used for long-term infrastructure projects repaid from generated cash flow, while trade finance facilitates international transactions without focusing on long-term cash generation.",
      "A": "Both are exclusively used for short-term financial needs, with repayment structures tied directly to immediate cash flows.",
      "C": "Trade finance is a subset of project finance, specifically designed to support the export activities of long-term infrastructure projects.",
      "D": "Both rely on pre-determined terms and conditions, leaving no room for negotiation or customization by the involved parties.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "253",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 1-6.pdf",
    "source_text": "252 the issuer with a goal of re-selling or syndicating the securities, thereby allowing the issuer to bring their securities to the marketplace. • Equity underwriting: financial services used by companies issuing equity, most often during an initial public offering. The underwriter commits, for a fee, to purchase shares from the issuer with a goal of re-selling those shares, thereby allowing the issuer to raise equity capital in return for an ownership position. • Financing agreements: legal documents defining the terms and conditions of a financing product or service between your organization, for example as lender, and your client, for example as borrower. • Project finance: financial products and services used for the financing of long-term infrastructure and industrial projects. The debt is paid back from the cash flow generated from the project. • Retail loans: loans and credit facilities extended to individual personal banking customers, including credit cards. Typically, retail customers have to enter into facilities on pre-determined terms and conditions, rather than being able to negotiate bespoke terms. • Retail mortgages: a home loan extended to individual personal banking customers secured on a specified property. Typically used by homebuyers to spread the cost of their purchase over the long-term. • Trade finance: financial products and services used by companies to facilitate international trade transactions. Includes products which make it possible or easier for exporters and importers to transact such as letters of credit and export credit. Tags Authority Type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level B,CC,F,,W Questionnaire Sector Question level FS Pension schemes (4.9) Does your organization offer its employees a pension scheme that incorporates environmental criteria in its holdings? Question details Change from last year No change Rationale Consideration of environmental factors in pension scheme holdings contributes to the financing of a sustainable economy and demonstrates that organizations consider such risks and opportunities in their assessment of pension plan options. This question allows data users to understand how the organization is contributing to sustainable investing. Ambition Financial institutions offer their employees a pension scheme which incorporates environmental criteria in its holdings. Response options Please complete the following table. You are able to add rows by using the “Add row” button at the bottom of the table.",
    "new_id": 98
  },
  {
    "id": 6858,
    "question": "Which statement accurately captures the relationship between organizational boundaries and reporting requirements for entities involved in both the oil and gas value chain and the steel value chain as outlined in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 1-6?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Activities such as coal mining are reportable only if the coal is intended for use within the steel sector, even if the entity operates in both value chains.",
      "A": "Entities must report on all upstream activities regardless of whether they fall within their organizational boundary if they operate in both the oil and gas and steel value chains.",
      "B": "An entity operating in both value chains can select any combination of activities from either chain without considering its organizational boundary.",
      "D": "The questionnaire mandates reporting on downstream activities for steel but exempts similar activities in the oil and gas value chain.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "45-46",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 1-6.pdf",
    "source_text": "44 in provides data users with the contextual information necessary to understand and evaluate how they assess and manage climate- and water-related dependencies, impacts, risks, and opportunities. This also enables data users to make more accurate cross-organizational and cross-industry comparisons. Response options Grouped option (multi-select group; multi-select option) Oil and gas value chain • Chemicals • Downstream • Midstream • Upstream Other divisions • Biofuels • Carbon capture and storage/utilization • Coal mining • Grid electricity supply from coal • Grid electricity supply from gas • Grid electricity supply from renewables Requested content General • Select all aspects of the oil and gas value chain within your organizational boundary. • The oil and gas industry encompasses diverse activities, ranging from the exploration of oil and gas to petroleum product delivery. The questionnaire splits these activities into four areas: o Upstream: The exploration, development, and production of oil and gas (IPIECA, 2020 Guidance on voluntary sustainability reporting). o Midstream: The transportation, storage, and distribution of crude oil and natural gas (IPIECA, 2020 Guidance on voluntary sustainability reporting). o Downstream: The refining, processing, and marketing of products derived from oil and gas, including service stations operations (IPIECA, 2020 Guidance on voluntary sustainability reporting). o Chemicals: The manufacturing, distribution and marketing of petrochemicals – chemical products derived from oil and gas (IPIECA, 2020 Guidance on voluntary sustainability reporting). Tags Authority Type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level CC,W Questionnaire Sector Question level OG\n\n[Page 46]\n45 (1.20) Which parts of the steel value chain does your organization operate in? Question details Change from last year No change Rationale CDP aims to deliver a more focused questionnaire for organizations that operate in the steel value chain. Based on your response to this question, you will receive questions that are most relevant to your organization, which should simplify the process of reporting. Answers given here allow investors and data users to more accurately compare responses across organizations and industries. Response options Select all that apply from the following options: • Iron ore mining • Coal mining • Limestone and dolomite quarrying • Other mining or quarrying (please specify) • Iron ore sintering and agglomeration • Coke oven operation • Blast furnace and basic oxygen furnace operations • Electric arc furnace operations • Direct reduced iron operations • Open hearth furnace operations • Hot rolling • Cold rolling and finishing • Scrap steel recycling • Oxygen production • Lime production • Other steelmaking operations (please specify) Requested content General • As a producer of steel, you should select at least one of the following steel value chain production activities/options above: o Blast furnace and basic oxygen furnace operations; o Electric arc furnace operations; o Direct reduced iron operations, or; o Open Hearth furnace operations. • You should select all activities that occur inside your organizational boundary. • If the only coal your organization mines is thermal coal for use outside the steel sector, then you should not select coal mining. • Similarly, for all other mining, quarrying, or production of raw materials, if the raw material is not intended for the steel industry, then it is not applicable. • Production of raw materials for sale or own consumption is applicable. Tags Authority Type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level CC",
    "new_id": 99
  },
  {
    "id": 6862,
    "question": "Which scenario would most likely result in the erasure of data in dependent questions following a response to question 1.22 in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 1-6?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Amending the response to include additional commodities not initially reported.",
      "A": "Providing total volumes for commodities that are considered confidential.",
      "B": "Changing the unit of measurement for commodity volumes after initial submission.",
      "C": "Selecting 'No, other reason' for not disclosing the total commodity volume.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "49-50",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 1-6.pdf",
    "source_text": "48 Produced and sourced commodities Section Overview This section requests details on the commodities you produced and/or sourced in the reporting period. Driving action on deforestation- and conversion-free supply chains requires transparent and comparable data on the total volume of a commodity produced and/or sourced (including used, purchased, and consumed) by your organization regardless of whether this volume is included or excluded from your disclosure. This information provides important context to data users for your responses in the environmental performance - forests module. (1.22) Provide details on the commodities that you produce and/or source. Question details Question dependencies Your response to this question will determine which subsequent questions are presented. If your response to 1.22 is amended, data in those dependent questions may be erased. Change from last year Modified guidance Rationale This question indicates your organization’s dependence on commodities by establishing and contextualizing the total volumes that you produced and/or sourced in the reporting period. Reporting this information provides context to data users on how relevant the commodities are to your organization. Organizations benefit from disclosing this information by increasing awareness of their own dependency on commodities and promoting transparency of their business activities, which are important steps towards deforestation- and conversion-free value chains. Ambition The organization discloses all commodities and volumes that they produce and/or source. Response options 0 1 2 3 4 5 Commodity Produced and/or sourced Commodity value chain stage Indicate if you have direct soy and/or embedded soy in your value chain Indicate if you are providing the total commodity volume that is produced and/or sourced Total commodity volume (metric tons) Timber products Select from: • Produced • Sourced • Produced and sourced Select all that apply: • Production • Processing • Trading • Manufacturing • Retailing N/A Select from: • Yes, we are providing the total volume • No, the total volume is confidential • No, the total volume is unknown • No, other reason, please specify Numerical field [enter a number from 0-999,999,999,999 using a maximum of 2 decimal places]\n\n[Page 50]\n49 Palm oil N/A Cattle products N/A Soy Select from: • Embedded soy only • Mixture of embedded soy and direct soy • Direct soy only • We do not know if we source embedded soy Rubber N/A Cocoa N/A Coffee N/A 6 7 8 9 10 Of the total commodity volume, state how much is embedded soy (metric tons) Of the total commodity volume, state how much is direct soy (metric tons) Did you convert the total commodity volume from another unit to metric tons? Original unit Provide details of the methods, conversion factors used and the total commodity volume in the original unit Numerical field [enter a number from 0-999,999,999,999 using a maximum of 2 decimal places] Numerical field [enter a number from 0-999,999,999,999 using a maximum of 2 decimal places] Select from: • Yes • No Select all that apply: • Cubic meters • Gallons • Heads of livestock • Kilogram • Liters • Pounds • Square meters • Square feet • Short ton • Long ton • Other, please specify Text field [maximum 2,500 characters] 11 12 13 14 15 16 Form of commodity % of procurement spend % of revenue dependent on commodity In the questionnaire setup did you indicate that Is this commodity considered significant to Reason for not disclosing",
    "new_id": 100
  },
  {
    "id": 6863,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between CAPEX allocation and its implications for the electric utilities sector's transition to low-carbon energy sources as inferred from the provided details in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 1-6?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The level of CAPEX investment in emerging products and services serves as a proxy for assessing potential impacts on the core business's future earning capacity during the energy transition.",
      "B": "The percentage of total CAPEX allocated to emerging products and services is irrelevant unless it exceeds 50% of the organization’s total CAPEX plan.",
      "C": "Investing in distributed generation or smart grids directly guarantees an increase in future earning capacity due to their association with low-carbon transitions.",
      "D": "The advancement of decentralized power production is solely dependent on large-scale storage systems being prioritized within the CAPEX plan.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "365-366",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 1-6.pdf",
    "source_text": "364 Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level CC only Questionnaire Sector Question level EU (5.7.1) Break down your total planned CAPEX in your current CAPEX plan for products and services (e.g. smart grids, digitalization, etc.). Question details Change from last year Modified guidance Rationale The advancement of decentralized power production and new technologies underpins the potential of the electric utilities sector to undergo a transition to low-carbon energy sources. The level of investment in emerging products and services provides an indication of the level to which future earning capacity of core business might be impacted. Response options Please complete the following table. You are able to add rows by using the “Add Row” button at the bottom of the table. Products and services Description of product/service CAPEX planned for product/service Percentage of total CAPEX planned for products and services End year of CAPEX plan Select from: • Distributed generation • Home storage systems • Smart appliances • Home systems • Prosumer services • Information campaigns • Audits • Tariff measures • Energy audits • Energy management services • Electric vehicles • Charging networks • Heating systems • HVAC • CHP • Lighting • Smart grid • Micro-grid Text field [maximum 2,400 characters] Numerical field [enter a number from 0-999,999,999,999,999 using a maximum of 2 decimal places] Numerical field [enter a number from 0-100 using a maximum of 2 decimal places] Numerical field [enter a number from 2025-2100]\n\n[Page 366]\n365 • Large-scale storage • Other, please specify Requested content General • If you select “Other, please specify,” provide a label for the product and/or service. Description of product/service (column 2) • Provide a description of the application of the new product or service. Please include: o An overview of the product and service; o The applicable markets and customer type (residential, commercial, municipal); o The number of customers product/service may impact; and o The expected energy production and/or energy savings associated and the stage of implementation (exploration, installation, initial or full implementation). CAPEX planned for product/service (column 3) • Enter your planned CAPEX for the new product/service you are reporting. • The CAPEX figure should be in the currency you selected in 1.2. Percentage of total CAPEX planned for products and services (column 4) • Enter the percentage that this CAPEX represents in terms of total CAPEX planned for products and service. Explanation of terms • Capital expenditure: a measure of the value of purchases of fixed assets such as property, buildings, an industrial plant, technology, or equipment. Put differently, CapEx is any type of expense that an organization capitalizes, or shows on its balance sheet as an investment, rather than on its income statement as an expenditure. Tags Authority Type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level CC only Questionnaire Sector Question level EU",
    "new_id": 101
  },
  {
    "id": 6864,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between taxonomy alignment and the company's fulfillment of DNSH requirements for renewable energy technologies as outlined in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 1-6",
    "options": {
      "B": "Although the company meets some DNSH criteria, its failure to assess the scope for reuse and secondary raw materials prevents full compliance with the Climate Delegated Act.",
      "A": "The company fully satisfies all DNSH requirements, as it has implemented water treatment and recycling equipment to mitigate risks.",
      "C": "The company achieves complete DNSH compliance due to its environmental impact assessments and avoidance of operations in biodiversity-sensitive areas.",
      "D": "DNSH requirements are deemed irrelevant for taxonomy alignment since the manufacture of renewable energy technologies is inherently sustainable.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "337-338",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 1-6.pdf",
    "source_text": "336 our total net turnover. The solar PVC and CSP activities considered here are found to be fully taxonomy-eligible, without any operations that are non-eligible. 28 29 30 31 32 33 Substantial contribution criteria met Details of substantial contribution criteria analysis Do no significant harm requirements met Details of do no significant harm analysis Minimum safeguards compliance requirements met Attach any supporting evidence Yes Solar PVC and CSP fall within the definition of ‘renewable energy’ under Directive (EU) 2018/2001. Therefore, the manufacture of solar PVC and CSP technologies meets the technical screening criteria requirement for activities falling under ‘Manufacture of renewable energy technologies’ outlined in Annex I of the Climate Delegated Act. No To address the DNSH criteria under ‘Manufacture of renewable energy technologies’, we performed a detailed climate risks and vulnerability assessment based on climate projections appropriate to the lifespan and scale of our business activities. We assessed physical risks from the manufacture of CSP and solar PV cells such as water stress and the emission of toxic chemicals to water, and installed water treatment and recycling equipment as adaptation measures to address these risks. We also performed an environmental impact assessment to identify threats of habitat loss and fragmentation and implemented measures based on the mitigation hierarchy, to avoid operations in biodiversity sensitive areas and mitigate damage where necessary. Please refer to our annual sustainability report (attached) to find a detailed summary of our EIA. Due to limited resources, our vulnerability assessment report does not, at this stage, include an assessment of the Yes Sustainability report\n\n[Page 338]\n337 scope for reuse and use of secondary raw material components in our manufactured products, which is a DNSH requirement for transition to a circular economy. We therefore do not meet all the DNSH requirements outlined in the Climate Delegated Act. However, we have included plans for assessing and adopting waste management measures to prioritize recycling over disposal of material. Company B response: Company B reports turnover and CAPEX associated with an activity which is aligned with the EU Taxonomy because it meets all the criteria prescribed under the taxonomy to make a substantial contribution to climate change mitigation based on own performance. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Economic activity Taxonomy under which information is being reported Taxonomy alignment Financial metrics Types of substantial contribution Taxonomy-aligned turnover from this activity in the reporting year (currency) Taxonomy-aligned turnover from this activity as % of total turnover in the reporting year Electricity generation from bioenergy EU Taxonomy for Sustainable Activities Taxonomy- aligned • Turnover • CAPEX Own performance 520,500 14 8 13 14 15 27 Taxonomy-aligned turnover from this activity that substantially contributed to Climate change mitigation as a % of total turnover in the reporting year Taxonomy-aligned CAPEX from this activity in the reporting year (currency) Taxonomy-aligned CAPEX from this activity as % of total turnover in the reporting year Taxonomy-aligned CAPEX from this activity that substantially contributed to climate change mitigation as a % of total CAPEX in the reporting year Calculation methodology and supporting information 14 35,000 12 12 14% our total turnover in the reporting year can be attributed to the sale of renewable electricity generated from biogas and bioliquids. 12% of our total CAPEX in the reporting year was also associated with",
    "new_id": 102
  },
  {
    "id": 6867,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the implicit relationship between senior management's responsibilities and the organization’s environmental policy as implied in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 1-6?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Assigning specific environmental responsibilities to senior management demonstrates organizational commitment to implementing its environmental policy effectively.",
      "A": "Senior management is solely responsible for setting environmental policies without needing input from other organizational levels.",
      "B": "The absence of a direct reporting line to the board indicates that environmental issues are considered less critical than other strategic priorities.",
      "D": "Senior management's role is limited to monitoring environmental metrics rather than actively shaping or executing environmental strategies.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "217-218",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 1-6.pdf",
    "source_text": "216 • Not an immediate strategic priority • Judged to be unimportant or not relevant • Other, please specify Forests Water Biodiversity [Fixed row] Requested content General • Select “Yes” if senior management positions or committees in your organization have responsibilities in any of the following areas related to environmental issues: o Managing dependencies, impacts, risks and opportunities; o Setting and measuring progress towards policies, commitments, and targets; o Managing public policy and/or value chain engagement; and o Setting and implementing strategy and managing financial planning. • If either “No” option is selected in column 1, you will be presented with columns 2 and 3. Explain why your organization does not have management-level responsibility for environmental issues (column 3) • Describe the primary reason selected in column 2 “Primary reason for no management-level responsibility for environmental issues” and explain any plans to address this in the future. • If you selected “Judged to be unimportant or not relevant” in column 2, explain the criteria used to decide that management-level responsibility for environmental issues is not important or relevant to your organization. Tags Authority Type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level CC, F, W, B Questionnaire Sector Question level All (4.3.1) Provide the highest senior management-level positions or committees with responsibility for environmental issues (do not include the names of individuals). Question details Question dependencies • This question only appears if you select “Yes” in response to column 1 “Management-level responsibility for this environmental issue” of 4.3. Change from last year • No change\n\n[Page 218]\n217 Rationale • While it is most important for a member of the board to have accountability over environmental issues, assigning management-level responsibility indicates that the organization is committed to implementing its environmental policy. Ambition • The organization has senior management responsibility for the assessment and management of environmental dependencies, impacts, risks, and opportunities. o These responsibilities are assigned to a particular role. o Senior management is informed about and monitors environmental issues, and the organization has a clear, transparent, and thorough process for doing so which includes whether, by whom, and how frequently management is informed. o Senior management has a direct reporting line to the board. • Senior management has responsibility for: o Environmental policies and commitments, o Setting and measuring progress (through performance metric tracking) against environmental targets, o Dedicated controls and procedures for the management of environmental issues, in particular with relation to the implementation of strategy, financial planning, and risk management policies. Response options Please complete the following table. You are able to add rows by using the “Add Row” button at the bottom of the table. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Environmental issue Position of individual or committee with responsibility Environmental responsibilities of this position Coverage of responsibilities Reporting line Frequency of reporting to the board on environmental issues Please explain Climate change Grouped option (single-select group; single-select option) Grouped option (multi-select group; multi-select option) Select all that apply: • Dependencies, impacts, risks, and opportunities related to our banking activities • Dependencies, impacts, risks, and opportunities related to our investing activities • Dependencies, impacts, risks, and opportunities related to our insurance underwriting activities • Dependencies, impacts, risks and opportunities related to our own operations and/or upstream value chain Select from: • Reports to the board directly • Reports to the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) • Reports to the Chief Financial Officer (CFO) • Reports to the Chief Operating Officer (COO) • Reports to the Chief Risks Officer (CRO) • Reports to the Chief Sustainability Officer (CSO) • Reports to the Chief Investment Officer (CIO) [FS only] • Other, please specify Select from: • More frequently than quarterly • Quarterly • Half-yearly • Annually • Less frequently than annually • As important matters arise • Not reported to the board Text field [maximum 2,000 characters] Forests",
    "new_id": 103
  },
  {
    "id": 6871,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the implicit relationship between an organization's environmental engagement strategy and its potential influence on investees' actions, as inferred from CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 1-6?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The strategy is designed to drive investee behavior through structured communication, measurable targets, and escalation processes when necessary.",
      "A": "The strategy primarily focuses on punitive measures to ensure investees comply with environmental goals.",
      "B": "The strategy relies solely on public disclosure of investees’ environmental performance to encourage improvements.",
      "C": "The strategy mandates immediate divestment from any investee failing to meet predefined environmental criteria.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "399-400",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 1-6.pdf",
    "source_text": "398 • Landscape: defined geographic area with common and interacting ecological and socioeconomic characteristics. They may be delineated based on river basins, seascapes, ecosystems, jurisdictional boundaries, or in other ways (adapted from AFi, 2024). • Portfolio: In the context of this questionnaire, your portfolio is your entire collection of your core financing activities and insurance policies that you offer. For banking, this is the entire collection of products, securities and loans held on your balance sheet for which you own the receivable stream. For asset managers, this is the entire collection of your products and investments that you hold and/or manage on behalf of your clients. For asset owners, this is the entire collection of products, funds and investments owned and controlled by your organization. For investment portfolios, asset managers should consider discretionary investments, those where the organization has discretion over investment decision. For insurance underwriting, this is the entire collection of products and insurance policies you provide to your clients. • Target: A specific measurable output to be achieved within a specific timeline. Targets often act as steps towards a wider and long-term corporate goal. Tags Authority type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level CC, F, W Questionnaire sector Question level FS (5.11.4) Provide details of your environmental engagement strategy with your investees. Question details Question dependencies This question appears if select “Yes” in response to column 1 “Engaging with this stakeholder on environmental issues” for the row “Investees” of 5.11. Change from last year Modified guidance Rationale This question provides data users with more transparency regarding investee engagement processes. Data users are interested in understanding how financial services companies are working with their investees to drive environmental action, such as whether organizations encourage their investees to set science-based targets. Ambition Financial services companies have investee engagement strategies for environmental issues and undertake engagement with investees to positively affect their own performance and the environment. Response options\n\n[Page 400]\n399 [Add row] 1 2 3 4 5 6 Environmental issues covered by the engagement strategy Type and details of engagement % of scope 3 investees associated emissions as reported in 12.1.1/12.1.3 % of investing (Asset managers) portfolio covered in relation to total portfolio value % of investing (Asset owners) portfolio covered in relation to total portfolio value Explain the rationale for the coverage of your engagement Select all that apply: • Climate change • Forests • Water Grouped option (multi-select group; multi-select option) from dropdown list below Select from: • None • Less than 1% • 1-25% • 26-50% • 51-75% • 76-99% • 100% • Unknown Select from: • None • Less than 1% • 1-25% • 26-50% • 51-75% • 76-99% • 100% • Unknown Select from: • None • Less than 1% • 1-25% • 26-50% • 51-75% • 76-99% • 100% • Unknown Text field (maximum 2,500 characters) 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Describe how you communicate your engagement strategy to your investees and/or to the public Attach your engagement strategy Staff in your organization carrying out the engagement Roles of individuals at the portfolio organizations you seek to engage with Effect of engagement, including measures of success Escalation process for engagement when dialogue is failing Describe your escalation process Text field [maximum 2,500 characters] Attach your document here Select all that apply: • Specialized in-house engagement teams • Fund managers • Equity/credit analysts • Senior-level roles • Other, please specify Select all that apply: • Board members • Board chair • CEO • Corporate secretary • Investor relations managers • Other, please specify Text field [maximum 2,500 characters] Select from: • Yes, we have an escalation process • No, we don’t have an escalation process Text field [maximum 2,500 characters]",
    "new_id": 104
  },
  {
    "id": 6872,
    "question": "Which criterion must be satisfied for carbon capture to be considered part of the required 90% emissions reduction in coal assets as outlined in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 1-6?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The captured carbon must be utilized for products with lifetimes of at least a century, such as geological storage.",
      "B": "The captured carbon must support processes that enable fossil fuel extraction to ensure economic feasibility.",
      "C": "The captured carbon must primarily target Scope 3 emissions to align with international standards.",
      "D": "The captured carbon must be stored temporarily to allow for future utilization in energy production.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "247-248",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 1-6.pdf",
    "source_text": "246 o All new financial services to new long-lead time upstream oil and gas projects and mid-stream infrastructure dedicated to new long-lead time upstream oil and gas projects. o The applicability of abatement for the purpose of the arrest of financial services to new unabated coal-fired power plants is considered to be at least a 90% reduction of scope 1 and 2 emissions from the associated coal assets of the holding company or project. For carbon capture to be considered part of the 90%, it must be (i) utilized for mitigation products that have century-scale (or greater) lifetimes (i.e., geological carbon capture and storage); and (ii) must not support processes that enable continued fossil fuel extraction and/or development of production capacity. Response options Please complete the following table. You are able to add rows by using the “Add row” button at the bottom of the table. 1 2 3 4 Portfolio Type of exclusion policy Fossil fuel value chain Year of exclusion implementation Banking (Bank) Select from: • All fossil fuels (CC only) • All coal (CC only) • Thermal coal (CC only) • Fuel from liquified coal (CC only) • Coal mining (CC only) • Mountaintop removal mining (CC only) • Power from coal (CC only) • All oil & gas (CC only) • Oil from tar sands (CC only) • Oil from shale (CC only) • Gas from shale (CC only) • Arctic oil and gas (CC only) • Ultra-deepwater oil and gas (CC only) • Fracked oil and gas (CC only) • Liquified natural gas (CC only) • Other, please specify Select all that apply: • Upstream • Midstream • Downstream Numerical field [enter a number between 1900- 2024 using no decimal places and no commas] Investing (Asset manager) Investing (Asset owner) Insurance underwriting (Insurance company) Select from: • Banking (Bank) • Investing (Asset manager) • Investing (Asset owner) • Insurance underwriting (Insurance company)\n\n[Page 248]\n247 5 6 7 8 Phaseout pathway Year of complete phaseout Country/area the exclusion policy applies to Description Select all that apply: • New business/investment for new projects • New business/investment for existing projects • Existing business/investment for existing projects • Other, please specify Numerical field [enter a number between 1900- 2050 using no decimal places and no commas] Select all that apply: • Worldwide • [List of forest- countries/areas] • Other, please specify Text field [maximum 2,500 characters] [Fixed row, add row] Requested content Portfolio (column 1) • The options which appear are driven by the activities you selected in 1.10. Type of exclusion policy (column 2) • Add a row for each type of exclusion policy. • If the exclusion is based solely on geography, for example an area important for biodiversity, or a river basin in an area with water stress, select “Other, please specify” here, then specify indicating e.g. “area important for biodiversity”, or “water basin”, and specify the area in column \"Country/area”. Year of exclusion implementation (column 4) • Select the year you implemented your exclusion policy. Phaseout pathway (column 5) • Indicate what type of projects and/or investments the policy applies to, whether it is for new or existing projects. • Selecting “New business/investment for new projects” implies that you would decline to participate in a financing, investment or insurance for a new project that was covered by the exclusion but may still participate in business for a project in which you were already a lender, investor, or insurer. • Selecting “New business/investment for existing projects” implies that you would decline to participate in business for a project covered by the exclusion, even if you were already a lender, investor, or insurer. Year of complete phaseout (column 6) • Select the year you completed your phaseout, or the year you will completely have phased out of financing or insuring any activity or region covered by your exclusion policy. Country/area the exclusion policy applies to (column 7)",
    "new_id": 105
  },
  {
    "id": 8533,
    "question": "Which statement best captures the nuanced difference in how Société Générale Group and ANZ Banking Group Limited approach the integration of climate-related risks into their risk management frameworks, as discussed in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures – Guidance on Risk Management Integration and Disclosure?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Société Générale Group updated its existing governance framework to include climate risks, while ANZ explicitly incorporates climate risks into its broader Risk Appetite Statements and credit risk assessments.",
      "A": "Both organizations created entirely new governance frameworks specifically to address climate-related risks, ensuring these are treated as standalone issues.",
      "C": "ANZ focuses exclusively on physical risks stemming from climate change, whereas Société Générale emphasizes transition risks without addressing physical impacts.",
      "D": "Both organizations rely solely on external regulatory requirements to define their approaches to managing climate-related risks, avoiding internal structural changes.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "26-27",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Guidence 2020 risk.pdf",
    "source_text": "Figure E6 Société Générale Group, Financial Filing 2020 Société Générale Group, Universal Registration Document 2020 , p. 284 Figure E7 Gold Fields, 2019 Climate Change Report Gold Fields, Our 2019 Climate Change Report , p. 2 In Figure E6 , a financial institution (Société Générale Group) describes its use of the TCFD definitions for climate-related transition and physical risks, explains how climate-related risks are a driver of existing risks, and then indicates the “existing risk management governance framework and processes have simply been updated to include climate risk factors.” The example shown in Figure E7 describes how a metals and mining company (Gold Fields) integrates climate-related risks into its risk management systems and business strategy. 24 The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Table of Contents B. Scope and Approach C. Unique Characteristics of Climate-Related Risks D. Integration in Practice: Key Principles and Initial Steps E. Disclosure of Risk Management Processes Appendices A. Background and Purpose\n\n[Page 27]\nThe examples below show how different companies disclose information about how they identify, assess, and manage climate-related risks. In the first example ( Figure E8 ), Australia and New Zealand (ANZ) Banking Group Limited describes how climate-related risks fit into its risk management framework and how these risks are included in the Group and Institutional Risk Appetite Statements to ensure they are appropriately identified and assessed.Identification, Assessment, and Management of Climate-Related Risks Figure E8 ANZ Banking Group Ltd, 2019 Climate-Related Financial Disclosures Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited, 2019 Climate-Related Financial Disclosures , p. 5 Note: Some content was reformatted in order to fit the page. 5 Risk Management Climate Risk Management We have disclosed our most material social and environmental risks in our 2019 Annual Report (see page 46) on anz.com/annualreport in accord ance with the ASX Corporate Governance Principles and Recommen dations. Our most material climate-related risks and opportunities resul t from our lending to business and retail customers, including credit-related losses incurred as a result of a customer being unable to repay debt. Under our risk management framework, our material risk category of Credit Risk incorporates the risks associated with lending to customers that could be impacted by climate change or by changes to laws, regulations, or other policies such as carbon pricing and climate change adaptation or mitigation policies. It also includes changes to the cost and level of insurance cover available to our customers. We also specifically include climate change as one of our Principal Risks and Uncertainties (available on anz.com/annualreport). Climate change risk is included in the Group and Institutional Risk Appetite Statements to ensure the risk is appropriately identified and assessed. We continue to develop an organisational culture that encourages regular discussion and consideration of emerging climate-related risks. Our Risk team is working with our bankers, encouraging them to talk with customers about managing the risks and opportunities associated with climate change, assisting us to progress our low carbon transition target focused on our largest emitting customers. 25 The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Table of Contents B. Scope and Approach C. Unique Characteristics of Climate-Related Risks D. Integration in Practice: Key Principles and Initial Steps E. Disclosure of Risk Management Processes Appendices A. Background and Purpose",
    "new_id": 106
  },
  {
    "id": 8534,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the relationship between RISK MANAGEMENT and BUSINESS OBJECTIVES as implied by their definitions and interdependencies within the text, as discussed in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures – Guidance on Risk Management Integration and Disclosure?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Risk management supports the achievement of business objectives by systematically addressing risks that could impede progress toward strategic goals.",
      "A": "Risk management is a subset of business objectives, as it solely focuses on mitigating risks without influencing strategic goals.",
      "B": "Business objectives are irrelevant to risk management since the latter deals exclusively with addressing operational issues.",
      "D": "Business objectives dictate the exact boundaries of risk appetite, ensuring that no external risks can ever disrupt organizational strategy.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "48",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Guidence 2020 risk.pdf",
    "source_text": "Appendix 4: Glossary BUSINESS OBJECTIVES refer to measurable steps an organization takes to achieve its strategy.44 CLIMATE-RELATED OPPORTUNITY refers to the potential positive impacts related to climate change on a company. CLIMATE-RELATED RISK refers to the potential negative impacts of climate change on a company. GOVERNANCE refers to “the system by which [a company] is directed and controlled in the interests of shareholders and other stakeholders.”45 IMPACT refers to the extent to which a risk event might affect a company. LIKELIHOOD represents the possibility that a given event will occur. OPERATING STRUCTURE refers to the way [a company] organizes and carries out its day-to- day operations.46 RISK APPETITE refers to the types and amount of risk, on a broad level, a company is willing to accept in pursuit of value.47 RISK CATEGORIES refer to the high-level classification of specific risks. Commonly used risk categories include strategic, financial, and operational; however, most companies have additional (or other) risk categories as well.RISK INVENTORY refers to all risks that could impact a company.48 RISK MANAGEMENT refers to a set of processes that are carried out by a company to support the achievement of its objectives by addressing its risks and managing the combined potential impact of those risks. RISK TAXONOMY refers to a common system to organize risks consistently across a company and establish “parent-child” relationships between broad risk categories and specific sub-categories. RISK PROFILE refers to a composite view of the risk assumed at a particular level of a company or aspect of the business that positions management to consider the types, severity, and interdependencies of risks and how they may affect performance relative to the strategy and business objectives.49 STRATEGY refers to a company’s desired future state. A company’s strategy establishes a foundation against which it can monitor and measure its progress in reaching that desired state. 44 COSO and WBCSD, Enterprise Risk Management–Applying Enterprise Risk Management to Environmental, Social and Governance-Related Risks , October 2018. 45 A. Cadbury, Report of the Committee on the Financial Aspects of Corporate Governance , London, 1992. 46 COSO and WBCSD, Enterprise Risk Management–Applying Enterprise Risk Management to Environmental, Social and Governance-Related Risks , October 2018. 47 Ibid. 48 Ibid. 49 Ibid. 46 The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Table of Contents B. Scope and Approach C. Unique Characteristics of Climate-Related Risks D. Integration in Practice: Key Principles and Initial Steps E. Disclosure of Risk Management Processes Appendices A. Background and Purpose",
    "new_id": 107
  },
  {
    "id": 8535,
    "question": "Which statement accurately captures the relationship between a company's RISK APPETITE and its ability to achieve BUSINESS OBJECTIVES as implied by the text, as discussed in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures – Guidance on Risk Management Integration and Disclosure?",
    "options": {
      "D": "A company’s RISK APPETITE reflects the balance it strikes in accepting risks while pursuing value, which indirectly influences its progress toward achieving BUSINESS OBJECTIVES.",
      "A": "A company's RISK APPETITE is independent of its BUSINESS OBJECTIVES, as risk management focuses solely on mitigating threats rather than supporting strategic goals.",
      "B": "A company’s RISK APPETITE directly determines its BUSINESS OBJECTIVES, since risks must be fully eliminated before any measurable steps toward strategy can be taken.",
      "C": "A company’s RISK APPETITE is designed to eliminate all uncertainties, ensuring that BUSINESS OBJECTIVES are achieved without encountering any potential negative impacts.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "48",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Guidence 2020 risk.pdf",
    "source_text": "Appendix 4: Glossary BUSINESS OBJECTIVES refer to measurable steps an organization takes to achieve its strategy.44 CLIMATE-RELATED OPPORTUNITY refers to the potential positive impacts related to climate change on a company. CLIMATE-RELATED RISK refers to the potential negative impacts of climate change on a company. GOVERNANCE refers to “the system by which [a company] is directed and controlled in the interests of shareholders and other stakeholders.”45 IMPACT refers to the extent to which a risk event might affect a company. LIKELIHOOD represents the possibility that a given event will occur. OPERATING STRUCTURE refers to the way [a company] organizes and carries out its day-to- day operations.46 RISK APPETITE refers to the types and amount of risk, on a broad level, a company is willing to accept in pursuit of value.47 RISK CATEGORIES refer to the high-level classification of specific risks. Commonly used risk categories include strategic, financial, and operational; however, most companies have additional (or other) risk categories as well.RISK INVENTORY refers to all risks that could impact a company.48 RISK MANAGEMENT refers to a set of processes that are carried out by a company to support the achievement of its objectives by addressing its risks and managing the combined potential impact of those risks. RISK TAXONOMY refers to a common system to organize risks consistently across a company and establish “parent-child” relationships between broad risk categories and specific sub-categories. RISK PROFILE refers to a composite view of the risk assumed at a particular level of a company or aspect of the business that positions management to consider the types, severity, and interdependencies of risks and how they may affect performance relative to the strategy and business objectives.49 STRATEGY refers to a company’s desired future state. A company’s strategy establishes a foundation against which it can monitor and measure its progress in reaching that desired state. 44 COSO and WBCSD, Enterprise Risk Management–Applying Enterprise Risk Management to Environmental, Social and Governance-Related Risks , October 2018. 45 A. Cadbury, Report of the Committee on the Financial Aspects of Corporate Governance , London, 1992. 46 COSO and WBCSD, Enterprise Risk Management–Applying Enterprise Risk Management to Environmental, Social and Governance-Related Risks , October 2018. 47 Ibid. 48 Ibid. 49 Ibid. 46 The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Table of Contents B. Scope and Approach C. Unique Characteristics of Climate-Related Risks D. Integration in Practice: Key Principles and Initial Steps E. Disclosure of Risk Management Processes Appendices A. Background and Purpose",
    "new_id": 108
  },
  {
    "id": 8537,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the implicit relationship between the iterative nature of the steps outlined and the role of data/tool limitations in climate-related risk integration, as discussed in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures – Guidance on Risk Management Integration and Disclosure?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The iterative process is designed to repeatedly address and refine the management of data and tool limitations as part of Step 4.",
      "B": "Data and tool limitations are only relevant during Step 3, where mapping climate risks occurs, making iteration unnecessary.",
      "C": "The iterative nature of the steps ensures that data and tool limitations are ignored until final disclosures are prepared.",
      "D": "Tool adequacy and data limitations are standalone considerations that do not interact with the iterative refinement of other steps.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "10",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Guidence 2020 risk.pdf",
    "source_text": "FPOFigure D2 Examples of Considerations Related to Integration Text in bold, blue font represents considerations described in this guidance, while text in regular font represents examples of other considerations a company may need to explore as part of integration. These examples are not exhaustive.Risk Identification and Assessment Climate -related risks in risk inventory (Step 3) Approaches updated for climate issues (Step 4) Prioritization criteria reviewed (Step 4) Materiality assessment of climate drivers Integration into policies and proceduresTools and Reporting Adequacy of tools (Step 4) Inclusion in internal risk reporting Adequacy of data and metrics Managing limitations of data and tools Climate -related risk disclosures Strategy and Risk Appetite Incorporation into risk appetite (Step 4) Use of scenario analysis Integration into strategic decisions Implementation of risk tolerances Management of breachesGovernance and Culture Board and management support (pre Step 1) Training (Step 1) Responsibilities for risk management (Step 2) Climate change -related incentives Subcommittee accountabilityFigure D22. INITIAL STEPS FOR INTEGRATING CLIMATE-RELATED RISKS INTO RISK MANAGEMENT The Task Force’s guidance on integrating climate-related risks into existing processes is organized as a set of high-level, initial steps and is intended to support companies in identifying important considerations for integration.14 In addition, the Task Force views these initial steps — summarized below — as iterative rather than strictly sequential. Step 1 – Ensure there is a general understanding across the company of climate change concepts and its potential impacts. Step 2 – Identify the specific risk management processes and elements that may need to be adjusted for the integration of climate-related risk as well as the functions and departments responsible for those processes and elements. Step 3 – Incorporate climate-related risks into the existing risk taxonomy and risk inventory used 14 COSO’s Creating and Protecting Value: Understanding and Implementing Enterprise Risk Management (thought paper) provides an approach and steps for implementing enterprise risk management that could be adapted for integrating climate-related risks into existing risk management processes. The approach and steps “are based on successful practices that companies have used to take an incremental, step-by-step approach to implementing enterprise risk management.” The thought paper provides initial steps a company could take, including forming a management working group to oversee integration and inventorying the company’s existing risk management practices. 15 COSO and WBCSD, Enterprise Risk Management–Applying Enterprise Risk Management to Environmental, Social and Governance-Related Risks , October 2018. in the company. This includes mapping climate- related risks to existing risk categories and types. Step 4 – Adapt existing risk management processes and key elements based on information gained in the previous steps and the characteristics of climate-related risk as described in Section C. Unique Characteristics of Climate-Related Risks . These steps draw on guidance developed by COSO and the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) on integrating environmental, social, and governance-related risks into risk management processes (COSO-WBCSD guidance) as well as other COSO documents and are meant to provide a starting point for companies in thinking through the integration of climate-related risks into existing risk management processes.15 There are multiple considerations related to integration a company may need to explore; and some of these are depicted in Figure D2 . Those reflected in bold, blue text are described in this sub-section. The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures 8 Table of Contents B. Scope and Approach C. Unique Characteristics of Climate-Related Risks D. Integration in Practice: Key Principles and Initial Steps E. Disclosure of Risk Management Processes Appendices A. Background and Purpose",
    "new_id": 109
  },
  {
    "id": 8538,
    "question": "Which inference can be drawn regarding the function of mapping tables like those shown for BASF and EnBW in aligning with the TCFD recommendations, as discussed in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures – Guidance on Risk Management Integration and Disclosure?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Mapping tables serve as a tool to demonstrate how companies integrate climate-related financial disclosures into their existing reporting frameworks without creating new content.",
      "A": "Mapping tables are primarily used to highlight sections of annual reports that contradict the TCFD's recommendations.",
      "C": "Mapping tables are designed to replace traditional financial disclosures with standalone TCFD-specific reports.",
      "D": "Mapping tables aim to provide an exhaustive list of all possible climate-related risks, regardless of their relevance to the company’s operations.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "35-36",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Guidence 2020 risk.pdf",
    "source_text": "Figure E16 BASF, Integrated Report 2019 BASF, BASF Report 2019 , p. 18 Note: Some content was reformatted in order to fit the page; and some content was excluded, denoted by [...]. *Some organizations provide tables and charts that map sections of their reports to the Task Force’s recommendations to direct users to where they can find their TCFD-aligned disclosures. Figure E16 shows a company’s (BASF’s) mapping of where in its integrated report a user can find information that addresses the recommended disclosures under the Risk Management recommendation.Mapping to the TCFD Recommendations 33 The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Table of Contents B. Scope and Approach C. Unique Characteristics of Climate-Related Risks D. Integration in Practice: Key Principles and Initial Steps E. Disclosure of Risk Management Processes Appendices A. Background and Purpose\n\n[Page 36]\nFigure E17 EnBW, Integrated Annual Report 2019 EnBW, Integrated Annual Report 2019 , p. 122›Task Force on Climate -related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) TCFD element ThemesSection Page reference Governance › Corporate management › Materiality analysis › Investment guidelines › Climate protection initiatives › Overall assessment by the management › Board of Management remuneration›Corporate governance ›In dialogue with our stakeholders ›The EnBW Group ›In dialogue with our stakeholders, General conditions ›Overall assessment of the economic situation of the Group ›Remuner ation repor tpage 48 page 51 f. page 76 pages 52 and 63 page 95 page 110 ff. Strategy › Robustness of business model/scenario analysis › Strategy , strategic development › Interdependencies › Materiality analysis › Green bonds › General conditions, climate protection› Business model › Strategy , goals and performance management system › Strategy , goals and performance management system › In dialogue with our stakeholders › The EnBW Group › General conditionspage 33 page 41 ff. page 46 f. page 51 f. page 74 page 63 Risk management› Integrated opportunity and risk management including opportunity and risk map › Environment goal dimension: opportunities and risks› Report on opportunities and risks › Report on opportunities and riskspage 100 ff. page 104 Performance indicators and targets› Sustainability ratings › Key performance indicators and long -term targets › Environment goal dimension: key performance indicators and other performance indicators› In dialogue with our stakeholders › Strategy , goals and performance management system › The EnBW Grouppage 53 page 44 ff. page 87 ff.Figure E17Similar to the figure above, Figure E17 shows EnBW’s mapping of the Risk Management recommendation to sections of its annual report. 34 The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Table of Contents B. Scope and Approach C. Unique Characteristics of Climate-Related Risks D. Integration in Practice: Key Principles and Initial Steps E. Disclosure of Risk Management Processes Appendices A. Background and Purpose",
    "new_id": 110
  },
  {
    "id": 8539,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why the mapping of 'Risk Management' to sections like 'Integrated opportunity and risk management' and 'Environment goal dimension: opportunities and risks' is critical for EnBW's climate-related financial disclosures, as discussed in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures – Guidance on Risk Management Integration and Disclosure?",
    "options": {
      "C": "It demonstrates how EnBW systematically addresses both financial and environmental risks in alignment with TCFD recommendations.",
      "A": "It ensures that all climate-related risks are categorized under governance rather than strategy.",
      "B": "It highlights the integration of financial and non-financial risks without prioritizing climate-specific concerns.",
      "D": "It focuses exclusively on remuneration reports as the primary mechanism for managing climate risks.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "36",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Guidence 2020 risk.pdf",
    "source_text": "Figure E17 EnBW, Integrated Annual Report 2019 EnBW, Integrated Annual Report 2019 , p. 122›Task Force on Climate -related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) TCFD element ThemesSection Page reference Governance › Corporate management › Materiality analysis › Investment guidelines › Climate protection initiatives › Overall assessment by the management › Board of Management remuneration›Corporate governance ›In dialogue with our stakeholders ›The EnBW Group ›In dialogue with our stakeholders, General conditions ›Overall assessment of the economic situation of the Group ›Remuner ation repor tpage 48 page 51 f. page 76 pages 52 and 63 page 95 page 110 ff. Strategy › Robustness of business model/scenario analysis › Strategy , strategic development › Interdependencies › Materiality analysis › Green bonds › General conditions, climate protection› Business model › Strategy , goals and performance management system › Strategy , goals and performance management system › In dialogue with our stakeholders › The EnBW Group › General conditionspage 33 page 41 ff. page 46 f. page 51 f. page 74 page 63 Risk management› Integrated opportunity and risk management including opportunity and risk map › Environment goal dimension: opportunities and risks› Report on opportunities and risks › Report on opportunities and riskspage 100 ff. page 104 Performance indicators and targets› Sustainability ratings › Key performance indicators and long -term targets › Environment goal dimension: key performance indicators and other performance indicators› In dialogue with our stakeholders › Strategy , goals and performance management system › The EnBW Grouppage 53 page 44 ff. page 87 ff.Figure E17Similar to the figure above, Figure E17 shows EnBW’s mapping of the Risk Management recommendation to sections of its annual report. 34 The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Table of Contents B. Scope and Approach C. Unique Characteristics of Climate-Related Risks D. Integration in Practice: Key Principles and Initial Steps E. Disclosure of Risk Management Processes Appendices A. Background and Purpose",
    "new_id": 111
  },
  {
    "id": 8540,
    "question": "Which principle underscores the necessity for cross-functional collaboration to effectively address the broad implications of climate-related risks, as inferred from the interplay between the highlighted key takeaways in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures – Guidance on Risk Management Integration and Disclosure?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Interconnections, as it explicitly involves all relevant functions, departments, and experts in managing climate-related risks.",
      "A": "Temporal Orientation, as it mandates extending traditional planning horizons to include short-, medium-, and long-term analyses.",
      "B": "Proportionality, as it requires alignment of climate-related risks with the company’s overall risk profile and strategy.",
      "C": "Consistency, as it ensures uniform application of methodologies across the company’s risk management processes.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "20",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Guidence 2020 risk.pdf",
    "source_text": "Table D5 Key Takeaways Common Understanding. Before beginning efforts to integrate climate-related risks into existing processes, it is useful to ensure there is a basic level of understanding across the company of climate change concepts and its potential impacts. Interconnections. Integrating climate-related risks into existing risk management requires analysis and collaboration across the company. The principle of interconnections means all relevant functions, departments, and experts are involved in the integration of climate-related risks into the company’s risk management processes and in the ongoing management of climate-related risks. Temporal Orientation. Climate-related physical and transition risks should be analyzed across short-, medium-, and long-term time frames for operational and strategic planning, which may require extending beyond traditional planning horizons. Proportionality. The integration of climate-related risks into existing risk management processes should be proportionate in the context of the company’s other risks, the materiality of its exposure to climate-related risks, and the implications for the company’s strategy. Consistency. The methodology used to integrate climate-related risks should be used consistently within a company’s risk management processes to support clarity on analysis of developments and drivers of change over time.3. KEY TAKEAWAYS As described in the sub-sections above, integrating climate-related risks into existing risk management processes involves building a shared understanding of climate change concepts and risks across the company and adapting existing processes to account for the unique characteristics of climate-related risks. Providing an exhaustive set of steps and considerations for ensuring climate-related risks are appropriately incorporated into existing processes is beyond the scope of this guidance. Instead, this guidance is intended to help companies begin thinking about and taking initial steps toward integration. In Table D5 , the Task Force highlights the key takeaways related to integrating climate-related risks into existing processes. Notably, the key principles described at the beginning of this section are a core part of the key takeaways. The Task Force views the key principles as the basis upon which companies can confirm they have effectively integrated climate-related risks. As highlighted in this section, identifying, assessing, and managing climate-related risks requires involvement from various functions and departments within a company given the broad implications of climate change. The Task Force believes the considerations involved in adapting existing risk management processes to address climate-related risks can serve as a catalyst to evolve a company’s risk management processes in general and better deal with a range of current and emerging risks. The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures 18 Table of Contents B. Scope and Approach C. Unique Characteristics of Climate-Related Risks D. Integration in Practice: Key Principles and Initial Steps E. Disclosure of Risk Management Processes Appendices A. Background and Purpose",
    "new_id": 112
  },
  {
    "id": 8541,
    "question": "Which combination of approaches would best address the interconnected challenges posed by both policy and legal risks as well as market risks, according to the implicit relationships outlined in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures – Guidance on Risk Management Integration and Disclosure?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Cross-functional collaboration to assess regulatory impacts alongside engagement with customers and suppliers to analyze supply-demand trends.",
      "B": "Scenario analysis focused on policy environment combined with cost-benefit analysis of key technologies.",
      "C": "Tracking of regulatory developments paired with mapping dependencies for enabling conditions like investment and policy.",
      "D": "Analysis of organizational capabilities related to technology coupled with evaluation of employee satisfaction levels.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "15",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Guidence 2020 risk.pdf",
    "source_text": "Table D2 Transition Risks and Identification and Assessment Approaches Type Characteristics Approaches Possible Metrics Policy and Legal• Differences in local, regional, and global requirements and incentives • Novel and uncertain effects of policy and legal actions across jurisdictions • Complex relationships connecting different regulatory developments across different actors and departments• Tracking of regulatory developments • Assessment of impact of regulation, including implications across operations, supply chains, and jurisdictions • Cross-functional, multidisciplinary collaboration to identify risks and implications • Scenario analysis focused on policy environment, sequence, timing, and relationships• Financial impact of carbon pricing and emission trading • Asset write-off, asset impairment, and retirement cost • Number of nodes of influence connecting key policy developments • Number of relevant policy measures and development timelines • Number of lawsuits brought forwardTechnology• Uncertain role of different solutions and technologies over time, for different uses, and in different contexts • Novel technologies, capabilities, and applications • Complex relationships among market conditions, economics, and policy environment• Technology assessment and forecasting • Maturity and readiness of technology • Cost-benefit analysis associated with key technologies • Analysis of organizational skills, knowledge, and capabilities associated with key technologies • Mapping of dependencies and enabling conditions (e.g., investment, policy) • Scenario analysis focused on technological development, use, deployment, and impact• Cost of supply, rate of return, return on investment, and payback periods for different technologies • Product development effectiveness and cost • Time to market and research and development success rate • Capabilities across peers • Number of and effectiveness of collaborative research relationships • Number of patentsMarket• Novel dynamics and signals from supply-demand relationships affecting raw materials, products, and services • Nonlinear relationships affecting demand and costs • Complex relationships among policy, consumers, and societal context• Analysis of trends in supply and demand for products and services • Comparison of company’s position and strategy to competition • Engagement with customers and suppliers • Identification of merger and acquisition targets• Market size • Growth potential • Commodity, product, and service pricing • Market coverage and share index • Opportunity and threat index • Product portfolio index • Revenue mix and sourcesReputation• Magnitude of severity and scope of impact can rapidly change, often enabled by the internet and social media • Novel nature of responses and reactions as societal awareness and understanding shifts • Interconnected issues driving impacts and actions• Use of social media, customer feedback, and market research to track customer sentiment and changing preferences • Evaluation of employee engagement and satisfaction • Identification of relationships between events and news and business and financial impacts• Share price change • Competitors’ market positions • Employee satisfaction level • Customer loyalty and retention level (e.g., net promoter score) • Changes in customer satisfaction • Media and social media sentiment • Number of new customers • Independent rankings and ratings The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures 13 Table of Contents B. Scope and Approach C. Unique Characteristics of Climate-Related Risks D. Integration in Practice: Key Principles and Initial Steps E. Disclosure of Risk Management Processes Appendices A. Background and Purpose",
    "new_id": 113
  },
  {
    "id": 8542,
    "question": "Which statement best captures the reason why existing studies on GDP loss due to climate change might underestimate the risks, according to the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures – Guidance on Risk Management Integration and Disclosure?",
    "options": {
      "B": "They assume that socioeconomic factors such as population and migration remain constant even at high warming levels.",
      "A": "They rely solely on historical data, which cannot account for unprecedented climate events.",
      "C": "They fail to consider the interconnectedness of socioeconomic and financial systems in their models.",
      "D": "They overemphasize the role of tipping points, leading to exaggerated damage estimates.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "7",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Guidence 2020 risk.pdf",
    "source_text": "9 According to the CRO Forum’s report (p. 14), “global GDP could be 25-40% lower by 2100 in a >3°C scenario versus baseline.” These estimates are more severe than many other studies; however, the Network for Greening the Financial System (NGFS) — a group of 72 central banks and supervisors — has indicated existing studies likely underestimate the risks associated with increased warming levels. In Climate Scenarios for Central Banks and Supervisors , the NGFS describes damage estimates associated with 3°C of warming from several studies, which range from a loss of 2% of global GDP to a loss of 25%. The NGFS indicates estimates vary for many reasons, such as the modeling approach used and whether impacts are considered to directly affect growth rate. It also highlights few studies fully capture the potential risks of tipping points and most assume socioeconomic factors such as population, migration, and conflict remain constant even at high levels of warming. 10 Lenton, T. M., et.al., “ Climate Tipping Points–Too Risky to Bet Against ,” Nature, Vol. 575, 2019.Table C1 Characteristics of Climate-Related Risks Different effects based on geography and activitiesThe effects of climate change and climate-related risks occur on local, regional, and global scales with different implications for different businesses, products and services, markets, operations, and value chains, among others. Longer time horizons and long-lived effectsSome climate-related risks exist and play out over time horizons that stretch beyond traditional business planning and investment cycles . These risks and related impacts may occur as a result of decades-long changes in driving forces (e.g., greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere) leading to climate-related physical or transition risk changes over the short, medium, and long term. Novel and uncertain natureMany of the effects of climate change have no precedent, limiting the ability to apply statistical and trend analysis based on historical data. Climate change is a dynamic and uncertain phenomenon and possible mitigation responses are also complex, with many unknowns such as the development and deployment of critical technologies and adaptation strategies as well as changing market and consumer behaviors. Changing magnitude and nonlinear dynamicsClimate-related risks may manifest at different scales over time, with increasing severity and scope of impacts. Climate systems may exhibit thresholds and tipping points that result in large, long-term, abrupt, and possibly irreversible changes .10 Understanding the sensitivities of tipping points in the physical climate system, as well as in ecosystems and society, is essential for understanding climate-related risks. Complex relationships and systemic effectsRisks associated with climate change are interconnected across socioeconomic and financial systems . Such interconnected risks are often characterized by knock-on effects and systemic effects, requiring a multidimensional perspective to assess the short-, medium-, and long-term implications for a company.Based on economic models that have been adapted to take a broader view of climate-related risk — such as allowing for damage from tipping points, extreme events, and socio-political consequences of food crises, migration, and conflict — global GDP (gross domestic product) could be significantly lower by 2100, especially at higher levels of warming.9 In addition to climate-related physical risks, companies also need to consider risks associated with society’s responses to climate change and the transition to a lower-carbon economy (climate-related transition risks), which include policy changes, reputational impacts, and shifts in market preferences and technology. For example, the development and use of emerging technologies such as renewable energy and battery storage will affect the competitiveness of certain companies, their production and distribution costs, and ultimately the demand for their products and services from end users. Given the wide-ranging implications of climate change in the short term and over the longer term, assessing the associated risks involves dealing with a set of complex variables and connections, many of which operate at different temporal and spatial scales. A critical aspect of integrating climate-related risks into existing processes involves taking into account the unique characteristics of these risks — described in Table C1 — that might not be fully con",
    "new_id": 114
  },
  {
    "id": 8835,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the implications of the disclosure requirements for energy consumption in the Non-Alcoholic Beverages industry, as outlined in the Non-Alcoholic Beverages – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The exclusion of fleet vehicle fuel from total energy consumption ensures that only energy directly consumed within facilities is disclosed, though this exclusion does not apply to biofuels used on-site.",
      "A": "Entities must consistently apply conversion factors like HHVs to all fuels, but they are permitted to exclude self-generated renewable energy from total energy consumption calculations.",
      "B": "Entities can meet their disclosure obligations without reporting the percentage of grid electricity if they exclusively use renewable energy sources for their operations.",
      "D": "Calculating the percentage of renewable energy requires including externally purchased renewable electricity and self-generated renewable energy, but excludes any biofuel usage due to its non-renewable classification.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "9-10",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Non-Alcoholic Beverages.pdf",
    "source_text": "3 The scope of disclosure includes fuel consumed by vehicles owned or operated by the entity. 4 The scope of disclosure excludes fuel consumed in the transportation of the entity ’s products by third parties. 5In calculating energy consumption from fuels and biofuels, the entity shall use higher heating values (HHV), also known as gross calorific values (GCV), which are measured directly or taken from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 6The entity shall apply conversion factors consistently for all data reported under this disclosure, such as the use of HHVs for fuel usage (including biofuels). SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |NON-ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES |9\n\n[Page 10]\nEnergy Management Topic Summary Entities in the Non-Alcoholic Beverages industry use significant energy to operate manufacturing facilities, distribution centres and warehouses. Entities in the industry generally buy electricity from the grid. Energy generation contributes to environmental impacts, including climate change and pollution, which have the potential to indirectly, yet materially, affect the operations of non-alcoholic beverages entities. Entities can reduce energy consumption and associated greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from their operations by implementing more efficient technologies and processes. Decisions regarding alternative fuels use, renewable energy and on-site generation of electricity, versus purchasing from the grid, can be important in influencing both the costs and reliability of the energy supply. Metrics FB-NB-130a.1. (1) Operational energy consumed, (2) percentage grid electricity and (3) percentage renewable 1The entity shall disclose (1) the total amount of energy it consumed (excluding fleet vehicles) as an aggregate figure, in gigajoules (GJ). 1.1 The scope of energy consumption excludes fuel consumed by fleet vehicles, but includes energy from all other sources, including energy purchased from external sources and energy produced by the organisation itself (self-generated). For example, purchased electricity, and heating, cooling and steam energy are all included within the scope of energy consumption. 1.2 The scope of energy consumption includes only energy directly consumed by the entity during the reporting period. 1.3 In calculating energy consumption from fuels and biofuels, the entity shall use higher heating values (HHV), also known as gross calorific values (GCV), which are measured directly or taken from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2The entity shall disclose (2) the percentage of energy it consumed (excluding fleet vehicles) that was supplied from grid electricity. 2.1 The percentage shall be calculated as purchased grid electricity consumption divided by total energy consumption. 3The entity shall disclose (3) the percentage of energy it consumed (excluding fleet vehicles) that was renewable energy. 3.1 Renewable energy is defined as energy from sources that are replenished at a rate greater than or equal to their rate of depletion, such as geothermal, wind, solar, hydro and biomass. 3.2 The percentage shall be calculated as renewable energy consumption divided by total energy consumption. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |NON-ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES |10",
    "new_id": 115
  },
  {
    "id": 8880,
    "question": "Which of the following is true regarding the calculation and reporting of energy consumption by entities in the Non-Alcoholic Beverages industry, as outlined in the Non-Alcoholic Beverages – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Energy consumption calculations exclude fleet vehicles but include all other sources of energy, with a consistent application of higher heating values (HHV) for fuels and biofuels.",
      "A": "Entities must report fleet vehicle fuel consumption as part of their total energy consumed, using conversion factors derived from higher heating values (HHV).",
      "B": "The percentage of renewable energy consumed is calculated based on the total energy consumption, including fleet vehicles, and excludes self-generated energy.",
      "C": "Purchased grid electricity is excluded from the total energy consumption when calculating the percentage of renewable energy utilized.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "9-10",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Non-Alcoholic Beverages.pdf",
    "source_text": "3 The scope of disclosure includes fuel consumed by vehicles owned or operated by the entity. 4 The scope of disclosure excludes fuel consumed in the transportation of the entity ’s products by third parties. 5In calculating energy consumption from fuels and biofuels, the entity shall use higher heating values (HHV), also known as gross calorific values (GCV), which are measured directly or taken from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 6The entity shall apply conversion factors consistently for all data reported under this disclosure, such as the use of HHVs for fuel usage (including biofuels). SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |NON-ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES |9\n\n[Page 10]\nEnergy Management Topic Summary Entities in the Non-Alcoholic Beverages industry use significant energy to operate manufacturing facilities, distribution centres and warehouses. Entities in the industry generally buy electricity from the grid. Energy generation contributes to environmental impacts, including climate change and pollution, which have the potential to indirectly, yet materially, affect the operations of non-alcoholic beverages entities. Entities can reduce energy consumption and associated greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from their operations by implementing more efficient technologies and processes. Decisions regarding alternative fuels use, renewable energy and on-site generation of electricity, versus purchasing from the grid, can be important in influencing both the costs and reliability of the energy supply. Metrics FB-NB-130a.1. (1) Operational energy consumed, (2) percentage grid electricity and (3) percentage renewable 1The entity shall disclose (1) the total amount of energy it consumed (excluding fleet vehicles) as an aggregate figure, in gigajoules (GJ). 1.1 The scope of energy consumption excludes fuel consumed by fleet vehicles, but includes energy from all other sources, including energy purchased from external sources and energy produced by the organisation itself (self-generated). For example, purchased electricity, and heating, cooling and steam energy are all included within the scope of energy consumption. 1.2 The scope of energy consumption includes only energy directly consumed by the entity during the reporting period. 1.3 In calculating energy consumption from fuels and biofuels, the entity shall use higher heating values (HHV), also known as gross calorific values (GCV), which are measured directly or taken from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2The entity shall disclose (2) the percentage of energy it consumed (excluding fleet vehicles) that was supplied from grid electricity. 2.1 The percentage shall be calculated as purchased grid electricity consumption divided by total energy consumption. 3The entity shall disclose (3) the percentage of energy it consumed (excluding fleet vehicles) that was renewable energy. 3.1 Renewable energy is defined as energy from sources that are replenished at a rate greater than or equal to their rate of depletion, such as geothermal, wind, solar, hydro and biomass. 3.2 The percentage shall be calculated as renewable energy consumption divided by total energy consumption. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |NON-ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES |10",
    "new_id": 116
  },
  {
    "id": 8881,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the implications of the disclosure requirements for renewable fuel, as described in the Non-Alcoholic Beverages – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Entities are required to use higher heating values (HHV) consistently for all fuel types, including biofuels, when calculating energy consumption.",
      "B": "Entities must disclose the total energy consumed by third-party transportation as part of their Scope 1 emissions.",
      "C": "The calculation of renewable fuel percentage allows for the inclusion of fuels that merely reduce fossil fuel usage without achieving net GHG reductions.",
      "D": "The standard mandates entities to report fuel purchases based on design parameters rather than actual fuel consumed.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "8-9",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Non-Alcoholic Beverages.pdf",
    "source_text": "Fleet Fuel Management Topic Summary Non-alcoholic beverages entities generate direct Scope 1 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from large vehicle fleets used for distribution and from manufacturing facilities. Specifically, refrigeration used in manufacturing facilities and in transport vehicles contributes a significant proportion of overall industry emissions. Efficiencies gained in fuel use can reduce costs, mitigate exposure to fossil fuel price volatility and limit emissions from production, storage and transportation of products. Long-term operational savings and regulatory risk mitigation may outweigh short-term capital expenditures in fuel efficient fleets and more energy-efficient technologies. Metrics FB-NB-110a.1. Fleet fuel consumed, percentage renewable 1The entity shall disclose the total amount of fuel consumed by its fleet vehicles as an aggregate figure, in gigajoules (GJ). 1.1 The calculation methodology for fuel consumed shall be based on actual fuel consumed as opposed to design parameters. 1.2 Acceptable calculation methodologies for fuel consumed may include methodologies based on: 1.2.1 Adding fuel purchases made during the reporting period to beginning inventory at the start of the reporting period, less any fuel inventory at the end of the reporting period; 1.2.2 Tracking fuel consumed by vehicles; and 1.2.3 Tracking fuel expenses. 2The entity shall disclose the percentage of the total amount of fuel consumed by its fleet vehicles that is renewable fuel. 2.1 Renewable fuel is generally defined as fuel that meets all of these requirements: 2.1.1 Produced from renewable biomass; 2.1.2 Used to replace or reduce the quantity of fossil fuel present in a transportation fuel, heating oil or jet fuel; and 2.1.3 Achieved net greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction on a life cycle basis. 2.2 The entity shall disclose the Standard or regulation used to determine if a fuel is renewable. 2.3 The percentage shall be calculated as the amount of renewable fuel consumed by the entity ’s fleet vehicles (in GJ) divided by the total amount of fuel consumed by the entity ’s fleet vehicles (in GJ). SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |NON-ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES |8\n\n[Page 9]\n3 The scope of disclosure includes fuel consumed by vehicles owned or operated by the entity. 4 The scope of disclosure excludes fuel consumed in the transportation of the entity ’s products by third parties. 5In calculating energy consumption from fuels and biofuels, the entity shall use higher heating values (HHV), also known as gross calorific values (GCV), which are measured directly or taken from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 6The entity shall apply conversion factors consistently for all data reported under this disclosure, such as the use of HHVs for fuel usage (including biofuels). SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |NON-ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES |9",
    "new_id": 117
  },
  {
    "id": 9701,
    "question": "Which scenario would most directly challenge an entity's ability to comply with the metric requirements for energy consumption reporting, as outlined in the E-commerce – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "An entity reports energy consumption based on lower heating values (LHV) instead of higher heating values (HHV), despite calculating all other metrics correctly.",
      "A": "An entity exclusively uses grid electricity but lacks access to its total energy consumption data due to a recent change in utility providers.",
      "C": "An entity outsources its entire data processing capacity to a cloud service provider and does not track its renewable energy percentage separately from the provider’s aggregate data.",
      "D": "An entity reduces its water cooling usage in favor of chillers, thereby increasing energy consumption but improving local water resource management.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "7-8",
    "ref_doc": "SASB E-Commerce.pdf",
    "source_text": "...continued TOPIC METRIC CATEGORYUNIT OF MEASURECODE Product Packaging & DistributionTotal greenhouse gas (GHG) footprint of product shipmentsQuantitativeMetric tonnes (t) CO₂-eCG-EC-410a.1 Discussion of strategies to reduce the environmental impact of product deliveryDiscussion and Analysisn/a CG-EC-410a.2 Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORYUNIT OF MEASURECODE Entity-defined measure of user activity5Quantitative Number CG-EC-000.A Data processing capacity, percentage outsourced6Quantitative See note CG-EC-000.B Number of shipments Quantitative Number CG-EC-000.C 5Note to CG-EC-000.A - The entity shall define and disclose a basic measure of user activity suitable for its business activities. This measure may be sales transactions, purchase transactions, number of searches, monthly active users, page views or unique URLs. 6Note to CG-EC-000.B – Data processing capacity shall be reported in units of measure typically tracked by the entity or used as the basis for contracting its IT services needs, such as million service units (MSUs), million instructions per second (MIPS), mega floating-point operations per second (MFLOPS), compute cycles or other units of measure. Alternatively, the entity may disclose owned and outsourced data processing needs in other units of measure, such as rack space or data centre square footage. The percentage outsourced shall include co-location facilities and cloud services (for example, platform as a service or infrastructure as a service). SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |E-COMMERCE |7\n\n[Page 8]\nHardware Infrastructure Energy & Water Management Topic Summary The E-Commerce industry uses a large part of the energy it consumes to power critical hardware and IT infrastructure in data centres. Data centres must be powered continuously, and disruptions to the energy supply can have a material impact on operations, depending on the disruption magnitude and timing. Entities also face a trade-off between energy and water consumption for their data centre cooling needs. Cooling data centres with water instead of chillers improves energy efficiency, but this method can result in dependence on potentially scarce local water resources. Entities that effectively manage this issue may benefit from cost savings and minimise reputational risks, because concerns over energy and water use are growing. Metrics CG-EC-130a.1. (1) Total energy consumed, (2) percentage grid electricity and (3) percentage renewable 1 The entity shall disclose (1) the total amount of energy it consumed as an aggregate figure, in gigajoules (GJ). 1.1 The scope of energy consumption includes energy from all sources, including energy purchased from external sources and energy produced by the entity itself (self-generated). For example, direct fuel usage, purchased electricity, and heating, cooling and steam energy are all included within the scope of energy consumption. 1.2 The scope of energy consumption includes only energy directly consumed by the entity during the reporting period. 1.3 In calculating energy consumption from fuels and biofuels, the entity shall use higher heating values (HHV), also known as gross calorific values (GCV), which are measured directly or taken from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2The entity shall disclose (2) the percentage of energy it consumed that was supplied from grid electricity. 2.1 The percentage shall be calculated as purchased grid electricity consumption divided by total energy consumption. 3 The entity shall disclose (3) the percentage of energy it consumed that was renewable energy. 3.1 Renewable energy is defined as energy from sources that are replenished at a rate greater than or equal to their rate of depletion, such as geothermal, wind, solar, hydro and biomass. 3.2 The percentage shall be calculated as renewable energy consumption divided by total energy consumption. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |E-COMMERCE |8",
    "new_id": 118
  },
  {
    "id": 9704,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the nuanced relationship between materiality judgments and the role of SASB Standards, as described in the E-commerce – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "While SASB Standards identify relevant disclosure topics and metrics, entities retain the responsibility for determining which disclosures are material to their unique circumstances.",
      "A": "Materiality judgments are solely determined by investors, with SASB Standards providing mandatory reporting requirements for all industries.",
      "B": "SASB Standards dictate the specific metrics every company must report, leaving no room for entity-specific determinations of materiality.",
      "D": "Entities are required to adopt all disclosure topics and metrics from multiple SICS® industries if they operate across more than one sector.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "5",
    "ref_doc": "SASB E-Commerce.pdf",
    "source_text": "Use of the Standards SASB Standards are intended to aid entities in disclosing information about sustainability-related risks and opportunities that could reasonably be expected to affect the entity ’s cash flows, its access to finance or cost of capital over the short, medium or long term. An entity determines which Industry Standard(s) and which disclosure topics are relevant to its business, and which associated metrics to report. In general, an entity should use the SASB Standard specific to its primary industry as identified in SICS® . However, companies with substantial business in multiple SICS® industries should refer to and consider the applicability of the disclosure topics and associated metrics in additional SASB Standards. The disclosure topics and associated metrics contained in this Standard have been identified as those that are likely to be useful to investors. However, the responsibility for making materiality judgements and determinations rests with the reporting entity. Industry Description E-Commerce industry entities provide an online marketplace for other entities or individuals to sell their goods and services, as well as retailers and wholesalers that provide an exclusively web-based platform for consumers to buy goods and services. Entities in this industry sell to consumers as well as to other businesses. Because of the accessibility of e-commerce sites, the industry is a global marketplace for buyers and sellers. Note: This industry scope applies only to ‘pure-play ’ e-commerce operations and does not address the manufacturing or brick-and-mortar retail operations of entities. Many consumer goods manufacturers and retailers have incorporated or are in the process of incorporating an e-commerce component to their business. Separate standards exist for the Multiline and Specialty Retailers & Distributors (CG-MR); Apparel, Accessories & Footwear (CG-AA); and Toys & Sporting Goods (CG-TS) industries. Depending on the specific activities and operations of entities in these industries, disclosure topics and metrics associated with the E-Commerce industry also may be relevant. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |E-COMMERCE |5",
    "new_id": 119
  },
  {
    "id": 9705,
    "question": "Which of the following represents a valid logical inference about the interplay between energy efficiency and water consumption in data centre cooling methods, as described in the E-commerce – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "While water-based cooling improves energy efficiency, it may increase dependency on potentially scarce local water resources, creating a trade-off.",
      "A": "Entities using water-based cooling for data centres are required to disclose their total water consumption under CG-EC-130a.1.",
      "B": "Improving energy efficiency through water-based cooling systems eliminates reputational risks associated with resource use.",
      "C": "The use of chillers instead of water-based cooling is recommended to minimize both energy and water consumption simultaneously.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "7-8",
    "ref_doc": "SASB E-Commerce.pdf",
    "source_text": "...continued TOPIC METRIC CATEGORYUNIT OF MEASURECODE Product Packaging & DistributionTotal greenhouse gas (GHG) footprint of product shipmentsQuantitativeMetric tonnes (t) CO₂-eCG-EC-410a.1 Discussion of strategies to reduce the environmental impact of product deliveryDiscussion and Analysisn/a CG-EC-410a.2 Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORYUNIT OF MEASURECODE Entity-defined measure of user activity5Quantitative Number CG-EC-000.A Data processing capacity, percentage outsourced6Quantitative See note CG-EC-000.B Number of shipments Quantitative Number CG-EC-000.C 5Note to CG-EC-000.A - The entity shall define and disclose a basic measure of user activity suitable for its business activities. This measure may be sales transactions, purchase transactions, number of searches, monthly active users, page views or unique URLs. 6Note to CG-EC-000.B – Data processing capacity shall be reported in units of measure typically tracked by the entity or used as the basis for contracting its IT services needs, such as million service units (MSUs), million instructions per second (MIPS), mega floating-point operations per second (MFLOPS), compute cycles or other units of measure. Alternatively, the entity may disclose owned and outsourced data processing needs in other units of measure, such as rack space or data centre square footage. The percentage outsourced shall include co-location facilities and cloud services (for example, platform as a service or infrastructure as a service). SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |E-COMMERCE |7\n\n[Page 8]\nHardware Infrastructure Energy & Water Management Topic Summary The E-Commerce industry uses a large part of the energy it consumes to power critical hardware and IT infrastructure in data centres. Data centres must be powered continuously, and disruptions to the energy supply can have a material impact on operations, depending on the disruption magnitude and timing. Entities also face a trade-off between energy and water consumption for their data centre cooling needs. Cooling data centres with water instead of chillers improves energy efficiency, but this method can result in dependence on potentially scarce local water resources. Entities that effectively manage this issue may benefit from cost savings and minimise reputational risks, because concerns over energy and water use are growing. Metrics CG-EC-130a.1. (1) Total energy consumed, (2) percentage grid electricity and (3) percentage renewable 1 The entity shall disclose (1) the total amount of energy it consumed as an aggregate figure, in gigajoules (GJ). 1.1 The scope of energy consumption includes energy from all sources, including energy purchased from external sources and energy produced by the entity itself (self-generated). For example, direct fuel usage, purchased electricity, and heating, cooling and steam energy are all included within the scope of energy consumption. 1.2 The scope of energy consumption includes only energy directly consumed by the entity during the reporting period. 1.3 In calculating energy consumption from fuels and biofuels, the entity shall use higher heating values (HHV), also known as gross calorific values (GCV), which are measured directly or taken from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2The entity shall disclose (2) the percentage of energy it consumed that was supplied from grid electricity. 2.1 The percentage shall be calculated as purchased grid electricity consumption divided by total energy consumption. 3 The entity shall disclose (3) the percentage of energy it consumed that was renewable energy. 3.1 Renewable energy is defined as energy from sources that are replenished at a rate greater than or equal to their rate of depletion, such as geothermal, wind, solar, hydro and biomass. 3.2 The percentage shall be calculated as renewable energy consumption divided by total energy consumption. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |E-COMMERCE |8",
    "new_id": 120
  },
  {
    "id": 11108,
    "question": "Which statement accurately captures the relationship between packaging sustainability metrics and their impact on an entity's operational or regulatory positioning, as described in the Household & Personal Products – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Effectively managing packaging sustainability through lightweight design, recycled content, and recyclability may help entities align with consumer preferences and reduce regulatory risks related to producer responsibility.",
      "B": "Entities optimizing only the total weight of packaging are likely to fully mitigate risks associated with environmental externalities and regulatory pressures.",
      "C": "The use of recycled or renewable materials in packaging directly correlates to reduced transportation costs but has no significant effect on consumer demand or regulatory compliance.",
      "D": "Primary and tertiary packaging exclusions ensure that entities can focus exclusively on secondary packaging as the sole determinant of sustainability performance.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "14",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Household & Personal Products.pdf",
    "source_text": "Packaging Lifecycle Management Topic Summary The Household & Personal Products industry uses a large quantity of materials for product packaging, which often constitutes a significant portion of entities ’ expenses. Packaging design, particularly packaging weight, has direct consequences for transportation expenses, which can be significant. The industry also faces pressure from both consumers and large retail outlets to manage the negative environmental externalities associated with packaging because of material extraction and waste. The sustainability performance of packaging depends largely on the type, use and ultimate disposal of materials. However, entities that effectively manage the sustainability characteristics of their product packaging —including developing light-weight, using recycled content and recyclable materials and adopting sustainably sourced materials —may be positioned better to capture shifting consumer demand and avoid (or mitigate) the effects of regulation related to extended producer responsibility. By managing the sustainability of product packaging, entities also potentially can reduce input and transportation costs. Metrics CG-HP-410a.1. (1) Total weight of packaging, (2) percentage made from recycled or renewable materials, and (3) percentage that is recyclable, reusable or compostable 1The entity shall disclose (1) the total weight of packaging purchased by the entity in metric tonnes. 1.1 The scope of the disclosure includes primary packaging and secondary packaging. 1.1.1 Primary packaging is defined as the packaging designed to come into direct contact with the product. 1.1.2 Secondary packaging is defined as the packaging designed to contain one or more primary packages together with any protective materials, if required. 1.1.3 The scope excludes tertiary packaging designed to contain one or more articles or packages, or bulk material, for the purposes of transport, handling or distribution. Tertiary packaging is also known as ‘distribution ’ or ‘transport ’ packaging. 2The entity shall disclose (2) the percentage of packaging, by weight, made from recycled or renewable materials. 2.1 Recycled content is defined, consistent with definitions in ISO 14021, Environmental labels and declarations —Self-declared environmental claims (Type II environmental labelling) , as the proportion, by mass, of recycled or recovered material in a product or packaging, for which only pre-consumer and post- consumer materials shall be considered as recycled content. 2.1.1 Recycled material is defined as material reprocessed from recovered (or reclaimed) material through a manufacturing process and made into a final product or a component to be integrated into a product. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |HOUSEHOLD & PERSONAL PRODUCTS |14",
    "new_id": 121
  },
  {
    "id": 11790,
    "question": "Which tool or framework explicitly integrates both mitigation and adaptation benefits while also requiring the evaluation of potential barriers to implementation as outlined in 2025 CDP-ICLEI Track and States & Regions Questionnaire and Guidance?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Action Selection and Prioritisation Tool (ASAP)",
      "A": "Climate Policy Database",
      "C": "Adaptation and Mitigation Integration Assessment Tool (AMIA)",
      "D": "City Action for Urban Sustainability (CURB)",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "355-356",
    "ref_doc": "CDP-ICLEI 2025.pdf",
    "source_text": "354 Additional Information Resources Name Description Institution Policy and Action Standard - An Accounting and Reporting Standard for Estimating the Greenhouse Gas Effects of Policies and Actions The GHG Protocol Policy and Action Standard provides a standardized approach for estimating and reporting the change in GHG emissions and removals resulting from policies and actions. WRI GHG Protocol for Project Accounting The Project Protocol provides specific principles, concepts, and methods for quantifying and reporting GHG reductions—i.e., the decreases in GHG emissions, or increases in removals and/or storage—from climate change mitigation projects (GHG projects). GHG Protocol, WBCSD, WRI Co-Benefits Calculator for Transport Estimates co-benefits of transportation projects in Asia. Includes travel-time savings, injury prevention, and economic savings. Institute for Global Environmental Strategies ClimateView Estimates emissions impacts of city-level climate-mitigation actions. Illustrates these impacts in terms of a city’s emissions goals. ClimateView Climate Policy Database Filterable database of existing climate policies for a variety of sectors and policy types. New Climate Institute Adaptation and Mitigation Integration Assessment Tool (AMIA) Helps users identify mitigation-relevant actions that also have climate-adaptation benefits. C40 Cities\n\n[Page 356]\n355 Action Selection and Prioritisation Tool (ASAP) Synthesizes information about a government’s goals, impacts and co-benefits of possible actions, and potential barriers to implementation to help users prioritize and select major climate change mitigation actions. C40 Cities City Action for Urban Sustainability (CURB) CURB, Climate Action for Urban Sustainability, is an interactive scenario planning tool that helps cities take action on climate change. GcoM, C40 Cities, World Bank Group, AECOM Consulting SEEG Soluções A tool for Brazilian cities developed by SEEG to support the identification of climate solutions and their impact on emissions. SEEG (9.3) Describe any planned climate-related projects within your jurisdiction for which you hope to attract financing. Questionnaire • Cities: Pathway 1, 2 and 3 • States and Regions Change From Last Year No change Connection to other frameworks • [Cities only] NetZeroCities – Mission Cities • Race to Resilience",
    "new_id": 122
  },
  {
    "id": 11863,
    "question": "Which scenario best exemplifies the distinction between 'Extremely serious' and 'Serious' impacts as described in 2025 CDP-ICLEI Track and States & Regions Questionnaire and Guidance?",
    "options": {
      "C": "An impact that extends slightly beyond the disturbed area, lasts for a few years, and partially recovers with targeted restoration efforts.",
      "A": "An impact that is localized, short-lived, and fully reversible through immediate intervention.",
      "B": "An impact that affects a large area, persists for decades, and causes irreversible changes to biodiversity.",
      "D": "An impact that results in minor, temporary disruptions but requires no specific environmental controls.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "421",
    "ref_doc": "CDP-ICLEI 2025.pdf",
    "source_text": "420 o Unknown – If the information as to when your region will experience the identified effect of deforestation and/or forest degradation is not available. • Impact seriousness: CDP asks states and regions to assess their level of risk by estimating the potential impact from the anticipated effect of deforestation and/or forest degradation along with the likelihood of that effect occurring. The seriousness of an impact will vary from region to region. When describing changes/activities and impacts on ecosystem structure and function, reference should be made to the following parameters, which include: positive or negative; magnitude; extent; duration; reversibility; and timing and frequency (Source: CIEEM – Impact Assessment). For example, “Extremely serious” impacts could be those that are widespread, long lasting and result in substantial and possibly irreversible change to the environmental value, which requires avoidance through appropriate and very specific responses or environmental controls. On the other hand, “Serious” impacts could be those that extend beyond the area of disturbance to the surrounding area but have a shorter duration. • Impact description: This is an open text field with 2400 characters, which allows you to provide information as to how the impact selected is affecting the region and its citizens. For example, Biodiversity has high economic value. Some of the more obvious sources of value include: bio-prospecting, carbon sequestration, watersheds and tourism. Therefore, biodiversity loss resulting from deforestation could have considerable costs in both measurable economic loss and difficult-to-measure non-marketed terms (Source: OECD – Biodiversity). • Primary action taken: Please select one option from the drop-down list that best describes the action you are taking to address the impact reported. If multiple actions apply, select the impact and the corresponding action by adding a new row to provide further information. If none of the available options are suitable, select “Other, please specify” and a text box will appear for you to add a label that describes your approach. • Status of action: Please select the most appropriate option from the drop-down menu to describe the stage of implementation of the action selected. • Action description: This is an open text field with 2400 characters, which allows you to provide further relevant comments about the action. Description of the actions should include details about: project name, scope, costs, timescale, collaborators and the projected outcome of the action.",
    "new_id": 123
  },
  {
    "id": 11902,
    "question": "Which of the following accurately reflects a necessary condition for reporting under the 'Energy Access and Poverty Pillar' when using notation keys as outlined in 2025 CDP-ICLEI Track and States & Regions Questionnaire and Guidance?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The use of notation keys is permissible when installed capacity cannot be disclosed due to confidentiality concerns.",
      "A": "Notation keys are optional unless energy consumption from renewable sources is insignificant.",
      "B": "The 'NE' notation key requires a justification in the 'Comment' column only if data was estimated but found unreliable.",
      "C": "Notation keys must always be accompanied by an explanation in the 'Comment' column, regardless of the specific key used.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "157-158",
    "ref_doc": "CDP-ICLEI 2025.pdf",
    "source_text": "156 • If the energy source is not applicable in your electricity grid, please enter 0. Select an appropriate notation key in columns 2 and 4 to explain why there is no installed capacity or generation data to report. • You can report in the 'Comment' field any other additional relevant information about the type of renewable energy that is installed within the jurisdiction boundary. Notation keys (columns 2 and 4) • Select an appropriate notation key to explain why there is no installed capacity or generation data to report. • Notation keys may be used to accommodate limitations in data availability and differences in installed capacity across energy sources. • Where notation keys are used, an accompanying explanation may be provided in the ‘Comment’ column. • The following are the descriptions on how to use the notation keys: o “NO” (not occurring): This energy source is not installed within the jurisdiction. This notation key may also be used for insignificant sources. o “NE” (not estimated): This energy source is installed but has not been estimated or reported. A justification for why not may be provided in the ‘Comment’ column. o \"C” (confidential): Reporting the installed capacity of this energy source could lead to the disclosure of confidential information, and as such is not reported publicly. GCoM Guidance Link to the GCoM Common Reporting Framework (CRF) The energy access and energy poverty assessment shall provide information on the energy attribute(s) deemed most relevant by each Regional and National Covenant. Region- and country-specific attributes will be made available through regionalized versions of the Common Reporting Framework and communicated by Regional/National Covenant helpdesks.\n\n[Page 158]\n157 The energy access and energy poverty assessment is framed by indicators for which local governments are invited to collect and provide information as below for the “Energy Access and Poverty Pillar”: Sustainable Energy Indicators: • Energy consumption from renewable energy sources (question 4.1 column 3), or; • Source mix of thermal energy (heating and cooling) consumed within local boundary (question 4.1, column 4 and question 4.1.2), or • Installed capacity of renewable energy sources within local boundary (question 4.1, column 4 and question 4.1.3 column 1) or; • Total energy generated from renewable energy source within local boundary (question 4.1, column 4 and question 4.1.3 column 3), or; • Percentage of households within the municipality with access to clean cooking fuels and technologies (question 4.2 column 1) Total energy generated from renewable energy source within local boundary This indicator refers to the total energy generated from renewable energy sources within the local boundary disaggregated per type of technology (wind, hydro, solar photovoltaic, solar thermal, etc.) be reported as Megawatt-hour (MWh). Installed capacity of renewable energy within local boundary This indicator refers to the installed capacity of renewable energy within the local boundary disaggregated per type of technology (wind, hydro, solar photovoltaic, solar thermal, etc) and should be reported as Megawatt (MW). GCoM required columns and common mistakes This question is mandatory to be compliant with the GCoM \" Energy Access and Poverty Pillar” if you are reporting against mandatory indicators ‘Installed capacity of renewable energy sources within local boundary’ or ‘Total energy generated from renewable energy sources within local boundary’ for the regional attribute of Sustainable Energy. Simplified level^: Mandatory (also mandatory for Complete level) Complete level^^: Mandatory (mandatory only for Complete level)",
    "new_id": 124
  },
  {
    "id": 11908,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes a scenario where a jurisdiction’s emissions reduction target boundary is classified as 'Partial', and what must be explained according to 2025 CDP-ICLEI Track and States & Regions Questionnaire and Guidance?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The target applies to part of the jurisdiction and adjoining areas, and both exclusions and additions must be detailed.",
      "B": "The target covers only emission sources owned and operated by the jurisdiction’s government, and exclusions must be justified.",
      "C": "The target includes the entire jurisdiction and adjoining areas, and both exclusions and additions must be clarified.",
      "D": "The target aligns exactly with the jurisdiction’s boundary, and no further explanation is required.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "229-230",
    "ref_doc": "CDP-ICLEI 2025.pdf",
    "source_text": "228 (6.1.1) Provide details of your emissions reduction target(s). Please report both long-term and mid-term targets, if applicable. Change From Last Year Minor change Question Dependencies This question is presented if ‘Yes, our jurisdiction has an active greenhouse gas emissions reduction target(s)’ is selected in response to 6.1. Questionnaire • Cities: Pathway 1, 2 and 3 • States and Regions Connection to other frameworks • [Cities only] GCoM: Mitigation Pillar • TCFD: Metric and Targets (Disclosure C) • [Cities only] NetZeroCities – Mission Cities • Race to Zero • [States and Regions only] Under2 Coalition • C40 Leadership Standards • Union of the Baltic Cities Sustainable Cities Commission • ICLEI's GreenClimateCities • ICLEI Ukrainian Cities: Climate Neutrality, Resilience and Recovery\n\n[Page 230]\n229 • Sustainable Development Goals: SDG11, SDG13 Response Options [*column/row appearance is dependent on selections in this question] 1 2 3 4 Select a reference ID for the target Target type^ Boundary of target relative to jurisdiction boundary^ Gases covered by target Select from: • Target 1 - Target 30 Select from: • Base year emissions (absolute) target • Fixed-level target • Base year intensity target based on emissions per capita • Base year intensity target based on emissions per unit GDP • Baseline scenario target Select from: • Same - covers entire jurisdiction and nothing else • Smaller - covers only part of the jurisdiction, please explain exclusions • Larger - covers the whole jurisdiction and adjoining areas, please explain additions • Partial - covers part of the jurisdiction and adjoining areas, please explain exclusions/additions • Government operations – covers only emission sources owned and operated by jurisdictions government Select all that apply: • CO2 • CH4 • N2O • HFCs • PFCs • SF6 • NF3",
    "new_id": 125
  },
  {
    "id": 11911,
    "question": "Which scenario accurately reflects the conditions under which a city would fail to meet compliance with the GCoM 'Mitigation-Inventory badge' as described in 2025 CDP-ICLEI Track and States & Regions Questionnaire and Guidance?",
    "options": {
      "B": "The city provides detailed emission reporting in response to question 3.1.3 but submits an inventory that covers only six months of data instead of the required 12 consecutive months.",
      "A": "The city submits its first greenhouse gas emissions inventory three years after joining the GCoM but ensures subsequent submissions occur every four years.",
      "C": "The city selects 'No' in response to question 3.1 and does not provide detailed emission reporting or attach their community-wide GHG inventory.",
      "D": "The city submits a direct link to their main community-wide GHG inventory but fails to include activity and emissions data in CRF-ready format.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "73-74",
    "ref_doc": "CDP-ICLEI 2025.pdf",
    "source_text": "72 Global Covenant of Mayors Online Training Course Provides foundational knowledge for getting started with GHG inventories, setting mitigation targets and developing climate action plans GCoM GHG Emission Factors for Electricity Consumption In the context of EU and Global Covenant of Mayors for Climate and Energy, the JRC provides energy related GHG emission factors. This dataset provides updated Covenant of Mayors emission factors for national electricity consumption (also referred to as National and European Emission Factors for Electricity - NEEFE). JRC, GCoM TOOL: City Inventory Reporting and Information System (CIRIS) City Inventory Reporting and Information System (CIRIS) is an accessible, easy-to-use and flexible Excel-based tool for managing and reporting city GHG inventory data. C40 Cities TOOL: Clearpath Data management for energy and emissions data. GHG inventory calculations. ICLEI USA TOOL: ClimateOS The ClimateOS platform provides a framework for emissions inventory development and city transitions. ClimateView TOOL: SCATTER Provides activity and emissions data in CRF-ready format. Allows users to explore action pathways with estimated impacts on reaching emission-reduction targets. Nottingham City Council: Anthesis Group TOOL: Data Portal for Cities Data Portal for Cities is an open data platform that helps communities fill critical information gaps by providing estimates of previously unavailable data drawn from national and regional sources. GCoM & WRI TOOL: Google Environmental Insights Explorer (EIE) The Google Environmental Insights Explorer (EIE) provides cities with instant access to greenhouse gas emissions data, allowing local governments to develop data-based climate action plans and facilitate urban climate action based on science and evidence. Google and GCoM\n\n[Page 74]\n73 GCoM guidance Link to the GCoM Common Reporting Framework (CRF) Section 3 “Greenhouse gas emissions inventory” of the Common Reporting Framework indicates that “Local governments shall submit their greenhouse gas emissions inventory to GCoM within two years upon joining GCoM. Every subsequent four years, a more recent greenhouse gas emissions inventory shall be submitted to GCoM. Greenhouse gas emission inventories shall cover a consecutive period of 12 months\". GCoM Required columns and common mistakes To be compliant with the GCoM \"Mitigation-Inventory badge\" you must answer \"Yes\" and provide detailed emission reporting in question 3.1.3. (3.1.1) Provide information on and an attachment (in spreadsheet format) /direct link to your main community-wide GHG emissions inventory. Change From Last Year No change Question Dependencies This question is presented if ‘Yes’ is selected in response to 3.1 Questionnaire • Cities",
    "new_id": 126
  },
  {
    "id": 11922,
    "question": "Which interpretation accurately reflects the reporting requirements for vehicle classification and emissions data based on 2025 CDP-ICLEI Track and States & Regions Questionnaire and Guidance?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The suggested vehicle weight classifications are optional guidelines that cities may use only if no local classification system exists.",
      "A": "Cities must adopt a universal classification system for freight vehicles, regardless of local definitions, to ensure consistency in reported emissions.",
      "B": "Emissions data for freight vehicles must be categorized by gross vehicle weight and include hybrid electric vehicles under the 'Electric fleet size' column.",
      "D": "Freight mode share data is mandatory for all cities, and failure to provide it results in exclusion from the reporting framework.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "180-181",
    "ref_doc": "CDP-ICLEI 2025.pdf",
    "source_text": "179 values reported, for example indicating if this includes all trips made within the jurisdiction, if it applies to all day or peak travel times etc. Freight mode share • The freight mode share columns are shown if options other than 'Jurisdiction does not have freight mode share data' are selected. • Classification of Light Goods Vehicles (LGV), Medium Goods Vehicles (MGV) and Heavy Goods Vehicles (HGV) vary globally based on vehicle size, gross vehicle weight, horsepower, number of axles and a wide range of other local factors. • This information is generally made publicly available by the relevant authority within the country/area/region, for example UK guidance. • Please report based on the classification system applicable to your country/area/region. If unknown the classification below can be used when reporting: o LGV: Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) <3.5 tonnes o MGV: Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) 3.5t-12 tonnes o HGV: Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) >12 tonnes o Rail: Includes train, metro and tram (4.6) Report the total emissions, fleet size and number of vehicle types for the following modes of transport. Change From Last Year No change\n\n[Page 181]\n180 Questionnaire • Cities: Initiative-specific Connection to other frameworks • ICLEI Ukrainian Cities: Climate Neutrality, Resilience and Recovery • Ecomobility AllianceSustainable Development Goals: SDG3, SDG9, SDG11 Response Options Please complete the following table. Please ensure all reported emissions data is in metric tonnes CO2e. Mode of transport Private vehicles Buses Municipal fleet (government owned vehicles excluding buses) Freight vehicles Taxis/Transport Network Companies/ Carshares Comment Annual emissions from transport mode (metric tonnes CO2e) Numeric field Numeric field Numeric field Numeric field Numeric field Text field Total fleet size per mode Numeric field Numeric field Numeric field Numeric field Numeric field Text field Electric fleet size per mode Numeric field Numeric field Numeric field Numeric field Numeric field Text field Hybrid electric vehicle fleet size per mode Numeric field Numeric field Numeric field Numeric field Numeric field Text field",
    "new_id": 127
  },
  {
    "id": 11928,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the implications of the city's emission inventory practices and reporting as mentioned in 2025 CDP-ICLEI Track and States & Regions Questionnaire and Guidance?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Despite consistent methodologies, the city ensures high data quality by relying on third-party verification and national/sub-national emission factors.",
      "A": "The city’s methodology for calculating emissions has evolved significantly since its initial inventory in 2002, incorporating additional gases such as NF3.",
      "B": "The city uses a tool called SCATTER exclusively for tracking CO2 emissions, while other greenhouse gases are managed through alternative protocols.",
      "C": "The city’s jurisdictional boundary for emissions reporting excludes certain populated areas to align with the Global Protocol for Community-Scale inventories.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "91-92",
    "ref_doc": "CDP-ICLEI 2025.pdf",
    "source_text": "90 1 2 3 4 5 6 Main community-wide emissions inventory attachment (spreadsheet) ^ URL link (with unrestricted access)^ Status of main community-wide inventory attachment and/or direct link Year covered by main inventory ^ Boundary of main inventory relative to jurisdiction boundary^ Population in year covered by main inventory [Attachment] The emissions inventory has been attached 2021 Same – covers entire jurisdiction and nothing else 1,380,250 7 9 10 11 12 Primary protocol/framework used to compile main inventory Tool used to compile main inventory Gases included in main inventory^ Primary source of emission factors Source of global warming potential values Global Protocol for Community-Scale Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventories (GPC) SCATTER CO2 CH4 N2O HFCs PFCs SF6 National/sub-national emission factors, please specify IPCC Sixth Assessment Report (2021)\n\n[Page 92]\n91 13 14 15 16 17 Has the main inventory been audited/verified? Overall level of data quality Have any of the calculation methodologies and/or boundary used for this inventory changed when compared to the previously reported inventory? Additional/historical inventories and other relevant attachments Further documentation links and comments Yes, externally audited/ verified (third-party verification) Activity data High data quality Emissions factors High data quality No changes to the methodology and/or boundary used when compared to the previously reported inventory [Attachment – Scatter tool output report] Our city has been tracking its emissions since 2002. We have been using the Scatter tool and have attached the output of the report in the previous field. 7 9 10 11 12 Primary protocol/framework used to compile main inventory Tool used to compile main inventory Gases included in main inventory^ Primary source of emission factors Source of global warming potential values NF3",
    "new_id": 128
  },
  {
    "id": 11965,
    "question": "Which scenario demonstrates a jurisdiction's failure to meet the implicit requirements for reporting on climate-related plans, based on the conditions outlined in 2025 CDP-ICLEI Track and States & Regions Questionnaire and Guidance?",
    "options": {
      "A": "A jurisdiction declares a climate emergency and includes a direct link to supporting documentation that requires user login to access.",
      "B": "A jurisdiction reports an implementation-complete status but provides no explanation for areas excluded from the plan boundary.",
      "C": "A jurisdiction updates its climate action plan mid-implementation without specifying the motivation for declaring the original climate emergency.",
      "D": "A jurisdiction with a regional Air Quality Management Plan fails to include clear time-bound targets for methane in its strategy.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "299-300",
    "ref_doc": "CDP-ICLEI 2025.pdf",
    "source_text": "298 • 'Climate emergency declaration’ includes any related declaration of a climate emergency within your jurisdiction. Related climate emergencies declarations include the following – please specify the exact term in column 3: o Climate and ecological emergency o Climate and environmental emergency o Climate and biodiversity emergency o Climate emergency and mobilization • 'Air quality’ may include an Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) developed by the jurisdiction only, or a regional/airshed AQMP in which the jurisdiction participates, or a Climate Action Plan (CAP) where air quality and public health considerations are integrated. An AQMP or AQ integrated-CAP will typically contain: o Clear time-bound targets for multiple pollutants (PMx, NOx, Ozone, CO, black carbon, methane, VOCs); o Comprehensive control strategies to reduce emissions in key sectors, including a description of how various agencies or departments will implement the strategies and programs outlined; o For example, the South Coast Air Quality Management Plan 2016 Attachment (column 2) / Name of plan and URL link, if applicable (column 3) • These columns are not presented if 'No other environment-related plans and/or strategies in the jurisdiction to report’ is selected in column 1. • Use column 2 to attach the plan, and provide the plan name in column 3. • You may also use column 3 to provide a direct link to the plan. If you are providing a direct link, please ensure the climate-related plan can be accessed unrestricted on the link provided. Current status of plan (column 4) • This column is not presented if 'No other environment-related plans and/or strategies in the jurisdiction to report’ is selected in column 1. • In implementation: if your jurisdiction has begun to implement actions from the climate action plan (execution);\n\n[Page 300]\n299 • Implementation complete: if the actions identified in the plan have been fully implemented; • Monitoring and evaluation in progress: if the project is complete and results are being measured; • Plan update in progress: if your jurisdiction has begun to update the action plan based on the progress and success of actions that have been executed. Boundary of plan relative to jurisdiction boundary (column 5) • This column is not presented if 'No other environment-related plans and/or strategies in the jurisdiction to report’ is selected in column 1. • Indicate the boundary of your climate-related plan relative to your jurisdiction’s boundary (as reported in 0.1). • If the jurisdiction’s climate-related plan covers only part of the jurisdiction or covers the whole jurisdiction and adjoining areas outside of the jurisdiction boundary then use the explanation field presented to briefly describe which areas are excluded or additional areas included. Year of formal approval of plan and End year of plan (column 6 and 7) • This column is not presented if 'No other environment-related plans and/or strategies in the jurisdiction to report’ is selected in column 1. • Enter the year the plan was published and approved by the jurisdiction and the year in which the plan will conclude as a numeric value. Comment (column 8) • You may use the field ‘Comment’ to add any additional context to your response. • If reporting a climate emergency declaration in column 1, report in this column the motivation of your jurisdiction for declaring a Climate Emergency, and to provide a link(s) to where the declaration text and/or other supporting documentation can be viewed on your website. You may also include further information about your Climate Emergency Declaration, for example the main climate actions associated and their progress.",
    "new_id": 129
  },
  {
    "id": 11970,
    "question": "Which of the following represents a logical inconsistency if applied to the WRI Cool Food Calculator's methodology from 2025 CDP-ICLEI Track and States & Regions Questionnaire and Guidance?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Fish and seafood categories, such as mollusks, are excluded from calculations involving food-related GHG emissions due to negligible impact.",
      "A": "Using boneless equivalent weight measurements across all food types would lead to inaccuracies for liquid dairy products.",
      "C": "The calculator’s regional emission factors ensure that all food-related carbon opportunity costs are reported in identical units globally.",
      "D": "Including both plant-based milk substitutes and liquid dairy in the same analysis could result in double-counting certain land-use metrics.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "208-209",
    "ref_doc": "CDP-ICLEI 2025.pdf",
    "source_text": "207 Breakdown of procured food by food group (column 2) • The breakdown by food group can differ depending on the methodology used to measure the total quantity of food. • WRI Cool Food Pledge developed a calculator which includes default land-use and emission factors by region, and helps pledge signatories enter and estimate five important metrics: 1) Food purchases by food type (boneless equivalent, in kilograms or pounds), 2) Food-related GHG emissions from agricultural supply chains, in tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2 e), 3) Food-related land use (in hectares), 4) Food-related carbon opportunity costs (tonnes of CO2 e), and 5) Normalized metrics (several possible units of measure). The food groups used by the WRI Cool Food Calculator are: o Beef o Buffalo o Other ruminant meat (goat, lamb, sheep) o Pork o Poultry o Fish and seafood: fish (finfish), crustaceans (e.g. shrimp, prawns), mollusks (e.g. clams, oysters) o Liquid dairy: milk, yoghurt o Solid dairy: cheese, butter, ice cream o Eggs o Legumes and pulses: beans, peas, lentils, chickpeas, peanuts and peanut butter, soybeans and tofu o Nuts and seeds o Grains: rice, wheat (flour), corn (maize) (flour), bread and baked goods, pasta and noodles, other grains and flours o Plant-based milk substitutes: almond milk, oat milk, rice milk, soy milk o Fruits o Vegetables (non-roots/tubers) o Roots and tubers o Sugars and sweeteners\n\n[Page 209]\n208 o Vegetable oils Year data applies to (column 3) • Report the information for the most recent year which data is available. Comment (column 4) • If you do not have food procurement data available to report, you can use the ‘comment’ field to explain why. (4.13) Report the sources of your jurisdiction’s water supply, volumes withdrawn per source, and the projected change. (S&R: N/A) Change From Last Year No change Questionnaire • Cities: Pathway 3 Connection to other frameworks • Race to Resilience • Union of the Baltic Cities Sustainable Cities Commission • ICLEI Ukrainian Cities: Climate Neutrality, Resilience and Recovery • EU Mission on Adaptation to Climate Change",
    "new_id": 130
  },
  {
    "id": 11998,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes a scenario where progress tracking related to a climate component would *not* involve engagement with a higher-level government, based on the outlined purposes of engagement in 2025 CDP-ICLEI Track and States & Regions Questionnaire and Guidance?",
    "options": {
      "C": "When data collected is exclusively used for local capacity building without sharing it across governmental levels.",
      "A": "When the purpose of engagement is solely to integrate the component into assessments developed by indigenous peoples.",
      "B": "When feedback from lower-level governments is required but not shared with national or higher-level entities.",
      "D": "When the method for developing the component was neither required nor recommended by any higher authority.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "33-34",
    "ref_doc": "CDP-ICLEI 2025.pdf",
    "source_text": "32 • ICLEI Ukrainian Cities: Climate Neutrality, Resilience and Recovery • EU Mission on Adaptation to Climate Change • Sustainable Development Goals: SDG17 Response Options [*column/row appearance is dependent on selections in this question] Climate component Other types of governments engaged in the development, implementation and/or monitoring of component* Outline the purpose of this engagement* Comment Select from: • Climate risk and vulnerability assessment • Community-wide GHG emissions inventory • Climate action plan • Climate mitigation target • Climate adaptation goal • Other, please specify • Not engaging with other levels of governments regarding climate action Select all that apply: • National-level government • Indigenous peoples with overlapping or neighboring territory • State/Regional-level government • Higher level of government (not listed above) • Lower level of government • Other, please specify Select all that apply: If national, state or higher level of government, or indigenous peoples • The development of this component is required by the national government (e.g., by law, regulation and/or agreement) • The development of this component is required by a higher-level of government that is not the national government (e.g., by law, regulation and/or agreement) • To facilitate the integration of this component into the Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) • To facilitate the integration of this component into the National Adaptation Plan (NAP) Text field\n\n[Page 34]\n33 Climate component Other types of governments engaged in the development, implementation and/or monitoring of component* Outline the purpose of this engagement* Comment • Progress tracking and/or updates associated with this component are shared with a higher-level of government (e.g., via a digital platform) • The method used to develop this component was required or recommended by a higher-level of government If any level of government • To collect data and/or feedback from other levels of government to inform its development • To facilitate information sharing across different levels of government • To facilitate capacity building across different levels of government • To facilitate the integration of this component into assessments and policy developed across different levels of government • Other, please specify [Add Row] Requested Content General",
    "new_id": 131
  },
  {
    "id": 12003,
    "question": "Which scenario best reflects a potential logical inconsistency in how regions might justify their involvement, or lack thereof, in global forest initiatives as outlined in 2025 CDP-ICLEI Track and States & Regions Questionnaire and Guidance?",
    "options": {
      "D": "A region claims that forest management is not a priority but intends to participate in global initiatives within the next two years.",
      "A": "A region states policies are set at the national level yet expresses intent to join global initiatives due to internal stakeholder pressure.",
      "B": "A region reports no current policies on deforestation but specifies plans to develop such policies while declining participation in global initiatives due to higher priorities.",
      "C": "A region cites lack of resources as a barrier to joining global initiatives but provides detailed future plans for policy implementation in the explanation field.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "385-386",
    "ref_doc": "CDP-ICLEI 2025.pdf",
    "source_text": "384 Questionnaire • States and Regions Question dependencies This question appears if you select any \"No” option or \"Do not know\" in response to 10.5. Response Options Reason Please explain Select one from: • Forest management is not a priority for the region • Policies are set at national level • Policy is in development • No information available • Other, please specify Text field Requested Content This question allows states and regions to explain the primary reason as to why there are no policies on deforestation and/or forest degradation. This question is a table with the following fields: • Reason: Please select the most appropriate reason for your response from the options provided in the drop-down list. Please select “Other, please specify” if you want to provide a different reason from the options provided. Please specify this reason in the text field provided. • Please explain: Please provide a brief explanation as to the relevance of this reason in the context of your region. Please use the text field to also explain any future plans you have to set and implement policies on deforestation and/or forest degradation if relevant.\n\n[Page 386]\n385 (10.6) Does your region participate in any global initiatives or conventions on forest protection or conservation? Change From Last Year No change Questionnaire • States and Regions Response Options Select from: • Yes • No, but we are intending to participate in the next 2 years • No, and we are not intending to participate due to other higher priorities • No, and we are not intending to participate due to a lack of resources • No, and we are not intending to participate due to a reason not listed above, please specify • Do not know Requested Content Taking part in recognized global initiatives indicates greater environmental stewardship and transparency. If “Yes” or “No, but we are intending to participate in the next 2 years” is selected, states and regions will be requested to report on those initiatives and their overall involvement in 10.6.1. CDP has listed the following initiatives/conventions:",
    "new_id": 132
  },
  {
    "id": 12012,
    "question": "Which scenario would most accurately reflect a city's compliance with the reporting requirements for energy poverty as described in 2025 CDP-ICLEI Track and States & Regions Questionnaire and Guidance?",
    "options": {
      "A": "A city uses 'fuel poverty' instead of 'energy poverty,' specifies this in the 'Comment' field, and applies a threshold that cannot be converted to the percentage of income spent on energy services.",
      "B": "A city reports energy poverty based on the percentage of households spending over 15% of income on energy services, aligning with the primary indicator but does not provide any commentary on alternative measures.",
      "C": "A city selects 'Energy poverty not estimated,' resulting in no further columns being presented, while also failing to provide any explanation or justification in the 'Comment' field.",
      "D": "A city converts its energy poverty measure to match the percentage of total population spending up to 10% of income on energy services without specifying why this conversion is valid.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "166-167",
    "ref_doc": "CDP-ICLEI 2025.pdf",
    "source_text": "165 Questionnaire • Cities: Pathway 2 and 3 Connection to other frameworks • [Cities only] GCoM: Energy Access and Poverty Pillar (Affordable Energy) • [Cities only] NetZeroCities – Mission Cities • Race to Resilience • ICLEI's GreenClimateCities • 100% Renewable Energy Campaign • Ecomobility Alliance • Sustainable Development Goals: SDG1, SDG7 Response Options [*column/row appearance is dependent on selections in this question] Indicator used to estimate energy poverty^ Percentage of households or total population within the jurisdiction boundary that face energy poverty*^ Threshold used for energy poverty*^ Comment Select from: • Percentage of households within the jurisdiction boundary that face energy poverty • Percentage of total population within the jurisdiction boundary that face energy poverty Percentage field Select from: • Up to 5% of income spent on energy services • Up to 10% of income spent on energy services • Up to 15% of income spent on energy services • Up to 20% or more of income spent on energy services • Other, please specify Text field\n\n[Page 167]\n166 Indicator used to estimate energy poverty^ Percentage of households or total population within the jurisdiction boundary that face energy poverty*^ Threshold used for energy poverty*^ Comment • Energy poverty not estimated Requested Content General • Addressing energy access and energy poverty are important elements for the sustainable development, resilience, and well-being of cities and local governments. • A common indicator for measuring energy poverty is the share of households' income spent on energy services and is the primary indicator used in the context of this question. • If the measure used for energy poverty is not defined by the percentage of income spent on energy services and cannot be converted to this measure then please select ‘Other, please specify’ and report the threshold that is used. • Definitions of energy poverty vary by jurisdiction; in this question you are requested to report based on the share of households' income spent on energy services. However, if this is not possible you may use the definition that is most applicable in the context of your jurisdiction and to describe this definition in the field ‘Comment’. • If the term ‘energy poverty’, as used in the context of this question, is not the term used in your jurisdiction, please report to this question in the context of the term that is used. For example, this could include other related terminology including ‘fuel poverty’ and ‘energy precariousness’. If this is applicable to your jurisdiction, please provide the term used in the field ‘Comment’. Examples of definitions of energy poverty are provided in the ‘Explanation of Terms’. • If 'Energy poverty not estimated’ is selected in column 1, columns 2 and 3 will not be presented. Comment (column 4)",
    "new_id": 133
  },
  {
    "id": 12020,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between monitoring, evaluation, and updates in the context of climate action plans as mentioned in 2025 CDP-ICLEI Track and States & Regions Questionnaire and Guidance?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Updates to the plan should integrate findings from both monitoring and evaluation to ensure alignment with targets, even if significant changes aren’t required.",
      "A": "Monitoring ensures equitable distribution of benefits, while evaluation focuses solely on jurisdiction-wide emissions reductions.",
      "C": "Evaluation is considered unnecessary if regular monitoring and public reporting are conducted consistently.",
      "D": "The update process is only initiated when a plan has been fully achieved or exceeded its intended outcomes.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "286",
    "ref_doc": "CDP-ICLEI 2025.pdf",
    "source_text": "285 • If these processes are not in place, then select the option ‘No monitoring, evaluation or update processes in place’. If other processes are in place related to the monitoring, evaluation and updating of the climate action plan then please select the option ‘Other, please specify’ and provide a brief explanation of these processes. • Monitoring: Indicate how often information on progress of the climate action plan is monitored and publicly reported. It is important that there is a process for monitoring and reporting progress on implementation of the climate action plan with key performance indicators identified for priority actions. This includes regular monitoring and public reporting, in line with existing governance and reporting systems. • Evaluation: Indicate the frequency to which the climate action plan is evaluated. This provides insight into the processes for evaluating the impact of the climate action plan and can include evaluating jurisdiction wide emissions reductions, risk reduction and the equitable distribution of benefits. • Updates: Indicate the frequency to which updates to the plan are published. Monitoring and evaluation should feed into the continuous review and revision of the plan, while this does not have to include updates that result in significant change throughout the plan it should support a reflective and iterative planning process that keeps the jurisdiction on track to meet its targets. This indicates that a process and timeline for review and revision are part of the climate action plan. If the plan has not yet been through an update process, for example due to being newly published, report the planned timeline for updates. • For further information related to the monitoring, evaluation and updating of climate action plans see C40’s Climate Action Planning Framework. • If “No monitoring, evaluation or update processes in place” is selected, no other selections should be made. Plan status/progress towards plan (column 7) • Indicate the status of the plan: o New – Select this option for plans that have been published in the reporting year and are newly in progress. o Underway – significant / moderate / limited progress made – Select this option for plans that were published before the reporting year, with an end year in the future, that have not been achieved and continue to be pursued. Ensure to select the appropriate option that indicates the progress made toward the plan. o Achieved – Select this option for plans that have been achieved or exceeded in the reporting year.",
    "new_id": 134
  },
  {
    "id": 12023,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why jurisdictions might choose to verify or audit their emissions inventory internally rather than relying solely on external verification from 2025 CDP-ICLEI Track and States & Regions Questionnaire and Guidance?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Internal verification allows jurisdictions to improve their emissions inventories using staff independent of the GHG accounting process without requiring third-party involvement.",
      "A": "Internal verification is always required by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) for all emissions inventories.",
      "B": "Internal verification ensures that the inventory aligns with the Local Government Operations Protocol, which mandates self-assessment.",
      "D": "Internal verification eliminates the need to include Scope 3 emissions in the inventory, simplifying the reporting process.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "131-132",
    "ref_doc": "CDP-ICLEI 2025.pdf",
    "source_text": "130 7 8 9 Emissions sources included Has the inventory been audited/verified? Comment • Waste related emission sources (scope 3) • Other, please specify Requested Content Government operations emissions inventory attachment (column 1) / Government operations emissions inventory link (column 2) • Use these fields to provide an attachment or direct link to your government operations emissions inventory. • If you are providing a direct weblink to the emissions inventory, please ensure the emissions inventory can be accessed unrestricted on the link provided. Year covered by inventory (column 3) • Report the year of your latest government operations emissions inventory. This is the year covered by the emissions inventory and not the year of publication or the year when the assessment was made. Boundary (column 4) • The options allow for emissions to be captured from a ranging set of institutions, from government departments to quasi-governmental authorities, public corporations and special purpose vehicles. • Further guidance on the suitability of these different methods is available in the Local Government Operations Protocol, the WRI/WBCSD GHG Protocol, and Appendix B of the Global Protocol for Community Scale Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventories. • If none of the listed options describes your boundary, please select “Other, please specify” from the drop-down list. You will then be provided with a text box in which to describe your boundary. Gases included in emissions inventory (column 5)\n\n[Page 132]\n131 • Select the greenhouse gases included in your inventory. The list consists of the main gases as defined by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC): carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), sulfur hexafluoride (SF6), as well as nitrogen trifluoride (NF3). Primary protocol (column 6) • Please select the methodology on which you base the majority of your calculations. The system will only let you select one methodology. If you do not see your chosen methodology reflected in the list please select “Other, please specify” and describe your methodology. Emissions sources included (column 7) • Select the sources of emissions that are included in the inventory. This includes the fuel that is consumed (converted to end-use energy) directly by your jurisdiction’s government – referring to Scope 1 emissions. Scope 1 emissions are all direct GHG emissions sources owned or operated by the municipal government. This fuel could be used in combustion in owned or controlled boilers, furnaces, vehicles, etc. • If Scope 3 emissions are also calculated the select the Scope 3 emissions sources included in this calculation, these sources include ‘(Scope 3)’ at the end. Has the inventory been audited/verified? (column 8) • Indicate if your inventory has been externally or internally verified and/or audited. If you have documentation that can be used as evidence of the audit/verification, please attach this to question 11.1 and indicate that you have done so in the ‘Comment’ column. • Jurisdictions may choose to externally or internally verify or audit their emissions inventory to demonstrate that it has been developed in accordance with the requirements of the selected methodology and to provide assurance to users that it represents a faithful, true, and fair account of their GHG emissions. • While verification is often undertaken by an independent organization (third-party verification), this may not always be the case. Many jurisdictions interested in improving their emissions inventories may subject their information to internal verification by staff who are independent of the GHG accounting and reporting process (self-verification).",
    "new_id": 135
  },
  {
    "id": 12024,
    "question": "Which of the following is NOT a condition for compliance with the Simplified level of reporting under the Covenant of Mayors Europe as mentioned in 2025 CDP-ICLEI Track and States & Regions Questionnaire and Guidance?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Setting a target year earlier than the reporting year.",
      "A": "Reporting at least one complete absolute emissions reduction target.",
      "B": "Ensuring alignment with Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs).",
      "C": "Providing transparent descriptions of methodologies for baseline scenario targets.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "253-254",
    "ref_doc": "CDP-ICLEI 2025.pdf",
    "source_text": "252 Target year^ Mandatory Mandatory All target types. Please provide a target year in the future (2025 onwards). A target earlier than the reporting year is not compliant. Estimated business as usual emissions in target year (metric tonnes CO2e)^ Mandatory Mandatory For a baseline scenario target, the modelling methodologies, and parameters shall be transparently described. Percentage of emissions reduction (including offsets and carbon dioxide removal)^ Mandatory Mandatory Net emissions in target year (including offsets and carbon dioxide removal) (metric tonnes CO2e)^ Mandatory Mandatory Alignment with Nationally Determined Contribution^ Mandatory Mandatory At a minimum, the target shall be as ambitious as the NDC. Local governments should set targets that are more ambitious than the NDC. Regional variations: To comply with the Simplified level of reporting, Covenant of Mayors Europe signatories shall, in addition to meeting other Simplified level requirements of the CRF, report: • At least one complete absolute emissions reduction target.\n\n[Page 254]\n253 (6.1.2) If you are using or plan to use carbon credits sold to or purchased from outside the jurisdiction or target boundary, provide details. Change From Last Year No change Question Dependencies This question is presented if ‘Yes, our jurisdiction has an active greenhouse gas emissions reduction target(s)’ is selected in response to 6.1. Questionnaire • Cities: Pathway 1, 2 and 3 • States and Regions Connection to other frameworks • GCoM: Mitigation Pillar^ • Race to Zero • [Cities only] NetZeroCities – Mission Cities • [States and Regions only] Under2 Coalition • ICLEI's GreenClimateCities Response Options (*column/row appearance is dependent on selections in this question)",
    "new_id": 136
  },
  {
    "id": 12025,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the reason why providing data in accordance with Appendix A is critical for jurisdictions aiming to align their targets with global climate initiatives as stated in 2025 CDP-ICLEI Track and States & Regions Questionnaire and Guidance?",
    "options": {
      "A": "It enables CDP and its partners to assess alignment with 1.5°C goals and support updates or actions as needed over time.",
      "B": "It ensures that all emissions are fully calculated before setting any target, which is a mandatory step for GCoM compliance.",
      "C": "It allows jurisdictions to avoid adjustments to their targets by locking in fixed emissions scenarios indefinitely.",
      "D": "It guarantees immediate achievement of science-based targets without requiring further reporting or verification.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "226-227",
    "ref_doc": "CDP-ICLEI 2025.pdf",
    "source_text": "225 • Union of the Baltic Cities Sustainable Cities Commission • ICLEI's GreenClimateCities • ICLEI Ukrainian Cities: Climate Neutrality, Resilience and Recovery • Sustainable Development Goals: SDG11, SDG13 Response Options Select from: • Yes, our jurisdiction has an active greenhouse gas emissions reduction target(s) • No, but we are planning to introduce a target in the next two years • No, as our emissions are not fully calculated • No, and not intending to set a target • No, due to a lack of resources • No, as our target is already achieved • No, due to a reason not listed above Requested Content General • An emissions reduction target is a commitment to reduce, or limit the increase of, GHG emissions or emissions intensity by a specified quantity, to be achieved by a future date. • If your jurisdiction does not have an emissions reduction target, please select the primary reason why not from the options presented. • Science-based climate targets are part of CDP scoring criteria in 2025 and are a key element of the Race to Zero commitment. To ensure that your jurisdiction’s target can be checked for alignment with 1.5°C, you should provide data for the questions and columns outlined in Appendix A 'Guidance on Reporting Science-Based Targets' Reporting this information will help CDP and\n\n[Page 227]\n226 its partners to support your jurisdiction to update targets where needed, take emissions reduction action in line with your target, and track progress over time. • While every effort is made to keep local governments informed of the latest Science-Based Target criteria and recommendations, we reserve the right to make adjustments as needed to reflect the most recent emissions scenarios, partner organisation policies, and greenhouse gas accounting practices. • C40 cities targets will be checked by C40. GCoM guidance Link to the GCoM Common Reporting Framework (CRF) Section 4 “Target Setting” of the Common Reporting Framework indicates that local governments shall submit their greenhouse gas emissions reduction target(s) to GCoM within two years upon joining GCoM. GCoM Required columns and common mistakes Simplified level^: Mandatory (also mandatory for Complete level) Complete level^^: Mandatory (mandatory only for Complete level) To be compliant with the GCoM \"Mitigation-Target badge\" cities must answer \"Yes, our jurisdiction has an active greenhouse gas emissions reduction target(s)\" in this question and complete all mandatory columns in question 6.1.1. Additional Information Resources Name Description Institution",
    "new_id": 137
  },
  {
    "id": 12026,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between the status of an action and its inclusion in a climate action plan or development/master plan as mentioned in 2025 CDP-ICLEI Track and States & Regions Questionnaire and Guidance?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Actions can be included in a climate action plan or development/master plan regardless of their implementation status, as long as it is known they will be part of the plan.",
      "A": "An action must be in the post-implementation/operation phase to be included in a climate action plan or development/master plan.",
      "C": "Inclusion in a climate action plan or development/master plan is only possible if the action has secured funding during the pre-implementation phase.",
      "D": "The implementation phase is a prerequisite for any action to be considered for inclusion in a climate action plan or development/master plan.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "349-350",
    "ref_doc": "CDP-ICLEI 2025.pdf",
    "source_text": "348 • If none of the options are applicable, then select the option ‘None of the above impacts associated with this action have been measured’. In this instance you will not be presented with columns 7–9. • If you measure another impact indicator then select the option ‘Other impact indicator, please specify’ and specify the indicator and its associated value in the text box that is presented. • Emissions reductions (column 7) can be calculated as what the baseline emissions would be in a year without the action, minus the emissions in a year with the action (GHG emissions reduction = baseline emissions – project emissions). For further details on this calculation, and for examples for different sectors, see this guide developed by the Partners for Climate Protection Program. • Emissions should be reported in metric tons of CO2e. Common conversion factors are included in the Technical Note “Units of Measure Conversions”. Co-benefits realized (column 10) • Please select which areas other than reducing GHG emissions are improved as a result of the action. • Evaluating the impacts of wider opportunities/benefits can help build a strong case for climate actions, create buy-in from decision-makers and help prioritize those actions that will deliver the most benefits (The co-benefits of climate action: Accelerating City-Level Ambition). • The Urban Climate Action Impacts Framework suggests indicators that can be used to measure co-benefits. • Tools that can enable your jurisdiction to quantify co-benefits include: C40 Benefits toolkit and Siemens City Performance Tool. Funding source(s) (column 11) • Please select the relevant funding sources providing financial support for the action. Status of action in the reporting year (column 12) • It is expected that a diverse set of mitigation actions will be reported, and that the definition of the status will be dependent upon the type of mitigation action (for example the status of the implementation of building codes and standards and a community-owned renewable electricity installation may vary considerably).\n\n[Page 350]\n349 • Recognizing this variation, jurisdictions are requested to select the status option that most closely relates to the context of the mitigation action being reported. If the presented options are not applicable then select ‘Other, please specify’ and provide the status in the text box that is presented. o Pre-implementation: The pre-implementation phase refers to actions which have yet to be implemented or yet to be in operation but are undergoing a scoping or pre-feasibility study or in the process of securing funding. o Implementation: The implementation phase refers to actions which are yet to be in operation and delivering mitigation impacts (i.e., emissions reductions or energy savings or renewable energy generation) but have started to be executed/implemented. o Post-implementation/Operation: The post-implementation/operation phase refers to actions which are in operation and delivering mitigation impacts (i.e., emissions reductions or energy savings or renewable energy generation). Inclusion in climate action plan and/or jurisdiction development/master plan (column 13) • Select the option ‘Action is included in climate action plan and/or development/master plan’ if the action is included in your jurisdiction’s climate action or master/development plan. This includes climate action plans (which may address mitigation, adaptation/resilience, and/or energy) or master/development plans that are published or currently in development but where it is known the action will be included. Total cost of action (in currency specified in 1.2) (column 14) • Total action cost is defined as all costs specific to the action incurred prior to operation. Please provide the total expected cost of the action, in numbers with no delimiters. For example, $600,000 should be written as 600000. Please ensure you are reporting using the currency selected in 1.2. Does this action contribute to your jurisdiction’s energy access and/or poverty objectives? (column 15) • This column is only presented to cities reporting to GCoM. • Select whether or not the action reported contributes to your jurisdiction’s energy access and/or poverty objectives. Please explain the related energy access and poverty indicator(s) and how the implementation of the action impacts the value of the those indicator (e.g. increases/decreases) (column 16)",
    "new_id": 138
  },
  {
    "id": 12028,
    "question": "Which of the following scenarios accurately reflects a logical implication of the reporting requirements for Covenant of Mayors Europe signatories under the Simplified level as mentioned in 2025 CDP-ICLEI Track and States & Regions Questionnaire and Guidance?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Signatories adhering to the Simplified level are required to report activity data on local renewable energy production in addition to other mandatory sector-specific emissions.",
      "A": "Signatories must report activity data on local renewable energy production only if they are following Pathway 2 or 3.",
      "B": "Reporting activity data on local renewable energy production is mandatory for all entities, regardless of their chosen reporting framework.",
      "D": "Entities reporting under the GPC or CRF frameworks are exempt from providing a breakdown of community-wide emissions by sector.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "118",
    "ref_doc": "CDP-ICLEI 2025.pdf",
    "source_text": "116 Waste>Solid waste disposal^^ Optional Optional Mandatory NA Waste>Biological treatment^^ Optional Optional Mandatory NA Waste>Incineration and open burning^^ Optional Optional Mandatory NA Waste>Wastewater^^ Optional Optional Mandatory NA Total Waste Optional Optional Optional Optional Total IPPU Optional Optional Optional Optional Total AFOLU Optional Optional Optional Optional Generation of grid-supplied energy > Electricity-only generation^^ Optional Optional Mandatory Optional Generation of grid-supplied energy > CHP generation^^ Optional Optional Mandatory Optional Generation of grid-supplied energy > Heat/cold generation^^ Optional Optional Mandatory Optional Generation of grid supplied energy > Local renewable generation Optional Optional Optional Optional Total generation of grid-supplied energy Optional Optional Optional Optional Total Emissions (excluding generation of grid-supplied energy) Optional Optional Optional Optional\n\n[Page 118]\n117 Regional variations: To comply with the Simplified level of reporting, Covenant of Mayors Europe signatories shall, in addition to meeting other Simplified level requirements of the CRF, report: • Activity data on local renewable energy production (MWh). To be reported in the inventory attachment. (3.1.4) Provide a breakdown of your community-wide emissions by sector. Change From Last Year No change Question Dependencies For Cities, this question is presented if you are reporting your emissions in any format other than the format of the Global Protocol for Community Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventories (GPC) or GCoM Common Reporting Framework (CRF). For States and Regions, this question is presented if ‘Yes’ is selected in response to 3.1. Questionnaire • Cities: Pathway 2 and 3 • States and Regions",
    "new_id": 139
  },
  {
    "id": 12029,
    "question": "Which of the following is implied about the reporting requirements for emissions in the 'Waste > Solid waste disposal' sub-sector compared to 'Waste > Wastewater' based on 2025 CDP-ICLEI Track and States & Regions Questionnaire and Guidance as stated in 2025 CDP-ICLEI Track and States & Regions Questionnaire and Guidance?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Solid waste disposal requires reporting on all three types of emissions, whereas wastewater excludes certain categories due to irrelevance.",
      "A": "Both sub-sectors allow for the same level of applicability regarding emissions reporting outside jurisdictional boundaries.",
      "B": "Solid waste disposal and wastewater are treated identically in terms of applicability across all emissions categories listed.",
      "C": "Wastewater uniquely permits exemptions in direct emissions reporting, while solid waste disposal does not.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "105-106",
    "ref_doc": "CDP-ICLEI 2025.pdf",
    "source_text": "104 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Sectors and sub-sectors Direct emissions (metric tonnes CO2e)^ If you have no direct emissions to report, please select a notation key to explain why^ Indirect emissions from the use of grid-supplied electricity, heat, steam and/or cooling (metric tonnes CO2e)^ If you have no indirect emissions to report, please select a notation key to explain why^ Emissions occurring outside the jurisdiction boundary as a result of in-jurisdiction activities (metric tonnes CO2e) If you have no emissions to report that are occurring outside the jurisdiction boundary as a result of in-jurisdiction activities, please select a notation key to explain why Please explain any excluded sources, identify any emissions covered under an ETS and provide any other comments^ Total Transport^ Same as above Same as above Same as above Same as above Same as above Same as above Same as above Waste > Solid waste disposal^^ Same as above Same as above Not applicable for this sub-sector Not applicable for this sub-sector Same as above Same as above Same as above Waste > Biological treatment^^ Same as above Same as above Not applicable for this sub-sector Not applicable for this sub-sector Same as above Same as above Same as above\n\n[Page 106]\n105 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Sectors and sub-sectors Direct emissions (metric tonnes CO2e)^ If you have no direct emissions to report, please select a notation key to explain why^ Indirect emissions from the use of grid-supplied electricity, heat, steam and/or cooling (metric tonnes CO2e)^ If you have no indirect emissions to report, please select a notation key to explain why^ Emissions occurring outside the jurisdiction boundary as a result of in-jurisdiction activities (metric tonnes CO2e) If you have no emissions to report that are occurring outside the jurisdiction boundary as a result of in-jurisdiction activities, please select a notation key to explain why Please explain any excluded sources, identify any emissions covered under an ETS and provide any other comments^ Waste > Incineration and open burning^^ Same as above Same as above Not applicable for this sub-sector Not applicable for this sub-sector Same as above Same as above Same as above Waste > Wastewater^^ Same as above Same as above Not applicable for this sub-sector Not applicable for this sub-sector Same as above Same as above Same as above Total Waste Same as above Same as above Not applicable for this sub-sector Not applicable for this sub-sector Same as above Same as above Same as above",
    "new_id": 140
  },
  {
    "id": 12030,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes why state and regional governments are considered essential in the implementation of forest-related policies, according to 2025 CDP-ICLEI Track and States & Regions Questionnaire and Guidance?",
    "options": {
      "A": "They bridge the gap between pilot projects and full national implementation by tailoring strategies to regional contexts.",
      "B": "They are solely responsible for enforcing federal-level policies at the local level.",
      "C": "They focus exclusively on socio-economic factors without considering environmental protection aspects.",
      "D": "Their role is limited to providing financial support for nationwide conservation efforts.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "381-382",
    "ref_doc": "CDP-ICLEI 2025.pdf",
    "source_text": "380 • No, but we are currently developing one and it will be complete in the next year. • No, but we are intending to develop one in the next two years. • Do not know Requested Content The aim of this question is to allow states and regions to report on all policies relating to the management of deforestation and/or forest degradation. When reporting on the policies, consider all levels of governance that may influence your region’s work on deforestation and/or forest degradation. These policies could cover those that are specific to the boundaries of the region or those from federal and national-levels. For example, state and regional governments play a vital role in making progress towards national reductions of emissions from deforestation and overall forest degradation as their efforts represent a vital link between pilot projects and full national implementation. If “Yes” is selected to this question, you will be asked to provide information on the policies you have that address deforestation and/or forest degradation. When reporting on the policy description and enforcement field, comment on how the region is contributing towards the implementation of the policies reported. Forest policies deal specifically with forest resources and their management when treating: socio-economic factors related to increasing the performance of the sector; the role of the forest and tree resource in land use and rural development; and nature conservation and environmental protection. (10.5.1) Please provide details of your region's forests-related policies. Change From Last Year No change\n\n[Page 382]\n381 Questionnaire • States and Regions Question dependencies This question only appears if you select \"Yes” in response to 10.5. Connection to other frameworks • EU Mission on Adaptation to Climate Change Response Options Policy name Year enforced Focus area Drivers covered by the policy Policy web link Policy description and region's role in its enforcement Text field Numerical field (1970 - 2025) Select all that apply: • Deforestation • Forest degradation • Conversion of natural habitats • Forest restoration • Other, please specify Select all that apply: Options pre-populated from drivers selected in question 10.2 Text field Text field [Add Row] Requested Content This question allows states and regions to provide additional information policies relating to the management of deforestation and/or forest degradation. Forest policies deal specifically with forest resources and their management when treating: socio-economic factors related to increasing the performance of the sector; the role of the forest and tree resource in land use and rural",
    "new_id": 141
  },
  {
    "id": 12031,
    "question": "Which scenario would most likely necessitate the selection of 'Other, please specify' under the methodology section while ensuring compliance with reporting standards in 2025 CDP-ICLEI Track and States & Regions Questionnaire and Guidance?",
    "options": {
      "B": "A city adopts a newly published regional framework for emissions accounting that is not yet included in the list of recognized methodologies.",
      "A": "A city uses a proprietary tool developed by a consultancy that is already listed in the provided options.",
      "C": "A city employs a custom-built internal tool to calculate emissions without using any external datasets or frameworks.",
      "D": "A city reports its inventory using the Global Protocol for Community Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventories format but modifies it slightly to include additional sectors.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "84",
    "ref_doc": "CDP-ICLEI 2025.pdf",
    "source_text": "83 • Note that all GCoM committed cities will be required to report their inventory based on the requirements of the GCoM Common Reporting Framework and will be presented with question 3.1.3 • By selecting the option ‘GCoM Common Reporting Framework (CRF)’ option you will be requested to report your emissions in the GCoM Common Reporting Framework format (question 3.1.3) • By selecting the option ‘Global Protocol for Community Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventories (GPC)’ you will be requested to report your emissions in the Global Protocol for Community Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventories format (question 3.1.2) • By selecting any other option than the above you will be requested to report your scope and sector emissions in line with the methodology used (questions 3.1.3, and 3.1.4) • If the methodology used to develop the inventory is not presented in the list, then select ‘Other, please specify’ and provide the name and/or a brief description of the methodology used. Tool used to compile main inventory (column 9) • A GHG emissions accounting tool provides cities with the means to quantify their emissions. A tool usually performs calculations on input data provided by the city or on pre-populated data, and provides output emissions data that can be used for reporting and informing policy. It typically comes in the form of a spreadsheet, an interactive online platform, or software. CDP’s Greenhouse Gas Emissions Tools and Datasets: Guide for Cities contains best practice recommendations for choosing the right GHG emissions tool or dataset for your inventory. • Select the tool used to develop the emissions inventory from the list of tools provided. The list does not contain all tools that can be used and will be updated annually to reflect additional tools used by reporting jurisdictions. o If your emissions inventory is compiled using a tool/process developed by a consultancy that is not listed (either custom-made or a general product), you may select ‘Consultancy-developed tool/process, please specify’ and briefly state the tool/process in the text box presented. o If your emissions inventory is compiled using a tool/process developed by a regional or national jurisdiction that is not listed, you may select ‘Other regionally/nationally developed tool/process, please specify’ and briefly state the tool/process in the text box presented. o If you compile your inventory internally using tools such as Excel or Microsoft PowerBI, you may select ‘Internal tool/process’.",
    "new_id": 142
  },
  {
    "id": 12033,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the implicit relationship between the identification of deforestation drivers and the engagement of marginalized groups, as outlined in 2025 CDP-ICLEI Track and States & Regions Questionnaire and Guidance?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Ensuring the meaningful participation of marginalized groups is essential to accurately identify and analyze deforestation drivers.",
      "A": "Marginalized groups are only tangentially involved in identifying deforestation drivers since their participation is considered optional.",
      "B": "The identification of deforestation drivers requires excluding certain marginalized groups to ensure the process remains efficient and focused.",
      "D": "The analysis of deforestation drivers is conducted independently of marginalized groups, whose input is reserved for later stages of policy implementation.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "418",
    "ref_doc": "CDP-ICLEI 2025.pdf",
    "source_text": "417 • Implementing jurisdictional or integrated landscape approaches • Increase awareness/engage all partners on sustainable forest management • Institutional strengthening and capacity building on forest management • Introduction of biodiversity offsets or compensatory conservation • Promoting certification and sustainable procurement policies • Promoting and sharing information on best practices • Reinforcing and expanding networks of protected areas and/or indigenous reserves • Restoring soil fertility • Setting up disincentives (e.g. taxes or fines for forest clearing) • Setting up incentives (e.g. payments for ecosystem services) • Strengthening demand-side policies • No action currently undertaken • Other, please specify Requested Content • This question allows states and regions to report on the current or anticipated impacts of deforestation and/or forest degradation as well as the primary actions they are taking to address these impacts. The FAO’s Sustainable Forest Management (SFM) Toolbox has a module on reducing deforestation has provided additional information and guidelines on how to address deforestation by: • Identifying and analysing drivers: Location-specific, comprehensive assessments of the drivers of deforestation are the essential first steps in addressing deforestation. Note that the identification and analysis of drivers should be done with the full and informed participation of all partners, such as the people involved in the various land uses and those benefiting from, or incurring costs due to, deforestation. Care should be taken to ensure that marginalized partners, such as women and youth, minority groups, and indigenous peoples and other forest-dependent people, are able to participate meaningfully. The general requirements for such analyses are as follows:",
    "new_id": 143
  },
  {
    "id": 12035,
    "question": "Which of the following scenarios would most likely require a region to prioritize 'Enforcing forest policies and regulations' as its primary action, based on the implicit relationships between impacts, drivers, and actions according to 2025 CDP-ICLEI Track and States & Regions Questionnaire and Guidance?",
    "options": {
      "D": "When habitat fragmentation is primarily driven by illegal logging activities.",
      "A": "When increased soil erosion is caused by natural disasters unrelated to human activity.",
      "B": "When biodiversity loss occurs due to the introduction of invasive species without any regulatory violations.",
      "C": "When disruptions in the water cycle are anticipated over the long-term due to climate change alone.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "416-417",
    "ref_doc": "CDP-ICLEI 2025.pdf",
    "source_text": "415 (10.11.1) Please provide details of the deforestation and/or forest degradation impacts as well as the primary action taken by your region. Change From Last Year No change Questionnaire • States and Regions Question dependencies This question only appears if you select \"Yes” or \"Do not know\" in response to 10.11. Response Options 1 2 3 4 Impacts Forests-related issue causing the impact Driver causing the impact Anticipated timescale Select from: • Increased greenhouse gas emissions • Loss of carbon sinks • Disruptions in the water cycle • Decline in water quality • Loss of forest products and services • Disruption of sources of livelihoods • Displacement or other impacts for Indigenous peoples • Biodiversity loss • Introduction of invasive species Select all that apply: • Deforestation • Forest degradation • Conversion of natural habitats • Other, please specify Select all that apply: Options pre-populated from drivers reported in question 10.2 Select from: • Current • Short-term • Medium-term • Long-term • Unknown\n\n[Page 417]\n416 • Change in forest structure and composition • Habitat loss and wildlife displacement • Habitat fragmentation • Increased soil erosion • Change in soil quality • Increased wildfires • Other, please specify [Add Row] Primary action drop-down options: • Adoption of afforestation strategies • Adoption of reforestation strategies • Encouraging integrated land-use planning and management • Enforcing forest policies and regulations • Upholding customary right and the security of land tenure and use • Forest landscape restoration 5 6 7 8 9 Impact seriousness Impact description Primary action taken Status of action Action description Select from: • Extremely serious • Serious • Less serious • Other, please specify Text field Select from: See drop-down options below Select from: • Scoping • Pre-feasibility study • Pre-implementation • Implementation • Operation • Complete • Monitoring and reporting Text field",
    "new_id": 144
  },
  {
    "id": 12036,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between forest monitoring methods and their implications for understanding deforestation patterns in the Amazon from 2025 CDP-ICLEI Track and States & Regions Questionnaire and Guidance?",
    "options": {
      "A": "While satellite imagery reveals regional variations in forest cover change, field plot measurements remain essential for accurate biomass estimation and carbon stock assessments.",
      "B": "Field plot measurements are sufficient to map deforestation across large areas due to their precision and cost-effectiveness.",
      "C": "Satellite data provides conclusive evidence of uniform deforestation trends across all biomes in South America, including the Amazon and Cerrado regions.",
      "D": "The use of allometric equations eliminates the need for both field measurements and satellite data when estimating forest biomass at a global scale.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "406-407",
    "ref_doc": "CDP-ICLEI 2025.pdf",
    "source_text": "405 • High Conservation Value (HCV): biological, ecological, social or cultural values which are considered outstandingly significant or critically important, at the national, regional or global level, as defined by the High Conservation Values (HCV) Resource Network. Additional Information Case study: Forest monitoring in the Amazon Forest monitoring in the Amazon basin is vital to map forest cover and identify areas of deforestation. Moreover, forest biomass measurement is a necessary step to identify total forest carbon stocks and establish baselines for carbon finance mechanisms such as REDD+. Forest inventory has traditionally been conducted by field plot measurements. H.H. Chapman and others at the Yale School of Forestry were some of the first foresters to develop a forest mensuration methodology in the United States. Today, allometric equations are then used to extrapolate total biomass and carbon content over a large scale. However, these biomass estimates vary between sites, and field plot measurements are costly and time consuming to replicate over a large area. Satellite data can be used to estimate forest cover across a large area at resolutions of 30 square meters for Landsat and 250 square meters for MODIS. A recent mapping project between the University of Maryland and Google created a detailed global map of forest cover change. Using Landsat images, the research confirmed a slowing down in Amazon forest cover loss in Brazil but increased deforestation in the dry forest area of the Cerrado and Chaco forest, in southern Brazil, Bolivia and Paraguay. Other studies using MODIS images also show the annual change in forest cover in South America. They found continued forest loss in the arc of deforestation extending from Para, Brazil, south to Mato Grosso, and west into Acre, while finding forest recovery in steep areas of the Andes, the Atlantic Forest of Brazil, and the dry Caatinga of northeast coastal Brazil. Source: Global Forest Atlas – Forest Inventory and Monitoring in the Amazon\n\n[Page 407]\n406 (10.10) Has a risk or vulnerability assessment on deforestation and/or forest degradation been undertaken for your region? Change From Last Year No change Questionnaire • States and Regions Connection to other frameworks • EU Mission on Adaptation to Climate Change Response Options Select one: • Yes, a risk or vulnerability assessment has been undertaken • Yes, a risk or vulnerability assessment is currently being undertaken and it will be complete in the next year • No, a risk or vulnerability assessment has not been undertaken but we plan to undertake and complete one in the next two years • No, a risk or vulnerability assessment has not been undertaken and we do not plan to undertake one in the next two years • Do not know",
    "new_id": 145
  },
  {
    "id": 12038,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between the Climate Risk and Adaptation Framework and Taxonomy (CRAFT) and other tools or frameworks mentioned in 2025 CDP-ICLEI Track and States & Regions Questionnaire and Guidance?",
    "options": {
      "B": "CRAFT serves as a complementary tool to the C40 Climate Change Risk Assessment Screening Template by providing standardized reporting for vulnerability assessments.",
      "A": "CRAFT is primarily designed to replace existing tools like the Urban Adaptation Support Tool (UAST) by offering a more comprehensive approach to adaptation planning.",
      "C": "CRAFT uniquely enables cities to perform consistent reporting of local climate hazards, while tools like the C40 Climate Change Risk Assessment Guidance focus on broader regional strategies.",
      "D": "CRAFT integrates disaster risk reduction with climate adaptation, unlike the Urban Risk Assessments which focus exclusively on natural hazards.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "46-47",
    "ref_doc": "CDP-ICLEI 2025.pdf",
    "source_text": "45 Name Description Institution C40 Climate Change Risk Assessment Guidance A guidance document to help cities that are conducting a climate change risk assessment in line with Global Covenant of Mayors and C40 Cities requirements C40 Cities C40 Climate Change Risk Assessment Screening Template Template that compares a city's climate risk assessment with C40 Climate Change Risk Assessment Guidance. C40 Cities Vulnerability Analysis The Future We Don’t Want data analysis calculates urban vulnerability to climate change, focusing on: Extreme heat, Heat and Poverty, Water availability, Food Security, Coastal Flooding and Sea level rise and Energy supply and Sea level rise. The Future We Don’t Want (C40 Cities, GCoM), Acclimatise, and the Urban Climate Change Research Network (UCCRN) Climate Risk and Adaptation Framework and Taxonomy (CRAFT) CRAFT is a standardized reporting framework that enables cities to perform robust and consistent reporting of local climate hazards and impacts, risk and vulnerability assessment, and adaptation planning and implementation. C40 Cities Strengthening the Climate Resiliency of Cities and their Communities in Asia: Climate Risk and Vulnerability Assessment – Training Guide for Cities Resource pack for cities in Asia (available in English and Bahasa) providing a summary of key learnings from CDP’s capacity-building program, with additional case studies and resources. It is intended as a training guide for cities on conducting their climate risk and vulnerability assessment. CDP Urban Risk Assessments: Understanding Disaster and Climate Risk in Cities The Urban Risk Assessment moves towards a common, cost-effective approach for specifying where and how many people are vulnerable to natural hazards and identifying high-risk infrastructure. World Bank\n\n[Page 47]\n46 Urban Adaptation Support Tool (UAST) The aim of the Urban Adaptation Support Tool (UAST) is to assist cities, towns and other local authorities in developing, implementing and monitoring climate change adaptation plans. See Section 3 for information on assessing climate change risks and vulnerabilities. Climate-ADAPT (European Commission, European Environment Agency) (2.1.1) Provide details on your climate risk and vulnerability assessment. Change From Last Year No change Questionnaire • Cities o Pathway 1: Columns 1-6 o Pathway 2 and 3: Columns 1-7 • States and Regions Question dependencies This question is presented if ‘Yes, a climate risk and vulnerability assessment has been undertaken’ is selected in response to 2.1. Connection to other frameworks • [Cities only] GCoM: Adaptation Pillar",
    "new_id": 146
  },
  {
    "id": 12039,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the implications of reporting a climate emergency declaration in column 1 and its associated requirements from 2025 CDP-ICLEI Track and States & Regions Questionnaire and Guidance?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The jurisdiction is required to include links to the declaration text or supporting documentation in the 'Comment' field, along with motivations for the declaration.",
      "A": "The jurisdiction must provide a detailed budget for all planned climate actions in the 'Comment' field.",
      "B": "The jurisdiction should report the year of formal approval of the climate emergency declaration in column 6.",
      "D": "The jurisdiction needs to describe excluded or additional areas relative to the jurisdiction boundary in the 'Comment' field.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "300-301",
    "ref_doc": "CDP-ICLEI 2025.pdf",
    "source_text": "299 • Implementation complete: if the actions identified in the plan have been fully implemented; • Monitoring and evaluation in progress: if the project is complete and results are being measured; • Plan update in progress: if your jurisdiction has begun to update the action plan based on the progress and success of actions that have been executed. Boundary of plan relative to jurisdiction boundary (column 5) • This column is not presented if 'No other environment-related plans and/or strategies in the jurisdiction to report’ is selected in column 1. • Indicate the boundary of your climate-related plan relative to your jurisdiction’s boundary (as reported in 0.1). • If the jurisdiction’s climate-related plan covers only part of the jurisdiction or covers the whole jurisdiction and adjoining areas outside of the jurisdiction boundary then use the explanation field presented to briefly describe which areas are excluded or additional areas included. Year of formal approval of plan and End year of plan (column 6 and 7) • This column is not presented if 'No other environment-related plans and/or strategies in the jurisdiction to report’ is selected in column 1. • Enter the year the plan was published and approved by the jurisdiction and the year in which the plan will conclude as a numeric value. Comment (column 8) • You may use the field ‘Comment’ to add any additional context to your response. • If reporting a climate emergency declaration in column 1, report in this column the motivation of your jurisdiction for declaring a Climate Emergency, and to provide a link(s) to where the declaration text and/or other supporting documentation can be viewed on your website. You may also include further information about your Climate Emergency Declaration, for example the main climate actions associated and their progress.\n\n[Page 301]\n300 (8.3) Does your jurisdiction have a strategy for reducing emissions from consumption of the most relevant goods and services? (S&R: N/A) Change From Last Year No change Questionnaire • Cities: Pathway 3 Connection to other frameworks • [Cities only] NetZeroCities – Mission Cities • C40 Leadership Standards • Union of the Baltic Cities Sustainable Cities Commission • ICLEI Ukrainian Cities: Climate Neutrality, Resilience and Recovery • Sustainable Development Goals: SDG12, SDG13 Response Options [*column/row appearance is dependent on selections in this question] 0 1 2 3",
    "new_id": 147
  },
  {
    "id": 12040,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes the logical relationship between the 'Projected population year' and the 'CRF level' in terms of their dependency or interrelation within the reporting framework from 2025 CDP-ICLEI Track and States & Regions Questionnaire and Guidance?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The CRF level and projected population year are unrelated, as the former pertains to reporting structure while the latter is a demographic forecast.",
      "A": "The CRF level determines the projected population year, as higher complexity frameworks require longer-term projections.",
      "B": "The projected population year is independent of the CRF level, but both are contingent upon the administrative boundary selected.",
      "C": "The projected population year must align with the financial reporting period defined by the selected currency, which indirectly dictates the CRF level.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "14-15",
    "ref_doc": "CDP-ICLEI 2025.pdf",
    "source_text": "13 4 5 6 7 8 Area of the jurisdiction boundary (in square km) Percentage range of jurisdiction area that is natural or modified terrestrial, freshwater, coastal and/or marine ecosystem Current (or most recent) population size Population year Projected population size Numeric field Select from: • <5% • 5-10% • 11-20% • 21-30% • 31-40% • 41-50% • 51-60% • 61-70% • 71-80% • 81-90% • 91-100% • I do not have this data Numeric field Select from: 2010-2025 Numeric field\n\n[Page 15]\n14 9 10 11 Projected population year Select the currency used for all financial information reported throughout your response Select which Common Reporting Framework level you are reporting to^ Select from: 2026-2050 Select from: Appendix A - (Currency) Select from: • CRF Complete level • CRF Simplified level Requested Content General • Any further contextual information relevant to your response may be added to question 11.1. Administrative boundary (column 1) • Select the administrative boundary of your jurisdiction by selecting the most appropriate response from the drop-down options listed. Next highest level of government (column 2) • Select the next highest level of government. For example, if your administration is a county which is considered a legal subdivision of a state or regional government you may select the option ‘State/regional’ as the most appropriate. • If none of the options represented reflect your jurisdiction’s context please select ‘Other, please specify’ and input the next highest level of government. If there is no higher level of government then select the option ‘No higher level of government’. Next lowest level of government (column 3)",
    "new_id": 148
  },
  {
    "id": 12041,
    "question": "Which of the following represents a necessary condition for local governments reporting under the Complete level of the Common Reporting Framework (CRF) to align with both adaptation and energy-related actions in 2025 CDP-ICLEI Track and States & Regions Questionnaire and Guidance?",
    "options": {
      "A": "They must report more than one key action per pillar, including specific commitments to increase energy access or reduce energy poverty, but are not required to link these to biodiversity benefits.",
      "B": "They must demonstrate at least one key action per pillar, including Mitigation, Adaptation, and Energy Access & Poverty, while also reporting on resilience-building through nature-based solutions.",
      "C": "They must ensure all reported actions explicitly integrate sustainable food production practices, such as regenerative agriculture, as part of their adaptation strategies.",
      "D": "They must declare commitments to reducing energy poverty exclusively through nature-positive production methods that avoid deforestation.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "324-325",
    "ref_doc": "CDP-ICLEI 2025.pdf",
    "source_text": "323 Explanation of Terms • Adaptation action: the result of the climate risk and vulnerability assessment, adaptation goals, and the strategic climate action plan. They are the interventions taken to achieve a given strategy, and include policies, projects, programmes, partnerships and other activities (C40). • Nature-based Solutions: Nature-based solutions are actions to protect, conserve, restore, sustainably use and manage natural or modified terrestrial, freshwater, coastal and marine ecosystems, which address social, economic and environmental challenges effectively and adaptively, while simultaneously providing human well-being, ecosystem services and resilience and biodiversity benefits (UNEA-5). • Resilience: the capacity of social, economic and environmental systems to cope with a hazardous event or trend or disturbance, responding or reorganizing in ways that maintain their essential function, identity and structure while also maintaining the capacity for adaptation, learning and transformation (IPCC, 2018). • Sustainable, healthy diet: While the exact definition of what constitutes a sustainable, healthy diet is subjective and may vary by city, the general principles are at a diet that prioritizes low-carbon, sustainably sourced health-positive foods, usually largely plant-based and with a reduction in meat consumption. Several frameworks define diets in this vein: o WRI’s Cool Food initiative emphasize low-carbon footprint meals that meat nutritional safeguards o EAT, a partner of the Cool Food initiative, utilizes the “Planetary Healthy diet,” a flexible set of guidelines for food groups that constitute an optimal diet for human health and environmental sustainability. It emphasizes a plant-forward diet where whole grains, fruits, vegetables, nuts and legumes comprise a greater proportion of foods consumed. Meat and dairy constitute important parts of the diet but in significantly smaller proportions than whole grains, fruits, vegetables, nuts and legumes. o The Milan Urban Food Pact defines a sustainable diet as one that is “healthy, safe, culturally appropriate, environmentally friendly, and rights-based.” • Sustainable food production practices: the list below are some examples and is not exhaustive: o Regenerative agriculture: an inclusive agroecosystems approach for conserving land and soil, biodiversity, and improving ecosystem services within farming systems. It focuses on the regeneration of living soil, improved micro hydrology, and conserving biodiversity at all levels while enhancing inputs use efficiency and ecosystem system\n\n[Page 325]\n324 services (FAO 2021). Practices include cover crops, reducing tilling, crop rotation, composting, organic farming, and natural fertilizer use in place of chemicals and herbicides. o Nature-positive production: Food production systems that provide beneficial impacts to nature (e.g. pollinator support, reforestation, improved biodiversity, etc) and avoid typical impacts to the environment such as deforestation (UNEP). o Nature-based solutions may also be applied to sustainable food production. GCoM Guidance Link to the GCoM Common Reporting Framework (CRF) • Section 6.1 “Climate action plans” of the Common Reporting Framework indicates that local governments reporting to the Complete level shall report more than one key action per pillar (Mitigation and Adaptation), and at least one key action for the Energy Access & Poverty pillar. Under the Simplified reporting level, local governments shall report at least one key action per pillar (Mitigation, Adaptation and Energy Access & Poverty). Energy-related Actions: When setting a target, local governments shall demonstrate commitments to increase in energy access and/or reduction in energy poverty. Local governments shall declare these commitments in their plan(s). Additionally, for all energy-related actions, local governments shall provide information on the related energy access and poverty indicators and how the implementation of the action impacts the value of the those indicators (e.g. increases/decreases). Avoiding common mistakes Simplified level^: Mandatory (also mandatory for Complete level) Complete level^^: Mandatory (mandatory only for Complete level)",
    "new_id": 149
  },
  {
    "id": 12042,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between funding status and inclusion in climate action plans as implied by 2025 CDP-ICLEI Track and States & Regions Questionnaire and Guidance?",
    "options": {
      "B": "An action’s inclusion in a climate action plan is independent of its funding status but requires completed feasibility studies.",
      "A": "Actions with fully secured funding are automatically included in climate action plans.",
      "C": "Feasibility studies must be finalized and at least partial funding secured for an action to be included in a climate action plan.",
      "D": "Inclusion in a climate action plan guarantees that an action will have all funding fully secured.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "344-345",
    "ref_doc": "CDP-ICLEI 2025.pdf",
    "source_text": "343 10 11 Co-benefits realized Funding source(s) Public Health • Improved physical health • Improved mental wellbeing/quality of life • Improved air quality • Improved preparedness for health service delivery • Reduced health impacts from extreme heat or cold weather • Reduced disaster/disease/contamination-related health impacts • Reduced premature deaths • Reduced health costs Environmental • Improved water/soil quality • Improved waste management • Reduced noise/light pollution • Increased/improved green space • Protected/improved biodiversity and ecosystem services Other impacts measured • Other impacts from climate actions, please specify • Do not know\n\n[Page 345]\n344 12 13 14 15 16 Status of action in the reporting year Inclusion in climate action plan and/or jurisdiction development/master plan^ Total cost of action (in currency specified in 1.2) Does this action contribute to your jurisdiction’s energy access and/or poverty objectives?^ Select the related energy access and/or poverty indicator(s) for this action, and indicate how they are impacted by the action (i.e. value increased or decreased)^ Select from: Pre-implementation • Scoping • Pre-feasibility study • Feasibility finalized, but currently no finance secured • Feasibility finalized, and finance partially secured • Feasibility finalized, and finance fully secured Implementation • Implementation complete in the reporting year • Implementation underway with completion expected in less than one year Select from: • Action is included in climate action plan and/or development/master plan • Action is not included in climate action plan and/or development/master plan • No climate action plan and/or development/master plan has been developed • Other, please specify Numeric field Select from: • Yes • No • Do not know Select all that apply: • Energy consumption from renewable energy sources (increase / decrease) • Source mix of thermal energy (heating and cooling) consumed within local boundary (increase / decrease) • Installed capacity of renewable energy sources within local boundary (increase / decrease) • Total energy generated from renewable energy sources within local boundary (increase / decrease) • Percentage of households within the municipality with access to clean cooking fuels and technologies (increase / decrease) • Percentage of households or population within the city boundary that spending up",
    "new_id": 150
  },
  {
    "id": 12045,
    "question": "What implication can be drawn about the relationship between the Simplified and Complete reporting levels in terms of their impact on global comparability and local government flexibility from 2025 CDP-ICLEI Track and States & Regions Questionnaire and Guidance?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The Simplified level prioritizes local government flexibility, even at the expense of reduced global comparability.",
      "A": "The Simplified level ensures greater global comparability by requiring all cities to report identical data points.",
      "B": "The Complete level sacrifices local government flexibility to prioritize consistent, comprehensive, and globally comparable data.",
      "D": "Both Simplified and Complete levels equally balance global comparability with local government flexibility.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "19-20",
    "ref_doc": "CDP-ICLEI 2025.pdf",
    "source_text": "18 • Sovereign city-state: A state consisting of a sovereign city and its dependencies (e.g., Singapore; Vatican City). • Special municipality: Local government with the authority and responsibilities of all administrative levels below the national government. These heightened administrative powers are usually given to large or significant cities within a country/area, very often the capital city. • Sub-municipal district: Further administrative subdivision of a Municipality or Special city / Federal district. They are occasionally present in very large cities and are responsible for many of the tasks assigned to municipalities in other parts of the country/area. • Town: An area with defined boundaries and a local government which is usually larger than a village but smaller than a city. • State / Regional: Top level administrative subdivision of a country/area. GCoM guidance CRF Complete and Simplified reporting levels In 2024 GCoM published an updated version (version 7) of the Common Reporting Framework (CRF) which expands on Version 6, to introduce the Energy Access & Poverty Pillar and an additional simplified reporting level. The Simplified reporting level is introduced to make it easier for local governments, such as those with low available resources and low data capacity, to comply with their commitment to the GCoM. The Simplified reporting level prioritizes flexibility and ease of access for the local governments over consistent, more complete, and comparable data at the global level, that local governments using the Complete reporting level contribute to. GCoM cities need to select in column 11 which level they would like to report against. Please note that this selection WILL NOT change the questionnaire layout, meaning that cities will see ALL GCoM questions and columns for Simplified and Complete level. GCoM cities are welcome to report to as many datapoints as they want regardless of their selected CRF level. For example, cities selecting the Simplified level can also report to Complete level data points. Throughout the questionnaire, all Simplified level columns are marked with the ‘^’ symbol while Complete level questions are marked with ‘^^’. Cities reporting to the Simplified level need only answer columns marked ‘^’, whereas cities reporting to the Complete level need to answer columns marked ‘^’ AND ‘^^’.\n\n[Page 20]\n19 (1.3) Provide information on your jurisdiction’s oversight of climate-related risks and opportunities and how these issues have impacted your jurisdiction's planning. Change From Last Year No change Questionnaire • Cities: Pathway 2 and 3 • States and Regions Connection to other frameworks • TCFD: Governance (Disclosure A & B), Strategy (Disclosure A & B) • NetZeroCities - Mission Cities • Race to Zero • Race to Resilience • [States and Regions only] RegionsAdapt • [States and Regions only] Under2 Coalition • ICLEI Ukrainian Cities: Climate Neutrality, Resilience and Recovery • EU Mission on Adaptation to Climate Change • Sustainable Development Goals: SDG11, SDG13, SDG16, SDG17",
    "new_id": 151
  },
  {
    "id": 12046,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures an implicit relationship between the reported drivers of forest impacts and the status of actions taken to address them on the basis of 2025 CDP-ICLEI Track and States & Regions Questionnaire and Guidance?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Forest landscape restoration is likely aligned with addressing medium- to long-term impacts like habitat fragmentation, given its association with implementation or monitoring phases.",
      "A": "The adoption of afforestation strategies is primarily linked to short-term impacts such as increased wildfires, as indicated by the operation phase.",
      "B": "Enforcing forest policies and regulations is most effective during the pre-implementation stage for addressing long-term biodiversity loss caused by deforestation.",
      "C": "Upholding customary rights directly mitigates current disruptions in the water cycle, based on its categorization under extremely serious impacts.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "416-417",
    "ref_doc": "CDP-ICLEI 2025.pdf",
    "source_text": "415 (10.11.1) Please provide details of the deforestation and/or forest degradation impacts as well as the primary action taken by your region. Change From Last Year No change Questionnaire • States and Regions Question dependencies This question only appears if you select \"Yes” or \"Do not know\" in response to 10.11. Response Options 1 2 3 4 Impacts Forests-related issue causing the impact Driver causing the impact Anticipated timescale Select from: • Increased greenhouse gas emissions • Loss of carbon sinks • Disruptions in the water cycle • Decline in water quality • Loss of forest products and services • Disruption of sources of livelihoods • Displacement or other impacts for Indigenous peoples • Biodiversity loss • Introduction of invasive species Select all that apply: • Deforestation • Forest degradation • Conversion of natural habitats • Other, please specify Select all that apply: Options pre-populated from drivers reported in question 10.2 Select from: • Current • Short-term • Medium-term • Long-term • Unknown\n\n[Page 417]\n416 • Change in forest structure and composition • Habitat loss and wildlife displacement • Habitat fragmentation • Increased soil erosion • Change in soil quality • Increased wildfires • Other, please specify [Add Row] Primary action drop-down options: • Adoption of afforestation strategies • Adoption of reforestation strategies • Encouraging integrated land-use planning and management • Enforcing forest policies and regulations • Upholding customary right and the security of land tenure and use • Forest landscape restoration 5 6 7 8 9 Impact seriousness Impact description Primary action taken Status of action Action description Select from: • Extremely serious • Serious • Less serious • Other, please specify Text field Select from: See drop-down options below Select from: • Scoping • Pre-feasibility study • Pre-implementation • Implementation • Operation • Complete • Monitoring and reporting Text field",
    "new_id": 152
  },
  {
    "id": 12355,
    "question": "Which combination of factors most directly increases the vulnerability of global food systems to climate change, according to the interplay of agricultural and trade policies described in the Climate Change and Land: An IPCC Special Report on climate change, desertification, land degradation, sustainable land management, food security, and greenhouse gas fluxes in terrestrial ecosystems?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The emphasis on productivity-driven agricultural policies coupled with insufficient regulation of international market volatility.",
      "B": "The reliance on trade for food security in regions with limited agricultural capacity, exacerbated by historical subsidies depressing global prices.",
      "C": "The promotion of high-yield commodity exports without mechanisms to stabilize local food supplies during market shocks.",
      "D": "The prioritization of environmental sustainability over productivity, leading to reduced agricultural outputs globally.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "518",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC SRCCL.pdf",
    "source_text": "508 Chapter 5 Food security55.7.1 Enabling policy environments The scope for responses to make sustainable land use inclusive of climate change mitigation and adaptation, and the policies to implement them, are covered in detail in Chapters 6 and 7. Here we highlight some of the major policy areas that have shaped the food system, and might be able to shape responses in future. Although two families of policy – agriculture and trade – have been instrumental in shaping the food system in the past (and potentially have led to conditions that increase climate vulnerability) (Benton and Bailey 2019), a much wider family of policy instruments can be deployed to reconfigure the food system to deliver healthy diets in a sustainable way. 5.7.1.1 Agriculture and trade policy Agriculture. The thrust of agricultural policies over the last 50 years has been to increase productivity, even if at the expense of environmental sustainability (Benton and Bailey 2019). For example, in 2007–2009, 46% of OECD support for agriculture was based on measures of output (price support or payments based on yields), 37% of support was based on the current or historical area planted, herd size (or correlated measures of the notional costs of farming), and 13% was payments linked to input prices. In a similar vein, non-OECD countries have promoted productivity growth for their agricultural sectors. Trade. Along with agricultural policy to grow productivity, the development of frameworks to liberalise trade (such as the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade – GATT – Uruguay Round, now incorporated into the World Trade Organization) have been essential in stimulating the growth of a globalised food system. Almost every country has a reliance on trade to fulfil some or all of its local food needs, and trade networks have grown to be highly complex (Puma et al. 2015; MacDonald et al. 2015; Fader et al. 2013 and Ercsey-Ravasz et al. 2012). This is because many countries lack the capacity to produce sufficient food due to climatic conditions, soil quality, water constraints, and availability of farmland (FAO 2015b). In a world of liberalised trade, using comparative advantage to maximise production in high-yielding commodities, exporting excess production, and importing supplies of other goods supports economic growth. City states as well as many small island states, do not have adequate farmland to feed their populations, while Sub-Saharan African countries are projected to experience high population growth as well as to be negatively impacted by climate change, and thus will likely find it difficult to produce all of their own food supplies (Agarwal et al. 2002). One study estimates that some 66 countries are currently incapable of being self-sufficient in food (Pradhan et al. 2014). Estimates of the proportion of people relying on trade for basic food security vary from about 16% to about 22% (Fader et al. 2013; Pradhan et al. 2014), with this figure rising to between 1.5 and 6 billion people by 2050, depending on dietary shifts, agricultural gains, and climate impacts (Pradhan et al. 2014). Global trade is therefore essential for achieving food and nutrition security under climate change because it provides a mechanism for enhancing the efficiency of supply chains, reducing the vulnerability of food availability to changes in local weather, and moving production from areas of surplus to areas of deficit (FAO 2018d). However, the benefits of trade will only be realised if trade is managed in ways that maximise broadened access to new markets while minimising the risks of increased exposure to international competition and market volatility (Challinor et al. 2018; Brown et al. 2017b). As described in Section 5.8.1 , trade acts to buffer exposure to climate risks when the market works well. Under certain conditions – such as shocks, or the perception of a shock, coupled with a lack of food stocks or lack of transparency about stocks (Challinor et al. 2018; Marchand et al. 2016) – the market can fail and trade can expose countries to food price shocks. Furthermore, Clapp (2016) showed that trade, often supported by high levels of subsidy support to agriculture in some countries, can depress world prices and reduce incomes for other agricultural exporters. Lower food prices that result from subsidy support may benefit urban consumers in importing countries, but at the same time they may hurt farmers’ incomes in those same countries. The outmigration of ",
    "new_id": 153
  },
  {
    "id": 12416,
    "question": "Which scenario best illustrates a limitation of high-tech precision agriculture that is not shared by low-tech precision agriculture, as discussed in the Climate Change and Land: An IPCC Special Report on climate change, desertification, land degradation, sustainable land management, food security, and greenhouse gas fluxes in terrestrial ecosystems?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Farmers using wireless sensors for real-time soil moisture monitoring struggle to interpret the data effectively due to a lack of technical expertise.",
      "A": "Small-scale farmers in the Global South achieve significant yield improvements by applying seed priming techniques without needing expensive equipment.",
      "C": "Herbicide savings achieved through site-specific weed management are negated by the high costs of implementing advanced sensor technologies.",
      "D": "Controlled traffic farming increases yields but requires substantial capital investment to adopt automatic steering and satellite guidance systems.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "513",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC SRCCL.pdf",
    "source_text": "503 Food security Chapter 55 Cross-Chapter Box 6 (continued) Improved efficiency – example of precision agriculture Precision farming usually refers to optimising production in fields through site-specific choices of crop varieties, agrochemical application, precise water management (e.g., in given areas or threshold moistures) and management of crops at a small scale (or livestock as individuals) (Hedley 2015) . Precision agriculture has the potential to achieve higher yields in a more efficient and sustainable manner compared with traditional low-precision methods. Precision agriculture Precision agriculture is a technologically advanced approach that uses continual monitoring of crop and livestock performance to actively inform management practices. Precise monitoring of crop performance over the course of the growing season will enable farmers to economise on their inputs in terms of water, nutrients and pest management. Therefore, it can contribute to both the food security (by maintaining yields), sustainability (by reducing unnecessary inputs) and land sparing goals associated with SI. The site-specific management of weeds allows a more efficient application of herbicide to specific weed patches within crops (Jensen et al. 2012) . Such precision weed control has resulted in herbicide savings of 19–22% for winter oilseed rape, 46–57% for sugar beet and 60–77% for winter wheat production (Gutjahr and Gerhards 2010) . The use of on-farm sensors for real time management of crop and livestock performance can enhance farm efficiency (Aqeel-Ur-Rehman et al. 2014) . Mapping soil nutrition status can allow for more targeted, and therefore more effective, nutrient management practices (Hedley 2015) . Using wireless sensors to monitor environmental conditions, such as soil moisture, has the potential to allow more efficient crop irrigation (Srbinovska et al. 2015) . Controlled traffic farming, where farm machinery is confined to permanent tracks, using automatic steering and satellite guidance, increases yields by minimising soil compaction. However, barriers to the uptake of many of these high-tech precision agriculture technologies remain. In what is described as the ‘implementation problem’, despite the potential to collect vast quantities of data on crop or livestock performance, applying these data to inform management decisions remains a challenge (Lindblom et al. 2017) . Low-tech precision agriculture The principle of precision agriculture can be applied equally to low capital-input farming, in the form of low-tech precision agriculture (Conway 2013) . The principle is the same, but instead of adopting capital-heavy equipment (such as sensor technology connected to the ‘internet of things’, or large machinery and expensive inputs), farmers use knowledge and experience and re-purposed innovative approaches, such as a bottle cap as a fertiliser measure for each plant, applied by hand (Mondal and Basu 2009) . This type of precision agriculture is particularly relevant to small-scale farming in the Global South, where capital investment is major limiting factor. For example, the application of a simple seed priming technique resulted in a 20 to 30% increase in yields of pearl millet and sorghum in semi-arid West Africa (Aune et al. 2017) . Low-tech precision agriculture has the potential to increase the economic return per unit land area while also creating new employment opportunities.Cross-Chapter Box 6, Table 1 | Approaches to sustainable intensification of agriculture (Pretty et al. 2018; Hill 1985). Approach Sub-category Examples/notes Improving efficiencyPrecision agriculture High- and low-technology options to optimise resource use. Genetic improvements Improved resource use efficiency through crop or livestock breeding. Irrigation technology Increased production in areas currently limited by precipitation (sustainable water supply required). Organisational scale-upIncreasing farm organisational scale (e.g., cooperative schemes) can increase efficiency via facilitation of mechanisation and precision techniques. SubstitutionGreen fertiliserReplacing chemical fertiliser with green manures, compost (including vermicompost), biosolids and digestate (by-product of anaerobic digestion) to maintain and improve soil fertility. Biological control Pest control through encouraging natural predators. Alternative crops Replacment of annual with perennial crops reducing the need for soil disturbance and reducing erosion. Pre",
    "new_id": 154
  },
  {
    "id": 12535,
    "question": "Which factor, when combined with rising saline groundwater tables, poses the greatest threat to the sustainability of continental oases in Tunisia and Egypt, as described in the Climate Change and Land: An IPCC Special Report on climate change, desertification, land degradation, sustainable land management, food security, and greenhouse gas fluxes in terrestrial ecosystems?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The inefficient drainage systems exacerbating soil salinisation and waterlogging.",
      "A": "The increasing demand for water due to population growth and agricultural expansion.",
      "B": "The loss of winter chill required for temperate-zone fruit trees to break dormancy.",
      "D": "The over-reliance on non-renewable groundwater for irrigation in desert agriculture.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "311",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC SRCCL.pdf",
    "source_text": "301 Desertification Chapter 33Date palms are routinely assumed to be able to endure very high temperatures, but recent transcriptomic and metabolomic evidence suggests that heat stress reactions already occur at 35°C (Safronov et al. 2017), which is not exceptionally warm for many oases in the region. Given current assumptions about the heat-tolerance of date palm, however, adverse effects are expected to be small (Aldababseh et al. 2018; Shabani et al. 2015). For some other perennial oasis crops, impacts of temperature increases are already apparent. Between 2004/2005 and 2012/2013, high-mountain oases of Al Jabal Al Akhdar in Oman lost almost all fruit and nut trees of temperate-zone origin, with the abundance of peaches, apricots, grapes, figs, pears, apples, and plums dropping by between 86% and 100% (Al-Kalbani et al. 2016). This implies that that the local climate may not remain suitable for species that depend on cool winters to break their dormancy period (Luedeling et al. 2009). A similar impact is very probable in Tunisia and Morocco, as well as in other oasis locations in the Arabian Peninsula and North Africa (Benmoussa et al. 2007). All these studies expect strong decreases in winter chill, raising concerns that many currently well-established species will no longer be viable in locations where they are grown today. The risk of detrimental chill shortfalls is expected to increase gradually, slowly diminishing the economic prospects to produce such species. Without adequate adaptation actions, the consequences of this development for many traditional oasis settlements and other plantations of similar species could be highly negative. At the same time, population growth and agricultural expansion in many oasis settlements are leading to substantial increases in water demand for human consumption (Al-Kalbani et al. 2014). For example, a large unmet water demand has been projected for future scenarios in the valley of Seybouse in East Algeria (Aoun-Sebaiti et al. 2014), and similar conclusions were drawn for Wadi El Natrun in Egypt (Switzman et al. 2018). Modelling studies have indicated long-term decline in available water and increasing risk of water shortages – for example, for oases in Morocco (Johannsen et al. 2016; Karmaoui et al. 2016), the Dakhla oasis in Egypt’s Western Desert (Sefelnasr et al. 2014) and for the large Upper Mega Aquifer of the Arabian Peninsula (Siebert et al. 2016). Mainly due to the risk of water shortages, Souissi et al. (2018) classified almost half of all farmers in Tunisia as non-resilient to climate change, especially those relying on tree crops, which limit opportunities for short-term adaptation actions. The maintenance of the oasis systems and the safeguarding of their population’s livelihoods are currently threatened by continuous water degradation, increasing soil salinisation, and soil contamination (Besser et al. 2017). Waterlogging and salinisation of soils due to rising saline groundwater tables coupled with inefficient drainage systems have become common to all continental oases in Tunisia, most of which are concentrated around saline depressions, known locally as chotts (Ben Hassine et al. 2013). Similar processes of salinisation are also occurring in the oasis areas of Egypt due to agricultural expansion, excessive use of water for irrigation and deficiency of the drainage systems (Abo-Ragab 2010; Masoud and Koike 2006). A prime example for this is Siwa oasis (Figure 3.16), a depression extending over 1050 km2 in the north-western desert of Egypt in the north of the sand dune belt of the Great Sand Sea (Abo-Ragab and Zaghloul 2017). Siwa oasis has been recognised as a Globally Important Agricultural Heritage Site (GIAHS) by the FAO for being an in situ repository of plant genetic resources, especially of uniquely adapted varieties of date palm, olive and secondary crops that are highly esteemed for their quality and continue to play a significant role in rural livelihoods and diets (FAO 2016). The population growth in Siwa is leading rapid agricultural expansion and land reclamation. The Siwan farmers are converting the surrounding desert into reclaimed land by applying their old inherited traditional practices. Yet, agricultural expansion in the oasis mainly depends on non-renewable groundwaters. Soil salinisation and vegetation loss have been accelerating since 2000 due to water mismanagement and improper drainage systems (Masoud and Koike 2006). Between 1990 an",
    "new_id": 155
  },
  {
    "id": 12542,
    "question": "Which scenario presents the most nuanced trade-off between mitigation benefits and potential adverse effects on food security, based on the conditions described in the Climate Change and Land: An IPCC Special Report on climate change, desertification, land degradation, sustainable land management, food security, and greenhouse gas fluxes in terrestrial ecosystems?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Expanding bioenergy and BECCS without restrictions, resulting in high mitigation potential but increasing competition for arable land and food production.",
      "A": "Large-scale deployment of bioenergy and BECCS on marginal lands, which minimizes biodiversity impacts but also limits the scale of CO2 removal.",
      "B": "Widespread implementation of enhanced mineral weathering, which offers moderate to large mitigation benefits but has unquantified effects on food production globally.",
      "C": "Adopting dietary changes that significantly reduce agricultural land use, while simultaneously creating large benefits for both mitigation and food security.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "625",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC SRCCL.pdf",
    "source_text": "615 Interlinkages between desertification, land degradation, food security and greenhouse gas fluxes Chapter 66Table 6.58 | Summary of direction and size of impact of land management options specifically for CDR on mitigation, adaptation, desertification, land degradation and food security. Integrated response option Mitigation Adaptation Desertification Land degradation Food securityContext and evidence base for magnitude of effect Enhanced weathering of mineralsND ND NDMitigation: Moderate to large benefits by removing atmospheric CO 2 (Table 6.17; Lenton 2010; Smith et al. 2016a; Taylor et al. 2016). Adaptation: There is no literature to assess the global impacts of enhanced mineral weathering on adaptation (Table 6.25) nor on desertification (Table 6.33). Land degradation: Limited benefits expected since ground minerals can increase pH where acidification is the driver of degradation (Table 6.41; Taylor et al. 2016). Food security: Though there may be co-benefits for food production (Beerling et al. 2018), these have not been quantified globally (Table 6.49). Bioenergy and BECCSMitigation: Large benefits of large-scale bioenergy and BECCS by potential to remove large quantities of CO 2 from the atmosphere (Table 6.17). Adaptation: Limited adverse impacts of large-scale bioenergy and BECCS by increasing pres - sure on land (Table 6.25). Desertification: Up to 15 million km2 of additional land is required in 2100 in 2°C scenarios, which will increase pressure for desertification and land degradation (Sections 6.3.3.1 and 6.3.4.1). This defines the maxi - mum area potentially impacted, though the actual area affected by this additional pressure is not easily quantified. Land degradation: Up to 15 million km2 of additional land is required in 2100 in 2°C scenarios, which will increase pressure for desertification and land degradation (Sections 6.3.3.1; 6.3.4.1). This defines the maximum area potentially impacted, though the actual area affected by this additional pressure is not easily quantified. Food security: Large adverse impacts of large-scale bioenergy and BECCS through increased competition for land for food (Table 6.49). These potentials and effects assume large areas of bioenergy crops, resulting in large mitigation potentials (i.e., >3 GtCO 2 yr–1). The sign and magnitude of the effects of bioenergy and BECCS depends on the scale of deployment, the type of bioenergy feedstock, which other response options are included, and where bioenergy is grown (including prior land use and indirect land-use change emissions). For example, limiting bioenergy production to marginal lands or abandoned cropland would have negligible effects on biodiversity, food security, and potentially small co-benefits for land degradation; however, the benefits for mitigation would also be smaller (Cross-Chapter Box 7 in this chapter, and Table 6.13). Note: Cell colours correspond to the large, moderate and small categories shown in Table 6.53. ND = no data. Table 6.59 | Summary of direction and size of impact of demand management options on mitigation, adaptation, desertification, land degradation and food security. Integrated response option Mitigation Adaptation Desertification Land degradation Food securityContext and evidence base for magnitude of effect Dietary change NDMitigation: Large benefits for mitigation by greatly reducing GHG emissions (Chapter 5 and Table 6.18). Adaptation: While it would be expected to help with adaptation by reducing agricultural land area, there are no studies providing global quan - tifications (Table 6.26). Desertification: Potential moderate benefits by decreasing pressure on land – restricted by relatively limited global area (Table 6.34). Land degradation: Large benefits by decreasing pressure on land (Table 6.42). Food security: Large benefits by decreasing competition for land, allowing more food to be produced from less land (Table 6.50). Reduced post- harvest lossesMitigation: Large benefits by reducing food sector GHG emissions and reducing the area required to produce the same quantity of food (Table 6.18), though increased use of refrigeration could increase emissions from energy use. Adap - tation: Large benefits by reducing pressure on land (Table 6.26). Desertification and land degradation: Moderate benefits for both by reducing pressure on land (Table 6.34 and Table 6.42). Food security: Large benefits since most of the food wasted in developing countries arises from post-harvest losse",
    "new_id": 156
  },
  {
    "id": 12607,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why land surface air temperatures (LSATs) are rising faster than sea surface temperatures (SSTs), based on the mechanisms described in the Climate Change and Land: An IPCC Special Report on climate change, desertification, land degradation, sustainable land management, food security, and greenhouse gas fluxes in terrestrial ecosystems?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Evaporation from land surfaces is lower than from oceans, reducing cooling effects and amplifying temperature rises over land.",
      "B": "Land surfaces absorb more solar radiation due to higher albedo compared to oceans, leading to greater temperature increases.",
      "C": "Anthropogenic aerosols over oceans counteract warming more effectively than over land, causing a slower rise in SSTs.",
      "D": "The thermal inertia of oceans causes them to warm more slowly, while land surfaces respond rapidly to increased greenhouse gas concentrations.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "54",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC SRCCL.pdf",
    "source_text": "44 Technical Summary TSTS.2 Land–climate interactions Implications of climate change, variability and extremes for land systems It is certain that globally averaged land surface air temperature (LSAT) has risen faster than the global mean surface temperature (i.e., combined LSAT and sea surface temperature) from the preindustrial period (1850–1900) to the present day (1999–2018). According to the single longest and most extensive dataset, from 1850–1900 to 2006–2015 mean land surface air temperature has increased by 1.53°C (very likely range from 1.38°C to 1.68°C) while global mean surface temperature has increased by 0.87°C ( likely range from 0.75°C to 0.99°C). For the 1880–2018 period, when four independently produced datasets exist, the LSAT increase was 1.41°C (1.31–1.51°C), where the range represents the spread in the datasets’ median estimates. Analyses of paleo records, historical observations, model simulations and underlying physical principles are all in agreement that LSATs are increasing at a higher rate than SST as a result of differences in evaporation, land–climate feedbacks and changes in the aerosol forcing over land (very high confidence ). For the 2000–2016 period, the land-to-ocean warming ratio (about 1.6) is in close agreement between different observational records and the CMIP5 climate model simulations (the likely range of 1.54–1.81). {2.2.1}Anthropogenic warming has resulted in shifts of climate zones, primarily as an increase in dry climates and decrease of polar climates ( high confidence ). Ongoing warming is projected to result in new, hot climates in tropical regions and to shift climate zones poleward in the mid- to high latitude and upward in regions of higher elevation ( high confidence ). Ecosystems in these regions will become increasingly exposed to temperature and rainfall extremes beyond the climate regimes they are currently adapted to ( high confidence ), which can alter their structure, composition and functioning. Additionally, high-latitude warming is projected to accelerate permafrost thawing and increase disturbance in boreal forests through abiotic (e.g., drought, fire) and biotic (e.g., pests, disease) agents ( high confidence ). {2.2.1, 2.2.2, 2.5.3} Globally, greening trends (trends of increased photosynthetic activity in vegetation) have increased over the last 2–3 decades by 22–33%, particularly over China, India, many parts of Europe, central North America, southeast Brazil and southeast Australia ( high confidence ). This results from a combination of direct (i.e., land use and management, forest conservation and expansion) and indirect factors (i.e., CO2 fertilisation, extended growing season, global warming, nitrogen deposition, increase of diffuse radiation) linked to human activities ( high confidence ). Browning trends (trends of decreasing photosynthetic activity) are projected in many regions where increases in drought and heatwaves are projected in a warmer climate. There is low confidence in the projections of global greening and browning trends. {2.2.4, Cross-Chapter Box 4 in Chapter 2} Figure TS.3 | The structure and functioning of managed and unmanaged ecosystems that affect local, regional and global climate. Land surface characteristics such as albedo and emissivity determine the amount of solar and long-wave radiation absorbed by land and reflected or emitted to the atmosphere. Surface roughness influences turbulent exchanges of momentum, energy, water and biogeochemical tracers. Land ecosystems modulate the atmospheric composition through emissions and removals of many GHGs and precursors of SLCFs, including biogenic volatile organic compounds (BVOCs) and mineral dust. Atmospheric aerosols formed from these precursors affect regional climate by altering the amounts of precipitation and radiation reaching land surfaces through their role in clouds physics. precipitation fertilizer fertilizerfertilizer fertilizer mineral aerosols carbonaceous aerosols CH4,N2OCH4 CO2CO2 CO2 CO2 BVOCsBVOCsN deposition & emissionsensible heatcondensation evaporationsolar radiation albedo CO2CO2 wind long wave radiation emissivity agriculture forestry unmanaged landssoil carbon & nutrientssoil carbon & nutrientssoil carbon & nutrients roughness",
    "new_id": 157
  },
  {
    "id": 12661,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why global models and national GHG inventories produce significantly different estimates for managed forest emissions, despite close agreement on deforestation and afforestation, as discussed in the Climate Change and Land: An IPCC Special Report on climate change, desertification, land degradation, sustainable land management, food security, and greenhouse gas fluxes in terrestrial ecosystems?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Global models consider only harvested lands as managed forests, while national GHG inventories adopt a broader definition that includes additional areas affected by human activity.",
      "A": "National GHG inventories exclude natural responses to human-induced environmental changes, while global models include them as part of anthropogenic emissions.",
      "C": "National GHG inventories overestimate emissions due to outdated IPCC guidelines, whereas global models use real-time data for more accurate estimates.",
      "D": "Global models attribute all land-based removals to non-anthropogenic sinks, while national inventories classify these removals as anthropogenic.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "19-20",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC SRCCL.pdf",
    "source_text": "9SPM Summary for PolicymakersA.3.3 Global models and national GHG inventories use different methods to estimate anthropogenic CO2 emissions and removals for the land sector. Both produce estimates that are in close agreement for land-use change involving forest (e.g., deforestation, afforestation), and differ for managed forest. Global models consider as managed forest those lands that were subject to harvest whereas, consistent with IPCC guidelines, national GHG inventories define managed forest more broadly. On this larger area, inventories can also consider the natural response of land to human-induced environmental changes as anthropogenic, while the global model approach (Table SPM.1) treats this response as part of the non-anthropogenic sink. For illustration, from 2005 to 2014, the sum of the national GHG inventories net emission estimates is 0.1 ± 1.0 GtCO2 yr–1, while the mean of two global bookkeeping models is 5.2 ± 2.6 GtCO2 yr–1 (likely range). Consideration of differences in methods can enhance understanding of land sector net emission estimates and their applications. {2.4.1, 2.7.3, Fig 2.5, Box 2.2}\n\n[Page 20]\n10SPM Summary for Policymakers Net anthropogenic emissions due to Agriculture, Forestry, and other Land Use (AFOLU) and non-AFOLU (Panel 1) and global food systems (average for 2007–2016)1 (Panel 2). Positive values represent emissions; negative values represent removals.",
    "new_id": 158
  },
  {
    "id": 12686,
    "question": "Which of the following accurately reflects a necessary condition for carbon dioxide capture, utilisation, and storage (CCUS) to result in carbon dioxide removal (CDR), based on the distinctions made between related processes in the Climate Change and Land: An IPCC Special Report on climate change, desertification, land degradation, sustainable land management, food security, and greenhouse gas fluxes in terrestrial ecosystems?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The CO2 must be recently removed from the atmosphere and stored in products for a climate-relevant time horizon.",
      "A": "The captured CO2 must be stored in geological formations for a climate-relevant time horizon.",
      "B": "The process must involve biological or geochemical sinks without human intervention.",
      "D": "The captured CO2 must be used immediately to produce energy-efficient industrial outputs.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "817",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC SRCCL.pdf",
    "source_text": "807 Glossary Annex IAIBlack carbon (BC) A relatively pure form of carbon, also known as soot, arising from the incomplete combustion of fossil fuels, biofuel, and biomass . It stays in the atmosphere only for days or weeks. Black carbon is a climate forcing agent with strong warming effect, both in the atmosphere and when deposited on snow or ice. See also Atmosphere, and Aerosol . Blue carbon All biologically-driven carbon fluxes and storage in marine systems that are amenable to management can be considered as blue carbon. Coastal blue carbon focuses on rooted vegetation in the coastal zone, such as tidal marshes, mangroves and seagrasses. These ecosystems have high carbon burial rates on a per unit area basis and accumulate carbon in their soils and sediments. They provide many non-climatic benefits and can contribute to ecosystem-based adaptation. If degraded or lost, coastal blue carbon ecosystems are likely to release most of their carbon back to the atmosphere . There is current debate regarding the application of the blue carbon concept to other coastal and non-coastal processes and ecosystems, including the open ocean. See also Ecosystem services, and Carbon sequestration . Business as usual (BAU) See Baseline scenario . Carbon budget Refers to three concepts in the literature: (1) an assessment of carbon cycle sources and sinks on a global level, through the synthesis of evidence for fossil-fuel and cement emissions, land-use change emissions, ocean and land CO2 sinks, and the resulting atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) growth rate. This is referred to as the global carbon budget; (2) the estimated cumulative amount of global carbon dioxide emissions that that is estimated to limit global surface temperature to a given level above a reference period , taking into account global surface temperature contributions of other greenhouse gases (GHGs) and climate forcers; (3) the distribution of the carbon budget defined under (2) to the regional, national, or sub-national level based on considerations of equity , costs or efficiency. See also Remaining carbon budget . Carbon cycle The flow of carbon (in various forms, e.g., as carbon dioxide (CO2), carbon in biomass , and carbon dissolved in the ocean as carbonate and bicarbonate) through the atmosphere , hydrosphere, terrestrial and marine biosphere and lithosphere. In this report, the reference unit for the global carbon cycle is GtCO2 or GtC (one Gigatonne = 1 Gt = 1015 grams; 1GtC corresponds to 3.667 GtCO2). Carbon dioxide (CO2) A naturally occurring gas, CO2 is also a by- product of burning fossil fuels (such as oil, gas and coal), of burning biomass , of land-use changes (LUC) and of industrial processes (e.g., cement production). It is the principal anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) that affects the Earth’s radiative balance. It is the reference gas against which other GHGs are measured and therefore has a Global Warming Potential (GWP) of 1. See also Greenhouse gas (GHG), Land use, and Land-use change . Carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS) A process in which a relatively pure stream of carbon dioxide (CO2) from industrial and energy-related sources is separated (captured), conditioned, compressed and transported to a storage location for long-term isolation from the atmosphere. Sometimes referred to as Carbon Capture and Storage. See also Carbon dioxide capture and utilisation (CCU), Bioenergy with carbon dioxide capture and storage (BECCS), and Sequestration . Carbon dioxide capture and utilisation (CCU) A process in which carbon dioxide (CO2) is captured and then used to produce a new product. If the CO2 is stored in a product for a climate -relevant time horizon, this is referred to as carbon dioxide capture, utilisation and storage (CCUS). Only then, and only combined with CO2 recently removed from the atmosphere , can CCUS lead to carbon dioxide removal. CCU is sometimes referred to as Carbon dioxide capture and use. See also Carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS) . Carbon dioxide capture, utilisation and storage (CCUS) See Carbon dioxide capture and utilisation (CCU) . Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) Anthropogenic activities removing carbon dioxide (CO2) from the atmosphere and durably storing it in geological, terrestrial, or ocean reservoirs, or in products. It includes existing and potential anthropogenic enhancement of biological or geochemical sinks and direct air capture and storage, but excludes natural CO2 uptake not directly caused by hu",
    "new_id": 159
  },
  {
    "id": 12714,
    "question": "Which factor, when neglected during sea wall construction, most directly contributes to increased coastal degradation in both small island nations and the Global North, as discussed in the Climate Change and Land: An IPCC Special Report on climate change, desertification, land degradation, sustainable land management, food security, and greenhouse gas fluxes in terrestrial ecosystems?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The interplay between environmental drivers and anthropogenic influences on coastal morphology.",
      "A": "The absence of tangible evidence left by international development organizations funding the projects.",
      "B": "The preference for hard engineering solutions over nature-based approaches like 'building with nature'.",
      "C": "The downdrift effects of sea walls leading to erosion along undefended stretches of coastline.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "413",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC SRCCL.pdf",
    "source_text": "403 Land degradation Chapter 44 rise, and storm surges transforming the natural coast to a ‘stabilised’ coastline (Cooper and Pile 2014; French 2001) . Every kind of adaptation response option is context-dependent, and, in fact, sea walls play an important role for adaptation in many places. Nonetheless, there are observed cases where the construction of sea walls can be considered ‘maladaptation’ (Barnett and O’Neill 2010; Magnan et al. 2016) by leading to increased coastal degradation, such as in the case of small islands where, due to limitations of space, coastal retreat is less of an option than in continental coastal zones. There is emerging literature on the implementation of alternative coastal protection measures and mechanisms on small islands to avoid coastal degradation induced by sea walls (e.g., Mycoo and Chadwick 2012; Sovacool 2012) . In many cases, increased rates of coastal erosion due to the construction of sea walls are the result of the negligence of local coastal morphological dynamics and natural variability as well as the interplay of environmental and anthropogenic drivers of coastal change ( medium evidence , high agreement ). Sea walls in response to coastal erosion may be ill-suited for extreme wave heights under cyclone impacts and can lead to coastal degradation by keeping overflowing sea water from flowing back into the sea, and therefore affect the coastal vegetation through saltwater intrusion, as observed in Tuvalu (Government of Tuvalu 2006; Wairiu 2017) . Similarly, in Kiribati, poor construction of sea walls has resulted in increased erosion and inundation of reclaimed land (Donner 2012; Donner and Webber 2014) . In the Comoros and Tuvalu, sea walls have been constructed from climate change adaptation funds and ‘often by international development organisations seeking to leave tangible evidence of their investments’ (Marino and Lazrus 2015, p. 344) . In these cases, they have even increased coastal erosion, due to poor planning and the negligence of other causes of coastal degradation, such as sand mining (Marino and Lazrus 2015; Betzold and Mohamed 2017; Ratter et al. 2016) . On the Bahamas, the installation of sea walls as a response to coastal erosion in areas with high wave action has led to the contrary effect and has even increased sand loss in those areas (Sealey 2006) . The reduction of natural buffer zones – such as beaches and dunes – due to vertical structures, such as sea walls, increased the impacts of tropical cyclones on Reunion Island (Duvat et al. 2016) . Such a process of ‘coastal squeeze’ (Pontee 2013) also results in the reduction of intertidal habitat zones, such as wetlands and marshes (Zhu et al. 2010) . Coastal degradation resulting from the construction of sea walls, however, is not only observed in SIDS, as described above, but also on islands in the Global North, for example, the North Atlantic (Muir et al. 2014; Young et al. 2014; Cooper and Pile 2014; Bush 2004) . The adverse effects of coastal protection measures may be avoided by the consideration of local social-ecological dynamics, including critical study of the diverse drivers of ongoing shoreline changes, and the appropriate implementation of locally adequate coastal protection options (French 2001; Duvat 2013) . Critical elements for avoiding maladaptation include profound knowledge of local tidal regimes, availability of relative sea level rise scenarios and projections for extreme water levels. Moreover, the downdrift effects of sea walls need to be considered, since undefended coasts may be exposed to increased erosion (Zhu et al. 2010) . In some cases, it may be possible to keep intact and restore natural buffer zones as an alternative to the construction of hard engineering solutions. Otherwise, changes in land use, building codes, or even coastal realignment can be an option in order to protect and avoid the loss of the buffer function of beaches (Duvat et al. 2016; Cooper and Pile 2014) . Examples in Barbados show that combinations of hard and soft coastal protection approaches can be sustainable and reduce the risk of coastal ecosystem degradation while keeping the desired level of protection for coastal users (Mycoo and Chadwick 2012) . Nature-based solutions and approaches such as ‘building with nature’ (Slobbe et al. 2013) may allow for more sustainable coastal protection mechanisms and avoid coastal degradation. Examples from the Maldives, several Pacific islands and the North Atlan",
    "new_id": 160
  },
  {
    "id": 12910,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the nuanced relationship between biochar application and its potential climate change mitigation benefits, as discussed in the Climate Change and Land: An IPCC Special Report on climate change, desertification, land degradation, sustainable land management, food security, and greenhouse gas fluxes in terrestrial ecosystems?",
    "options": {
      "A": "While biochar can reduce N2O emissions and nitrogen fertiliser needs, its mitigation potential may be diminished by surface darkening that depends on factors like soil moisture and land use.",
      "B": "Biochar application uniformly enhances climate change mitigation by significantly increasing surface albedo, regardless of soil moisture or land use type.",
      "C": "The reduction in nitrogen fertiliser requirements due to biochar is offset by an unavoidable increase in N2O emissions, negating its mitigation potential.",
      "D": "Biochar's mitigation benefits are solely derived from its ability to enhance soil carbon storage, with no significant influence from changes in surface albedo or nitrogen dynamics.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "203",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC SRCCL.pdf",
    "source_text": "193 Land–climate interactions Chapter 22emissions through biochar. Griscom et al. (2017) suggest a potential of 1.0 GtCO 2 yr–1 based on available residues. Biochar can provide additional climate change mitigation benefits by decreasing N 2O emissions from soil and reducing nitrogen fertiliser requirements in agricultural soils (Borchard et al. 2019). Application of biochar to cultivated soils can darken the surface and reduce its mitigation potential via decreases in surface albedo, but the magnitude of this effect depends on soil moisture content, biochar application method and type of land use ( low confidence ) (Verheijen et al. 2013; Bozzi et al. 2015) (Section 4.9.5). 2.6.1.4 Land management in other ecosystems Protection and restoration of wetlands, peatlands and coastal habitats reduces net carbon loss (primarily from sediment/soils) and provides continued or enhanced natural CO 2 removal (Section 4.9.4). Reducing annual emissions from peatland conversion, draining and burning could mitigate 0.45–1.22 GtCO 2-eq yr–1 up to 2050 ( medium confidence ) (Hooijer et al. 2010; Griscom et al. 2017; Hawken 2017) and peatland restoration 0.15–0.81 ( low confidence ) (Couwenberg et al. 2010; Griscom et al. 2017). The upper end from Griscom et al. (2017) represents a maximum sustainable potential (accounting for biodiversity and food security safeguards) for rewetting and biomass enhancement. Wetland drainage and rewetting was included as a flux category under the second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol, with significant management knowledge gained over the last decade (IPCC 2013b). However, there are high uncertainties as to carbon storage and flux rates, in particular the balance between CH 4 sources and CO 2 sinks (Spencer et al. 2016). Peatlands are sensitive to climate change which may increase carbon uptake by vegetation and carbon emissions due to respiration, with the balance being regionally dependent ( high confidence ). There is low confidence about the future peatland sink globally. Some peatlands have been found to be resilient to climate change (Minayeva and Sirin 2012), but the combination of land use change and climate change may make them vulnerable to fire (Sirin et al. 2011). While models show mixed results for the future sink (Spahni et al. 2013; Chaudhary et al. 2017; Ise et al. 2008), a study that used extensive historical data sets to project change under future warming scenarios found that the current global peatland sink could increase slightly until 2100 and decline thereafter (Gallego-Sala et al. 2018). Reducing the conversion of coastal wetlands (mangroves, seagrass and marshes) could reduce emissions by 0.11–2.25 GtCO 2-eq yr–1 by 2050 ( medium confidence ) (Pendleton et al. 2012; Griscom et al. 2017; Howard et al. 2017; Hawken 2017). Mangrove restoration can mitigate the release of 0.07 GtCO 2 yr–1 through rewetting (Crooks et al. 2011) and take up 0.02–0.84 GtCO 2 yr–1 from biomass and soil enhancement ( medium confidence ) (Griscom et al. 2017). The ongoing benefits provided by mangroves as a natural carbon sink can be nationally-important for small island developing states (SIDS) and other countries with extensive coastlines, based on estimates of high carbon sequestration rates per unit area (McLeod et al. 2011; Duarte et al. 2013; Duarte 2017; Taillardat et al. 2018). There is only medium confidence in the effectiveness of enhanced carbon uptake using mangroves, due to the many uncertainties regarding the response of mangroves to future climate change (Jennerjahn et al. 2017), dynamic changes in distributions (Kelleway et al. 2017) and other local-scale factors affecting long-term sequestration and climatic benefits (e.g., methane release) (Dutta et al. 2017). The climate mitigation potential of coastal vegetated habitats (mangrove forests, tidal marshes and seagrasses) is considered in Chapter 5 of the IPCC Special Report on the Ocean, Cryosphere and Climate Change (SROCC), in a wider ‘blue carbon’ context. 2.6.1.5 Bioenergy and bioenergy with carbon capture and storage An introduction and overview of bioenergy and bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) can be found in Cross-Chapter Boxes 7 and 12, and Chapters 6 and 7. CCS technologies are discussed in SR15. The discussion below refers to modern bioenergy only (e.g., liquid biofuels for transport and the use of solid biofuels in combined heat and power plants). The mitigation potential of bioenergy coupled with CCS (",
    "new_id": 161
  },
  {
    "id": 12912,
    "question": "Which statement accurately captures the relationship between catastrophe bonds and the limitations of post-event finance mechanisms in the context of climate disasters, as discussed in the Climate Change and Land: An IPCC Special Report on climate change, desertification, land degradation, sustainable land management, food security, and greenhouse gas fluxes in terrestrial ecosystems?",
    "options": {
      "B": "The utility of catastrophe bonds is limited to higher-income developing countries due to their reliance on pre-existing legal, financial, and data infrastructure, which contrasts with the universal applicability of post-event finance.",
      "A": "Catastrophe bonds are primarily designed to address low-impact, frequently occurring events, similar to contingency finance systems.",
      "C": "Post-event finance mechanisms are better suited than catastrophe bonds for managing high-consequence climate disasters because they can be quickly disbursed without predefined thresholds.",
      "D": "Catastrophe bonds eliminate the need for government borrowing capacity by forgiving principal repayment in all disaster scenarios, making them superior to post-event finance.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "723",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC SRCCL.pdf",
    "source_text": "713 Risk management and decision-making in relation to sustainable development Chapter 77and infrastructure to make immediate disbursement of funds in the event of a disaster) (Kousky and Cooke 2012; Clarke and Dercon 2016b). Contingency finance is suited to manage frequently occurring, low-impact events (Campillo et al. 2017; Mahul and Ghesquiere 2010; Roberts 2017) and may be linked with social protection systems. These instruments are limited by uncertainty surrounding the size of contingency fund reserves, given unpredictable climate disasters (Roberts 2017) and lack of borrowing capacity of a country (such as small island states) (Mahul and Ghesquiere 2010). In part because of its link with debt burden, contingency, or post-event finance can disrupt development and is not suitable for higher consequence events and processes such as weather extremes or structural changes associated with climate and land change. Post-event finance of negative impacts such as sea level rise, soil salinisation, depletion of groundwater, and widespread land degradation, is likely to become infeasible for multiple, high-cost events and processes. There is high confidence that post-extreme event assistance may face more severe limitations, given the impacts of climate change (Linnerooth-bayer et al. 2019; Surminski et al. 2016; Deryugina 2013; Dillon et al. 2014; Clarke 2016; Shreve and Kelman 2014; Von Peter et al. 2012). In a catastrophe risk pool, multiple countries in a region pool risks in a diversified portfolio. Examples include African Risk Capacity (ARC), the Caribbean Catastrophe Risk Insurance Facility (CCRIF), and the Pacific Catastrophe Risk Assessment and Financing Initiative (PCRAFI) (Bresch et al. 2017; Iyahen and Syroka 2018). ARC payouts have been used to assist over 2.1 million food insecure people and provide more than 900,000 cattle with subsidised feed in the affected countries (Iyahen and Syroka 2018). ARC has also developed the Extreme Climate Facility, which is designed to complement existing bilateral, multilateral and private sources of finance to enable proactive adaptation (Vincent et al. 2018). It provides beneficiaries the opportunity to increase their benefit by reducing exposure to risk through adaptation and risk reduction measures, thus side-stepping ‘moral hazard’ problems sometimes associated with traditional insurance. Governments pay coupon interest when purchasing catastrophe (CAT) bonds from private or corporate investors. In the case of the predefined catastrophe, the requirement to pay the coupon interest or repay the principal may be deferred or forgiven (Nguyen and Lindenmeier 2014). CAT bonds are typically short-term instruments (three to five years) and the payout is triggered once a particular threshold of disaster/damage is passed (Härdle and Cabrera 2010; Campillo et al. 2017; Estrin and Tan 2016; Hermann et al. 2016; Michel-Kerjan 2011; Roberts 2017). The primary advantage of CAT bonds is their ability to quickly disburse money in the event of a catastrophe (Estrin and Tan 2016). Green bonds, social impact bonds, and resilience bonds are other instruments that can be used to fund land-based interventions. However, there are significant barriers for developing country governments to enter into the bond market: lack of familiarity with the instruments; lack of capacity and resources to deal with complex legal arrangements; limited or non-existent data and modelling of disaster exposure; and other political disincentives linked to insurance. For these reasons, the utility and application of bonds is currently largely limited to higher-income developing countries (Campillo et al. 2017; Le Quesne 2017). 7.4.7.3 Innovative financing approaches for transition to low-carbon economies Traditional financing mechanisms have not been sufficient and thereby leave a gap in facilitating a rapid transition to a low-carbon economy or building resilience (Geddes et al. 2018). More recently there have been developments in more innovative mechanisms, including crowdfunding (Lam and Law 2016), often supported by national governments (in the UK through regulatory and tax support) (Owen et al. 2018). Crowdfunding has no financial intermediaries and thus low transaction costs, and the projects have a greater degree of independence than bank or institution funding (Miller et al. 2018). Other examples of innovative mechanisms are community shares for local projects, such as renewable energy (Holstenkamp and Kah",
    "new_id": 162
  },
  {
    "id": 12914,
    "question": "Which of the following is true regarding the interplay between response options and their contextual limitations, as described in the Climate Change and Land: An IPCC Special Report on climate change, desertification, land degradation, sustainable land management, food security, and greenhouse gas fluxes in terrestrial ecosystems?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Some response options, like those utilizing freshwater, may have significant adverse effects in regions with water scarcity but not in water-abundant areas.",
      "A": "All response options are equally applicable across different bioclimatic regions, with side effects being negligible in most scenarios.",
      "B": "Response options such as afforestation and reforestation have uniform impacts on local climate regardless of where they are implemented.",
      "D": "Regions facing greater land challenges generally have access to a wider variety of effective response options due to increased mitigation needs.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "563",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC SRCCL.pdf",
    "source_text": "553 Interlinkages between desertification, land degradation, food security and greenhouse gas fluxes Chapter 66Executive summary The land challenges, in the context of this report, are climate change mitigation, adaptation, desertification, land degradation, and food security. The chapter also discusses implications for Nature’s Contributions to People (NCP), including biodiversity and water, and sustainable development, by assessing intersections with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The chapter assesses response options that could be used to address these challenges. These response options were derived from the previous chapters and fall into three broad categories: land management, value chain, and risk management. The land challenges faced today vary across regions; climate change will increase challenges in the future, while socio- economic development could either increase or decrease challenges ( high confidence ). Increases in biophysical impacts from climate change can worsen desertification, land degradation, and food insecurity ( high confidence ). Additional pressures from socio- economic development could further exacerbate these challenges; however, the effects are scenario dependent. Scenarios with increases in income and reduced pressures on land can lead to reductions in food insecurity; however, all assessed scenarios result in increases in water demand and water scarcity ( medium confidence ). {6.1} The applicability and efficacy of response options are region and context specific; while many value chain and risk management options are potentially broadly applicable, many land management options are applicable on less than 50% of the ice-free land surface ( high confidence ). Response options are limited by land type, bioclimatic region, or local food system context ( high confidence ). Some response options produce adverse side effects only in certain regions or contexts; for example, response options that use freshwater may have no adverse side effects in regions where water is plentiful, but large adverse side effects in regions where water is scarce ( high confidence ). Response options with biophysical climate effects (e.g., afforestation, reforestation) may have different effects on local climate, depending on where they are implemented ( medium confidence ). Regions with more challenges have fewer response options available for implementation ( medium confidence ). {6.1, 6.2, 6.3, 6.4} Nine options deliver medium-to-large benefits for all five land challenges ( high confidence ). The options with medium-to-large benefits for all challenges are increased food productivity, improved cropland management, improved grazing land management, improved livestock management, agroforestry, forest management, increased soil organic carbon content, fire management and reduced post-harvest losses. A further two options, dietary change and reduced food waste, have no global estimates for adaptation but have medium- to-large benefits for all other challenges ( high confidence ). {6.3, 6.4} Five options have large mitigation potential (>3 GtCO 2e yr–1) without adverse impacts on the other challenges ( high confidence ). These are: increased food productivity; reduced deforestation and forest degradation; increased soil organic carbon content; fire management; and reduced post-harvest losses. Two further options with large mitigation potential, dietary change and reduced food waste, have no global estimates for adaptation but show no negative impacts across the other challenges. Five options: improved cropland management; improved grazing land managements; agroforestry; integrated water management; and forest management, have moderate mitigation potential, with no adverse impacts on the other challenges ( high confidence ). {6.3.6} Sixteen response options have large adaptation potential (more than 25 million people benefit), without adverse side effects on other land challenges ( high confidence ). These are increased food productivity, improved cropland management, agroforestry, agricultural diversification, forest management, increased soil organic carbon content, reduced landslides and natural hazards, restoration and reduced conversion of coastal wetlands, reduced post-harvest losses, sustainable sourcing, management of supply chains, improved food processing and retailing, improved energy use in food systems, livelihood diversification, use of local seeds, and disaster risk management ( high co",
    "new_id": 163
  },
  {
    "id": 12920,
    "question": "Which statement accurately captures the relationship between agricultural intensification, deforestation control mechanisms, and their broader implications, as discussed in the Climate Change and Land: An IPCC Special Report on climate change, desertification, land degradation, sustainable land management, food security, and greenhouse gas fluxes in terrestrial ecosystems?",
    "options": {
      "D": "While agricultural intensification reduced pressure on forests, inconsistent conservation policies and spill-over effects have undermined sustained progress in global deforestation rates.",
      "A": "Agricultural intensification has completely halted deforestation in South America by replacing extensive pasturelands with high-yield crops.",
      "B": "Deforestation rates worldwide have consistently declined due to robust governance and uniform implementation of forest protection schemes across regions.",
      "C": "The adoption of integrated agroforestry systems and no-till techniques alone accounts for the significant reduction in deforestation rates observed since 2004.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "492",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC SRCCL.pdf",
    "source_text": "482 Chapter 5 Food security5 Box 5.4 (continued) Nevertheless, Azevedo et al. (2017) argue that the full potential of these financial incentives has not been achieved, due to weak enforcement mechanisms and limited supporting public policies. Agricultural expansion and intensification have complex interactions with deforestation. While mechanisms have been implemented in the region to protect native forests and ecosystems, control of deforestation rates require stronger governance of natural resources (Ceddia et al. 2013 and Oliveira and Hecht 2016), including monitoring programmes to evaluate fully the results of land-use policies in the region. Public and private sector actions resulted in a reduction of the Brazilian legal Amazon deforestation rate from 2.78 Mha yr–1 in 2004, to about 0.75 Mha yr–1 (ca. 0.15%) in 2009 (INPE 2015), oscillating from 0.46 Mha and 0.79 Mha (2016) since then (INPE 2018; Boucher and Chi 2018). The governmental forest protection scheme was also expanded to other biomes. As a result, the Brazilian Cerrado deforestation was effectively reduced from 2.9 Mha yr–1 in 2004 to an average of 0.71 Mha yr–1 in 2016–2017 (INPE 2018). Overall, deforestation rates in South America have declined significantly, with current deforestation rates being about half of rates in the early 2000s (FAOSTAT 2018). However, inconsistent conservation policies across countries (Gibbs et al. 2015) and recent hiccups (Curtis et al. 2018) indicate that deforestation control still requires stronger reinforcement mechanisms (Tollefson 2018). Further, there are important spill-over effects that need coordinated international governance. Curtis et al. (2018) and Dou et al. (2018) point out that, although the Amazon deforestation rate decreased in Brazil, it has increased in other regions, particularly in South Asia, and in other countries in South America, resulting in nearly constant deforestation rates worldwide. Despite the reduced expansion rates into forest land, agricultural production continues to rise steadily in South America, relying on increasing productivity and substitution of extensive pastureland by crops. The average soybean and maize productivity in the region increased from 1.8 and 2.0 t ha–1 in 1990 to 3.0 and 5.0 t ha–1, respectively, in 2015 (FAOSTAT 2018). Yet, higher crop productivity was not enough to meet growing demand for cereals and oilseeds and cultivation continued to expand, mainly on grasslands (Richards 2015). The reconciliation of this expansion with higher demand for meat and dairy products was carried out through the intensification of livestock systems (Martha et al. 2012). Nevertheless, direct and indirect deforestation still occurs, and recently deforestation rates have increased (INPE 2018), albeit they remain far smaller than observed in the 2000–2010 period. The effort towards sustainable intensification has also been incorporated in agricultural policies. In Brazil, for instance, the reduction of deforestation, the restoration of degraded pasture areas, the adoption of integrated agroforestry systems3 and no-till agricultural techniques play a major role in the nation’s voluntary commitments to reduce GHG emissions in the country’s NAMAs (Mozzer 2011) and NDCs (Silva Oliveira et al. 2017; Rochedo et al. 2018). Such commitment under the UNFCCC is operationalised through the Low Carbon Agriculture Plan (ABC),4 which is based on low interest credit for investment in sustainable agricultural technologies (Mozzer 2011). Direct pasture restoration and integrated systems reduce area requirements (Strassburg et al. 2014), and increase organic matter (Gil et al. 2015; Bungenstab 2012; Maia et al. 2009), contributing to overall lifecycle emissions reduction (Cardoso et al. 2016; de Oliveira Silva et al. 2016). Also, increased adoption of supplementation and feedlots, often based on agroindustrial co-products and agricultural crop residues are central to improve productivity and increase climate resilience of livestock systems (Mottet et al. 2017a; van Zanten et al. 2018). Despite providing clear environmental and socio-economic co-benefits, including improved resource productivity, socio-environmental sustainability and higher economic competitiveness, implementation of the Brazilian Low Carbon Agriculture Plan is behind schedule (Köberle et al. 2016). Structural inefficiencies related to the allocation and distribution of resources need to be addressed to put the plan on track to meet its ",
    "new_id": 164
  },
  {
    "id": 12926,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the complex relationship between biodiversity conservation measures and their potential impacts on carbon dynamics, as implied by interactions described in the Climate Change and Land: An IPCC Special Report on climate change, desertification, land degradation, sustainable land management, food security, and greenhouse gas fluxes in terrestrial ecosystems?",
    "options": {
      "A": "While biodiversity conservation can increase carbon storage through activities like tree planting, it may also reduce carbon storage in tropical forests due to defaunation effects.",
      "B": "Biodiversity conservation always enhances carbon storage uniformly across ecosystems, making it a universally reliable climate mitigation strategy.",
      "C": "The establishment of protected areas has no significant impact on carbon storage but primarily benefits food security by reducing land degradation.",
      "D": "Rewilding programs aimed at conserving frugivores are less effective at sequestering carbon than all forms of tree planting in every biome.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "585",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC SRCCL.pdf",
    "source_text": "575 Interlinkages between desertification, land degradation, food security and greenhouse gas fluxes Chapter 66Integrated response optionDescription Context and caveats Supporting evidence Biodiversity conservationBiodiversity conservation refers to practices aimed at maintaining components of biological diversity. It includes conservation of ecosystems and natural habitats, maintenance and recovery of viable populations of species in their natural surroundings ( in-situ conservation) and, in the case of domesticated or cultivated species, in the surroundings where they have developed their distinctive properties outside their natural habitats ( ex-situ conservation). Examples of biodiversity conservation measures are establishment of protected areas to achieve specific conservation objectives, preservation of biodiversity hotspots, land management to recover natural habitats, interventions to expand or control selective plant or animal species in productive lands or rangelands (e.g., rewilding). Biodiversity conservation measures interact with the climate system through many complex processes, which can have either positive or negative impacts. For example, establishment of protected areas can increase carbon storage in vegetation and soil, and tree planting to promote species richness and natural habitats can enhance carbon uptake capacity of ecosystems. Management of wild animals can influence climate via emissions of GHGs (from anaerobic fermentation of plant materials in the rumen), impacts on vegetation ( via foraging), changes in fire frequency (as grazers lower grass and vegetation densities as potential fuels), and nutrient cycling and transport (by adding nutrients to soils). Conserving and restoring megafauna in northern regions also prevents thawing of permafrost and reduces woody encroachment, thus avoiding methane emissions and increases in albedo. Defaunation affects carbon storage in tropical forests and savannahs. In the tropics, the loss of mega-faunal frugivores is estimated be responsible for up to 10% reduction in carbon storage of global tropical forests. Frugivore rewilding programmes in the tropics are seen as carbon sequestration options that can be equally effective as tree planting schemes. Biodiversity conservation measures generally favour adaptation, but can interact with food security, land degradation or desertification. Protected areas for biodiversity reduce the land available for food production, and abundancies of some species (such as large animals) can influence land degradation processes by grazing, trampling and compacting soil surfaces, thereby altering surface temperatures and chemical reactions affecting sediment and carbon retention.Bello et al. 2015; Campbell et al. 2008; Cromsigt et al. 2018; Kapos et al. 2008; Osuri et al. 2016; Schmitz et al. 2018; Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity 2008 Table 6.9 | Integrated response options based on land management specifically for carbon dioxide removal (CDR). Integrated response optionDescription Context and caveats Supporting evidence Enhanced weathering of mineralsThe enhanced weathering of minerals that naturally absorb CO 2 from the atmosphere has been proposed as a CDR technology with a large mitigation potential. The rocks are ground to increase the surface area and the ground minerals are then applied to the land where they absorb atmospheric CO 2.Enhanced mineral weathering can remove atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO 2). Since ground minerals can increase pH, there could be some benefits for efforts to prevent or reverse land degradation where acidification is the driver of degrada - tion. Since increasing soil pH in acidified soils can increase productivity, the same effect could provide some benefit for food security. Minerals used for enhanced weathering need to be mined, and mining has large impacts locally, though the total area mined is likely to be small on the global scale.Beerling et al. 2018; Lenton 2010; Schuiling and Krijgsman 2006; Smith et al. 2016a; Taylor et al. 2016 Bioenergy and bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS)Bioenergy production can mitigate climate change by delivering an energy service, therefore avoiding combustion of fossil energy. It is the most common renewable energy source used in the world today and has a large potential for future deployment (see Cross- Chapter Box 7 in this chapter). BECCS entails the use of bioenergy technologies (e.g., bioelectricity or biof",
    "new_id": 165
  },
  {
    "id": 12929,
    "question": "Which scenario best illustrates a potential trade-off between bioenergy production and land-based mitigation or adaptation strategies, as implied by the Climate Change and Land: An IPCC Special Report on climate change, desertification, land degradation, sustainable land management, food security, and greenhouse gas fluxes in terrestrial ecosystems?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Expanding bioenergy crop cultivation into forested areas, leading to reduced above-ground carbon stores and increased risk of biodiversity loss.",
      "A": "Using agricultural residues for bioenergy while ensuring their complete removal does not deplete soil nutrients or carbon content.",
      "C": "Growing dedicated bioenergy crops on marginal lands unsuitable for food production, thereby avoiding competition with food security needs.",
      "D": "Implementing advanced conversion technologies that allow all biomass types to displace fossil fuels without regard to land use changes.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "656",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC SRCCL.pdf",
    "source_text": "646 Chapter 6 Interlinkages between desertification, land degradation, food security and greenhouse gas fluxes6Frequently Asked Questions FAQ 6.1 | What types of land-based options can help mitigate and adapt to climate change? Land-based options that help mitigate climate change are various and differ greatly in their potential. The options with moderate- to-large mitigation potential, and no adverse side effects, include options that decrease pressure on land (e.g., by reducing the land needed for food production) and those that help to maintain or increase carbon stores both above-ground (e.g., forest measures, agroforestry, fire management) and below-ground (e.g., increased soil organic matter or reduced losses, cropland and grazing land management, urban land management, reduced deforestation and forest degradation). These options also have co-benefits for adaptation by improving health, increasing yields, flood attenuation and reducing urban heat island effects. Another group of practices aim at reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emission sources, such as livestock management or nitrogen fertilisation management. Land-based options delivering climate change adaptation may be structural (e.g., irrigation and drainage systems, flood and landslide control), technological (e.g., new adapted crop varieties, changing planting zones and dates, using climate forecasts), or socio-economic and institutional (e.g., regulation of land use, associativity between farmers). Some adaptation options (e.g., new planting zones, irrigation) may have adverse side effects for biodiversity and water. Adaptation options may be planned, such as those implemented at regional, national or municipal level (top-down approaches), or autonomous, such as many technological decisions taken by farmers and local inhabitants. In any case, their effectiveness depends greatly on the achievement of resilience against extreme events (e.g., floods, droughts, heat waves, etc.). FAQ 6.2 | Which land-based mitigation measures could affect desertification, land degradation or food security? Some options for mitigating climate change are based on increasing carbon stores, both above-ground and below-ground, so mitigation is usually related to increases in soil organic matter content and increased land cover by perennial vegetation. There is a direct relationship, with very few or no adverse side effects for prevention or reversal of desertification and land degradation and the achievement of food security. This is because desertification and land degradation are closely associated with soil organic matter losses and the presence of bare ground surfaces. Food security depends on the achievement of healthy crops and high and stable yields over time, which is difficult to achieve in poor soils that are low in organic matter. FAQ 6.3 | What is the role of bioenergy in climate change mitigation, and what are its challenges? Plants absorb carbon as they grow. If plant-based material (biomass) is used for energy, the carbon it absorbed from the atmosphere is released back. Traditional use of bioenergy for cooking and heating is still widespread throughout the world. Modern conversion to electricity, heat, gas and liquid fuels can reduce the need to burn fossil fuels and this can reduce GHG emissions, helping to mitigate climate change. However, the total amount of emissions avoided depends on the type of biomass, where it is grown, how it is converted to energy, and what type of energy source it displaces. Some types of bioenergy require dedicated land (e.g., canola for biodiesel, perennial grasses, short rotation woody crops), while others can be co-produced or use agricultural or industrial residues (e.g., residues from sugar and starch crops for ethanol, and manure for biogas). Depending on where, how, and the amount of bioenergy crops that are grown, the use of dedicated land for bioenergy could compete with food crops or other mitigation options. It could also result in land degradation, deforestation or biodiversity loss. In some circumstances, however, bioenergy can be beneficial for land, for example, by increasing soil organic carbon. The use of co-products and residues for bioenergy limits the competition for land with food but could result in land degradation if carbon and nutrient-rich material is removed that would otherwise be left on the land. On the other hand, the by-products of some bioenergy conversion processes can be returned to the land as a fert",
    "new_id": 166
  },
  {
    "id": 12931,
    "question": "Which of the following statements accurately reflects a key difference in the timing and scale of carbon dioxide removal (CDR) strategies between Pathway 1 (RCP2.6) and Pathway 2 (RCP1.9), as discussed in the Climate Change and Land: An IPCC Special Report on climate change, desertification, land degradation, sustainable land management, food security, and greenhouse gas fluxes in terrestrial ecosystems?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Pathway 2 achieves net-negative emissions earlier due to higher deployment rates of both afforestation/reforestation and BECCS-based CDR starting in the near term.",
      "A": "Pathway 1 relies more heavily on afforestation/reforestation than BECCS, while Pathway 2 reverses this balance by prioritizing BECCS over afforestation.",
      "B": "Both pathways achieve identical cumulative CDR from BECCS and afforestation, but differ only in the persistence of CH4 and N2O emissions.",
      "D": "Pathway 1 eliminates residual CH4 and N2O emissions by 2050 through advanced agricultural management, whereas Pathway 2 does not address these emissions until later.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "208",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC SRCCL.pdf",
    "source_text": "198 Chapter 2 Land–climate interactions2Figure 2.27 shows six alternative pathways (archetypes) for achieving ambitious climate targets (RCP2.6 and RCP1.9), highlighting land- based strategies and GHG emissions. All pathways are assessed by different models but are all based on the SSP2 (Riahi et al. 2017), with all based on an RCP 1.9 mitigation pathway expect for Pathway 1, which is RCP2.6. All scenarios show land-based negative emissions, but the amount varies across pathways, as do the relative contributions of different land-based CDR options, such as afforestation/reforestation and BECCS. Pathway 1 RCP2.6 ‘Portfolio’ (Fricko et al. 2017) shows a strong near-term decrease of CO 2 emissions from land-use change, mainly due to reduced deforestation, as well as slightly decreasing N 2O and CH 4 emissions after 2050 from agricultural production due to improved agricultural management and dietary shifts away from emissions-intensive livestock products. However, in contrast to CO 2 emissions, which turn net-negative around 2050 due to afforestation/ reforestation, CH 4 and N 2O emissions persist throughout the century due to difficulties of eliminating these residual emissions based on existing agricultural management methods (Stevanović et al. 2017; Frank et al. 2017b). In addition to abating land related GHG emissions as well as increasing the terrestrial sink, this example also shows the importance of the land sector in providing biomass for BECCS and hence CDR in the energy sector. In this scenario, annual BECCS-based CDR is about three times higher than afforestation-based CDR in 2100 (–11.4 and –3.8 GtCO 2 yr–1 respectively). Cumulative CDR throughout the century amounts to –395 GtCO 2 for BECCS and –73 GtCO 2 for afforestation. Based on these GHG dynamics, the land sector turns GHG emission neutral in 2100. However, accounting also for BECCS- based CDR taking place in the energy sector, but with biomass provided by the land sector, turns the land sector GHG emission neutral already in 2060, and significantly net-negative by the end of the century. Pathway 2 RCP1.9 ‘Increased Ambition’ (Rogelj et al. 2018) has dynamics of land-based GHG emissions and removals that are very similar to those in Pathway 1 (RCP2.6) but all GHG emission reductions as well as afforestation/reforestation and BECCS-based CDR start earlier in time at a higher rate of deployment. Cumulative CDR throughout the century amounts to –466 GtCO 2 for BECCS and –117 GtCO 2 for afforestation. (4) Early CDR − RCP1.9 (5) Low resid emis − RCP1.9 (6) Low Energy − RCP1.9(1) Portfolio − RCP2.6 (2) Incr Ambition − RCP1.9 (3) Only BECCS − RCP1.92000 2025 2050 2075 2100 2000 2025 2050 2075 2100 2000 2025 2050 2075 2100−10010 −10010Gt CO 2 eq yr−1Emission Type CO2 Land CH4 Land N2O Land BECCS Net Emissions Land+BECCS Land only Figure 2.27 | Evolution and breakdown of global land-based GHG emissions and removals under six alternative mitigation pathways. This figure illustrates the differences in timing and magnitude of land-based mitigation approaches including afforestation and BECCS. All pathways are based on different IAM realisations of SSP2. Pathway 1 is based on RCP 2.6, while all other pathways are based on RCP 1.9. Pathway 1: MESSAGE-GLOBIOM (Fricko et al. 2017); Pathway 2: MESSAGE-GLOBIOM (Rogelj et al. 2018); Pathway 3: REMIND-MAgPIE (Kriegler et al. 2017); Pathway 4: REMIND-MAgPIE (Bertram et al. 2018); Pathway 5: IMAGE (van Vuuren et al. 2018); Pathway 6: MESSAGE-GLOBIOM (Grubler et al. 2018). Data is from an update of the IAMC Scenario Explorer developed for the SR15 (Rogelj et al. 2018). The categories CO 2 Land, CH 4 Land and N 2O Land include GHG emissions from land-use change and agricultural land use (including emissions related to bioenergy production). In addition, the category CO 2 Land includes negative emissions due to afforestation. BECCS reflects the CO 2 emissions captured from bioenergy use and stored in geological deposits. Solid lines show the net effect of all land based GHG emissions and removals (CO 2 Land, CH 4 Land, N 2O Land and BECCS), while dashed lines show the net effect excluding BECCS. CH 4 and N 2O emissions are converted to CO 2-eq using GWP factors of 28 and 265 respectively.",
    "new_id": 167
  },
  {
    "id": 12933,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why addressing soil erosion in Central Asia requires a focus on both human activities and climatic factors, according to the interrelated challenges described in the Climate Change and Land: An IPCC Special Report on climate change, desertification, land degradation, sustainable land management, food security, and greenhouse gas fluxes in terrestrial ecosystems?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Because human activities like overgrazing and poor irrigation infrastructure maintenance interact with hot, semi-arid climates to intensify soil erosion processes.",
      "A": "Because overgrazing and deep ploughing are direct results of semi-arid climate conditions, which uniformly affect all regions.",
      "B": "Because excessive water use in irrigated areas exacerbates wind erosion, while arid climates independently cause widespread dust storms.",
      "C": "Because restoring traditional land uses alone can fully mitigate the effects of climate change on soil erosion without addressing human factors.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "303",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC SRCCL.pdf",
    "source_text": "293 Desertification Chapter 33by a semi-arid climate and annual average precipitation of 250–300 mm (Türkeş 2003; Türkeş and Tatlı 2011). In areas where vegetation was overgrazed or inappropriately tilled, the surface soil horizon was removed through erosion processes resulting in the creation of large drifting dunes that threatened settlements around Karapınar (Groneman 1968). Such dune movement had begun to affect the Karapınar settlement in 1956 (Kantarcı et al. 2011). Consequently, by the early 1960s, Karapınar town and nearby villages were confronted with the danger of abandonment due to out-migration in the early 1960s (Figure 3.11(1)). The reasons for increasing wind erosion in the Karapınar district can be summarised as follows: sandy material was mobilised following drying of the lake; hot and semi-arid climate conditions; overgrazing and use of pasture plants for fuel; excessive tillage; and strong prevailing winds. Restoration and mitigation strategies were initiated in 1959, and today 4300 ha of land have been restored (Akay and Yildirim 2010) (Figure 3.11 (2)), using specific measures: (i) physical measures: construction of cane screens to decrease wind speed and prevent sand movement (Figure 3.11(3)); (ii) restoration of cover: increasing grass cover between screens using seeds collected from local pastures or the cultivation of rye ( Secale sp.) and wheat grass (Agropyron elongatum ) that are known to grow in arid and hot conditions; and (iii) afforestation: saplings obtained from nursery gardens were planted and grown between these screens. Main tree species selected were oleaster ( Eleagnus sp.), acacia ( Robinia pseudeaccacia ), ash ( Fraxinus sp.), elm ( Ulmus sp.) and maple ( Acer sp.) (Figure 3.11 (4)). Economic growth occurred after controlling erosion and new tree nurseries have been established with modern irrigation. Potential negative consequences through the excessive use of water can be mitigated through engagement with local stakeholders and transdisciplinary learning processes, as well as by restoring the traditional land uses in the semi-arid Konya closed basin (Akça et al. 2016).3.7.1.4 Soil erosion in Central Asia under changing climate Soil erosion is widely acknowledged to be a major form of degradation of Central Asian drylands, affecting a considerable share of croplands and rangelands. However, up-to-date information on the actual extent of eroded soils at the regional or country level is not available. The estimates compiled by Pender et al. (2009), based on the Central Asian Countries Initiative for Land Management (CACILM), indicate that about 0.8 Mha of the irrigated croplands were subject to high degree of soil erosion in Uzbekistan. In Turkmenistan, soil erosion was indicated to be occurring in about 0.7 Mha of irrigated land. In Kyrgyzstan, out of 1 Mha of irrigated land in the foothill zones, 0.76 Mha were subject to soil erosion by water, leading to losses in crop yields of 20–60% in these eroded soils. About 0.65 Mha of arable land were prone to soil erosion by wind (Mavlyanova et al. 2017). Soil erosion is widespread in rainfed and irrigated areas in Kazakhstan (Saparov 2014). About 5 Mha of rainfed croplands were subject to high levels of soil erosion (Pender et al. 2009). Soil erosion by water was indicated to be a major concern in sloping areas in Tajikistan (Pender et al. 2009). The major causes of soil erosion in Central Asia are related to human factors, primarily excessive water use in irrigated areas (Gupta et al. 2009), deep ploughing and lack of maintenance of vegetative cover in rainfed areas (Suleimenov et al. 2014), and overgrazing in rangelands (Mirzabaev et al. 2016). Lack of good maintenance of watering infrastructure for migratory livestock grazing, and fragmentation of livestock herds led to overgrazing near villages, increasing the soil erosion by wind (Alimaev et al. 2008). Overgrazing in the rangeland areas of the region (e.g., particularly in Kyzylkum) contributes to dust storms, coming primarily from the Ustyurt Plateau, desertified areas of Amudarya and Syrdarya rivers’ deltas, the dried seabed of the Aral Sea (now called Aralkum), and the Caspian Sea (Issanova and Abuduwaili 2017; Xi and Sokolik 2015). Xi and Sokolik (2015) estimated that total dust emissions in Central Asia were 255.6 Mt in 2001, representing 10–17% of the global total. 2 4 Figure 3. 11 | (1) A general view of a nearby village of Karapınar town in the early 1960s (Çarkaci 1999",
    "new_id": 168
  },
  {
    "id": 15245,
    "question": "Which of the following best reflects an implicit limitation in the geographic and temporal applicability of the models described, based on their typical output intervals and scales, as outlined in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Physical Climate Models are incapable of providing outputs at resolutions smaller than 200km grids, making them unsuitable for localized climate adaptation strategies.",
      "B": "IEA World Energy Model projections beyond 2050 lack sufficient granularity, as they only provide outputs at five-yearly intervals without regional specificity.",
      "C": "Integrated Assessment Models fail to account for socioeconomic variables like GDP and population growth when projecting outcomes after 2100.",
      "D": "Impact, Adaptation, Vulnerability Models cannot reliably assess financial service risks due to their reliance on biological properties and physical climate conditions.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "66",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Guidence 2020.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial DisclosuresTable A1-2 Representative Model Inputs and Outputs Model TypeExamples of Model InputsExamples of Model Outputs149 Geographic and Time Scale/Intervals Physical Climate Models• Projections of emissions and other radiative forcing drivers (e.g., RCPs) • Incoming and outgoing solar radiation • Solar radiation reflection and absorbed • Observed historical climate • Temperature changes150 • Precipitation changes • Others such as wind speed, humidity, evapotranspiration, snow cover, snow melt, sea ice cover, and sea ice melt• Typically, 1850–2100 with some to 2300 • Time intervals typically vary from hourly to seasonal or average annual • Geographic range typically 200 to 500km grids, with downscaling projects able to provide down to 1km grids (typically between 5 to 25km grids) IEA World Energy Model• Assumptions around GDP and population growth, as well as related regional consumption and demand • Projected price and demand curves for current and emerging energy sources; assumed carbon prices• Total primary energy demand • Power generation and total final consumption by source (IEA, 2019) • Investment ($bn per annum) • Retirements, additions• Time range is typically Present > 2040–2050 with five yearly intervals • Information provided at regional level and for major energy consumption/ production countries151 Integrated Assessment Models• Socioeconomic development assumptions (e.g., SSPs) • Population • GDP • Assumptions around policy, climate, land use, existing and emerging technologies, etc.• Various. The Integrated Assessment Modeling Consortium (IAMC) gives a detailed list of 598 possible output variables from these models (IAMC, 2019)• Time range is typically Present > 2100 with five or ten yearly intervals • Most information provided at regional level, e.g., Asia, Middle East and Africa, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development Impact, Adaptation, Vulnerability Models• Inputs will depend on the topic studied. If related to agriculture, most inputs would focus on biological properties and physical climate conditions• Various. Examples include: - Agriculture – a crop yield model can assess how changes in climate variables (such as available water, temperatures, and CO2 concentration) interact to produce changes in the crop production quantity and quality - Financial services – insurance companies often use catastrophe (Cat) models to assess the economic impact of a natural disaster• Various 149 These include indices, which can be calculated from the raw model output. 150 A full list of standard output GCM variables for CMIP5 can be found at https://pcmdi.llnl.gov/mips/cmip5/docs/standard_output. pdf?id=41 . 151 Information is available at a country level for certain countries (U.S., Brazil, China, Japan, India, Russia), and more granular subregions (Asia-Pacific, North America, EU, Middle East, etc.). 65 Executive Summary Table of Contents B. Getting Organized C. The Scenario Process D. Strategic Management Using Scenarios E. Disclosure: Demonstrating Strategy Resilience ConclusionA. Introduction Glossary, Abbreviations, References, and AcknowledgmentsAppendix 1: An Overview of Public Scenarios and Models Appendix 2: Scenario Construction Appendix 3: Summary of Selected Scenario Tools and Information Appendix 4: Interviewed Organizations",
    "new_id": 169
  },
  {
    "id": 15258,
    "question": "Which combination of considerations ensures the most comprehensive evaluation of a company's climate transition risk strategy, given the uncertainties and contextual factors mentioned, as described in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Quantitative comparison of strategies, full system value of assets, and flexibility to address problematic issues from global scenarios.",
      "A": "Temperature-emissions relationship, policy design features, and uniform goals imposed across companies.",
      "C": "Global emissions pathway attainability, non-climate-related reference conditions, and explicit allowance for company-specific variation in goals.",
      "D": "Market and technology assumptions, robustness evaluation of strategies, and implicit imposition of identical objectives across industries.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "88",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Guidence 2020.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures2. EVALUATING TOOLS AND METHODOLOGIES New research is emerging that is developing a technical foundation for climate-related risk assessment that informs methodological development and application. For instance, when selecting open source or commercial scenario tools or methodologies, or developing in-house capability for climate transition risk, companies should consider the following questions (Rose & Scott, 2020): 1. Are the following uncertainties considered and how? a. Temperature-emissions relationship? b. Global emissions pathway attainability? c. Policy design features? d. Non-climate-related reference conditions (e.g., markets, technology)?2. Are global scenario results used and how are problematic issues addressed? 3. How is the company-specific context considered? 4. Is a uniform goal explicitly or implicitly imposed across companies, or are goals allowed to vary from one company to the next? 5. Given uncertainties, does the approach provide flexibility? 6. Is quantitative comparison of alternative strategies possible? 7. What is the approach for evaluating strategy robustness? 8. Is the full (system) value of company assets and investments considered? 87 Executive Summary Table of Contents B. Getting Organized C. The Scenario Process D. Strategic Management Using Scenarios E. Disclosure: Demonstrating Strategy Resilience ConclusionA. Introduction Glossary, Abbreviations, References, and AcknowledgmentsAppendix 1: An Overview of Public Scenarios and Models Appendix 2: Scenario Construction Appendix 3: Summary of Selected Scenario Tools and Information Appendix 4: Interviewed Organizations",
    "new_id": 170
  },
  {
    "id": 15263,
    "question": "Which of the following best represents a limitation implicitly conveyed about the Transition Pathway Initiative (TPI) in terms of its scope and utility for analyzing climate-related risks, as described in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The TPI lacks specific emissions scenarios or time horizons, relying instead on current state assessments without future projections.",
      "A": "The TPI provides company-level ratings but does not explicitly disclose how these ratings are weighted across different sectors.",
      "B": "The TPI exclusively focuses on transition risks without addressing any physical risks associated with climate change.",
      "D": "The TPI is restricted to regional analyses, failing to provide global insights necessary for multinational corporations.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "104",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Guidence 2020.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial DisclosuresTable A3-2: Selected Scenario Tool and Data Providers (Continued) Name of Provider DetailsWeb Link SENSES Toolkit Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact ResearchWhat services do they provide? Analysis Tool The SENSES Toolkit: Modules to help companies understand and communicate climate change scenarios. The modules utilize visualizations in an explanatory or exploratory way. What are the outputs? Scenario Finder: Allows you to quickly filter all available scenarios from the IAMC 1.5 database. Scenario Explorer: Presents an ensemble of quantitative, model-based climate change mitigation pathways. What climate-related risks and opportunities are covered? Both transition and physical What emissions scenario(s) and time horizon(s) are covered? Emissions scenario(s): Scenarios from the IAMC 1.5 database Time horizon: Aligned with the IAMC scenarios What sectors can use this tool/data? What sectors are covered by the data or analysis? Intended user: N/A Sectors covered: N/A What geography is covered? At what resolution (if disclosed)? Geography covered: Global and regional Resolution: Not disclosedLink 1 Link 2 Transition Pathway Initiative (TPI)What services do they provide? Analysis Tool An open source tool that assesses trends in emissions and rates the management of emissions and climate-related risks at the company and sector level. What are the outputs? Company ratings (from 0–4) of management of climate-related risks aggregated at the sector level. Time series plots of emissions intensity by company. What climate-related risks and opportunities are covered? Transition • Not specified, but relevant to carbon pricing and the energy transitionWhat emissions scenario(s) and time horizon(s) are covered? Emissions scenario(s): N/A Time horizon: Current state What sectors can use this tool/data? What sectors are covered by the data or analysis? Intended users: Not defined (depends on user’s interpretation and use of information). Sectors covered: Multiple, including energy, manufacturing, industrial, transportation, etc. What geography is covered? At what resolution (if disclosed)? Geography covered: Companies span multiple regions, (e.g., North America, Europe, Asia). Resolution: Company levelLink 103 Executive Summary Table of Contents B. Getting Organized C. The Scenario Process D. Strategic Management Using Scenarios E. Disclosure: Demonstrating Strategy Resilience ConclusionA. Introduction Glossary, Abbreviations, References, and AcknowledgmentsAppendix 1: An Overview of Public Scenarios and Models Appendix 2: Scenario Construction Appendix 3: Summary of Selected Scenario Tools and Information Appendix 4: Interviewed Organizations",
    "new_id": 171
  },
  {
    "id": 15425,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the reason why the IEA's World Energy Outlook and the IAMC's Scenario Explorer could both be used in transition risk analysis, yet differ fundamentally in their approach to sectoral applicability, as outlined in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The IEA explicitly targets energy-intensive sectors as its primary users, while the IAMC leaves sectoral applicability undefined, depending entirely on user interpretation.",
      "A": "The IEA focuses exclusively on energy sector CO2 emissions, while the IAMC provides a broader scope that necessarily includes non-energy sectors like agriculture.",
      "B": "Both tools are designed for universal sectoral application, but the IEA's projections are limited to policy-driven scenarios, whereas the IAMC incorporates socioeconomic factors across all sectors.",
      "C": "The IEA provides geographically resolved data for specific countries, whereas the IAMC aggregates global data into broad regional categories, limiting its precision.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "100",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Guidence 2020.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial DisclosuresTable A3-2: Selected Scenario Tool and Data Providers (Continued) Name of Provider DetailsWeb Link IEA What services do they provide? Data World Energy Outlook: Published annually and projects global energy supply and demand, and provides detailed scenarios that map out the consequences of different energy policy and investment choices. What are the outputs? Scenarios and trends that can be used as inputs for a transition risk/opportunity scenario analysis. What climate-related risks and opportunities are covered? Transition • Depends on user application; most applicable to carbon pricing and demand for various types of energy.What emissions scenario(s) and time horizon(s) are covered? Emissions scenario(s): Scenarios that align with various temperature outcomes. Time horizon: Projections in 2019 report extend to 2040. Energy sector CO2 emissions only. What sectors can use this tool/data? What sectors are covered by the data or analysis? Intended users: Not defined (depends on user’s interpretation and use of information). Directly applicable to energy sector or energy-intensive sectors. Sectors covered: Energy sector What geography is covered? At what resolution (if disclosed)? Geography covered: Global (trends are also divided by country) Resolution: Not disclosedLink Integrated Assessment Modeling Consortium (IAMC)What services do they provide? Data IAMC 1.5°C Scenario Explorer: An interactive dashboard that presents quantified socioeconomic factors (e.g., land use, energy demand, carbon price) under multiple scenarios, based on models used by the IPCC. Scenario database developed for the IPCC’s Fifth Assessment Report: Additional scenarios literature and resources (Database for the IPCC’s Sixth Assessment Report is currently under development). What are the outputs? Time series plots for select factors (e.g., carbon price, per capita meat consumption, land use, etc.) in select scenarios and regions. What climate-related risks and opportunities are covered? Transition • Not defined. Can be used as an input to support a transition risk analysis for a variety of transition risks (based on user context and interpretation).What emissions scenario(s) and time horizon(s) are covered? Emissions scenario(s): 1.5°C, 2°C, and higher (e.g., 3˚C, 4˚C) Time horizon: Up to 2100 What sectors can use this tool/data? What sectors are covered by the data or analysis? Intended user: N/A Sectors covered: Not defined (depends on user’s interpretation and use of information) What geography is covered? At what resolution (if disclosed)? Geography covered: Global Resolution: Data can be disaggregated into: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development + EU, Asia, Latin America and Caribbean, Middle East and Africa.Link 1 Link 2 99 Executive Summary Table of Contents B. Getting Organized C. The Scenario Process D. Strategic Management Using Scenarios E. Disclosure: Demonstrating Strategy Resilience ConclusionA. Introduction Glossary, Abbreviations, References, and AcknowledgmentsAppendix 1: An Overview of Public Scenarios and Models Appendix 2: Scenario Construction Appendix 3: Summary of Selected Scenario Tools and Information Appendix 4: Interviewed Organizations",
    "new_id": 172
  },
  {
    "id": 15435,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures a limitation or gap in the data provided by the tools mentioned in the excerpt, as described in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Moody's Carbon Transition Assessment (CTA) fails to provide sector-specific forward-looking scoring for industries outside carbon-intensive sectors, despite covering a wide range of geographies.",
      "B": "The Inevitable Policy Response tool lacks any form of physical risk analysis, focusing exclusively on transition risks without disclosing geographic resolution.",
      "C": "Both providers fail to offer insights into financial opportunities arising from physical risks, limiting their utility for sovereign credit assessments.",
      "D": "Neither tool discloses emissions scenarios explicitly, and both are restricted to short-term time horizons under 20 years.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "101",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Guidence 2020.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial DisclosuresTable A3-2: Selected Scenario Tool and Data Providers (Continued) Name of Provider DetailsWeb Link Inevitable Policy ResponseWhat services do they provide? Analysis Tool Free-to-use tool and analysis on the abrupt transition scenario. What are the outputs? Policy, energy system, and financial analysis of a policy shock to financial markets. Data tables and an Excel tool are also provided. What climate-related risks and opportunities are covered? Analysis of market risks and opportunities in equities, fixed income, private equity, and infrastructure.What emissions scenario(s) and time horizon(s) are covered? Emissions scenario(s): Transition risks Time horizon: Up to 2100 What sectors can use this tool/data? What sectors are covered by the data or analysis? Intended user: N/A Sectors covered: All sectors What geography is covered? At what resolution (if disclosed)? Geography covered: Global Resolution: Not disclosedLink Moody's Investor ServiceWhat services do they provide? Analysis Tool, Data Carbon Transition Assessment (CTA): Provides sector-specific forward-looking scoring of corporate issuers based on exposure to and mitigation of transition risks (under development). Data: Country ratings based on sovereign credits’ vulnerability to physical climate risk. What are the outputs? Sector ratings and scorecards: Corporate CTA scores indicating materiality of carbon transition for the issuer. What climate-related risks and opportunities are covered? Physical (transition pending) • Physical risks: Warming, snow cover, sea level rise, drought, wildfire, floods, storms, and cyclones. • Transition risks and opportunities under CTA.What emissions scenario(s) and time horizon(s) are covered? Emissions scenario(s): Not disclosed. Time horizon: • Sovereign ratings: Not disclosed. • CTA: Up to 15 years for longer-term resilience against IEA Sustainable Development Scenario. What sectors can use this tool/data? What sectors are covered by the data or analysis? Intended users: Generally applicable. Specific sectors or limitations not disclosed. Sectors covered: For CTA, carbon- intensive sectors are covered: Power, Oil and Gas, Autos, Airlines, Shipping, Cement, and Steel. What geography is covered? At what resolution (if disclosed)? • Sovereign ratings: Certain regions in South America, Africa, Middle East, and Asia as well as Greenland are not considered. • CTA: Applied globally to Moody’s rated universe of issuers in the sectors.Link 1 Link 2 Link 3 100 Executive Summary Table of Contents B. Getting Organized C. The Scenario Process D. Strategic Management Using Scenarios E. Disclosure: Demonstrating Strategy Resilience ConclusionA. Introduction Glossary, Abbreviations, References, and AcknowledgmentsAppendix 1: An Overview of Public Scenarios and Models Appendix 2: Scenario Construction Appendix 3: Summary of Selected Scenario Tools and Information Appendix 4: Interviewed Organizations",
    "new_id": 173
  },
  {
    "id": 15454,
    "question": "Which of the following scenarios is LEAST likely to be accurately assessed by the tools described in the excerpt when analyzing climate-related financial risks for a global portfolio, as discussed in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures: Guidance on Scenario Analysis for Non-Financial Companies?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Estimating changes to energy demand affecting oil and gas investments globally under a 4°C warming scenario limited to the year 2025.",
      "A": "Evaluating the impact of carbon pricing policies on manufacturing companies across Europe under a 2°C scenario by 2035.",
      "C": "Assessing the exposure of assets owned by an energy company in coastal regions to cyclones and storm surges over the next 15 years using localized, downscaled data.",
      "D": "Measuring the potential effects of extreme cold weather patterns on utility service providers operating solely within tropical regions up to 2040.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "90",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Guidence 2020.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial DisclosuresName of Provider DetailsWeb Link Bloomberg Scenario Analysis Tool Included with access to Bloomberg TerminalWhat services do they provide? Analysis Tool Physical Risk Assessment : Maps assets against physical risks to highlight areas of exposure. Scenario Analysis Tool: Evaluates potential future CapEx at risk in the oil and gas industry under a 2°C scenario. What are the outputs? • Physical Risk Assessment: A map that highlights assets with greater exposure to specified physical risks. • Scenario Analysis Tool: Impact on CapEx and net present value. What climate-related risks and opportunities are covered? Both physical and transition • Physical Risk Assessment: Cyclones, floods, extreme heat, water stress, flood, storm surge, and wildfires • Scenario Analysis Tool: Changes to energy generation mix, changes to energy demandWhat emissions scenario(s) and time horizon(s) are covered? Emissions scenario(s): • Physical Risk Assessment: 2°C and 4°C • Scenario Analysis Tool: 2°C scenario Time horizon: • Physical Risk Assessment: Up to 2040 (based on TD Bank case study) • Scenario Analysis Tool: Up to 2025 What sectors can use this tool/data? What sectors are covered by the data or analysis? Intended users: Financial institutions Sectors covered: • Physical Risk Assessment: Any sector (case studies focus on energy and financial sectors) • Scenario Analysis Tool: Energy sector (focus on oil and gas) What geography is covered? At what resolution (if disclosed)? Geography covered: Global Resolution: Not disclosedLink 1 Link 2 Carbon Delta (an MSCI Company)What services do they provide? Analysis Tool Climate VaR: Provides investors with tools to measure the climate-related risks of their portfolio. What are the outputs? VaR (including impacts on cost, profit, and security valuation) aggregated at the sector, country, or portfolio level. What climate-related risks and opportunities are covered? Both physical and transition • Physical risks: Multiple, including heat, cold, wind, precipitation, snowfall, wildfires, hurricanes • Transition risks: Multiple, including carbon pricing,194 green revenues from low-carbon technologiesWhat emissions scenario(s) and time horizon(s) are covered? Emissions scenario(s): Multiple, including 3°C, 2°C, and 1.5°C Time horizon: 15 years into the future What sectors can use this tool/data? What sectors are covered by the data or analysis? Intended users: Financial institutions (investment managers, banks, asset owners, insurance companies). Sectors covered: All business sectors (22,000 companies and over 300,000 securities covered). Case studies include agriculture, services, manufacturing, mining and petroleum refining, construction, transportation, and utility service. What geography is covered? At what resolution (if disclosed)? Geography covered: Global Resolution: Localized, downscaled data is available at the city level for most locationsLink 194 A price on carbon emissions (typically expressed as a monetary value per ton of carbon dioxide equivalent) used as a policy mechanism to regulate emissions, usually in the form of an emissions trading system or carbon tax.Table A3-1: Selected Providers That Can Conduct a Scenario Analysis on Behalf of an Organization (Continued) 89 Executive Summary Table of Contents B. Getting Organized C. The Scenario Process D. Strategic Management Using Scenarios E. Disclosure: Demonstrating Strategy Resilience ConclusionA. Introduction Glossary, Abbreviations, References, and AcknowledgmentsAppendix 1: An Overview of Public Scenarios and Models Appendix 2: Scenario Construction Appendix 3: Summary of Selected Scenario Tools and Information Appendix 4: Interviewed Organizations",
    "new_id": 174
  },
  {
    "id": 15466,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why Integrated Assessment Models (IAMs) and Physical Climate Models differ fundamentally in their temporal and geographic resolution outputs, as described in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures: Guidance on Scenario Analysis for Non-Financial Companies?",
    "options": {
      "C": "IAMs prioritize socioeconomic variables over precise spatial data, while Physical Climate Models focus on high-resolution geographic outputs to capture localized climate phenomena.",
      "A": "Physical Climate Models are limited to seasonal intervals due to computational constraints, whereas IAMs extend to 2100 because they rely solely on annual socioeconomic projections.",
      "B": "IAMs use five or ten yearly intervals to align with policy timelines, while Physical Climate Models provide hourly to seasonal outputs to reflect immediate radiative forcing dynamics.",
      "D": "Physical Climate Models depend on downscaling techniques for higher resolution, while IAMs avoid this due to the irrelevance of subregional geographic detail in global energy demand projections.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "66",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Guidence 2020.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial DisclosuresTable A1-2 Representative Model Inputs and Outputs Model TypeExamples of Model InputsExamples of Model Outputs149 Geographic and Time Scale/Intervals Physical Climate Models• Projections of emissions and other radiative forcing drivers (e.g., RCPs) • Incoming and outgoing solar radiation • Solar radiation reflection and absorbed • Observed historical climate • Temperature changes150 • Precipitation changes • Others such as wind speed, humidity, evapotranspiration, snow cover, snow melt, sea ice cover, and sea ice melt• Typically, 1850–2100 with some to 2300 • Time intervals typically vary from hourly to seasonal or average annual • Geographic range typically 200 to 500km grids, with downscaling projects able to provide down to 1km grids (typically between 5 to 25km grids) IEA World Energy Model• Assumptions around GDP and population growth, as well as related regional consumption and demand • Projected price and demand curves for current and emerging energy sources; assumed carbon prices• Total primary energy demand • Power generation and total final consumption by source (IEA, 2019) • Investment ($bn per annum) • Retirements, additions• Time range is typically Present > 2040–2050 with five yearly intervals • Information provided at regional level and for major energy consumption/ production countries151 Integrated Assessment Models• Socioeconomic development assumptions (e.g., SSPs) • Population • GDP • Assumptions around policy, climate, land use, existing and emerging technologies, etc.• Various. The Integrated Assessment Modeling Consortium (IAMC) gives a detailed list of 598 possible output variables from these models (IAMC, 2019)• Time range is typically Present > 2100 with five or ten yearly intervals • Most information provided at regional level, e.g., Asia, Middle East and Africa, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development Impact, Adaptation, Vulnerability Models• Inputs will depend on the topic studied. If related to agriculture, most inputs would focus on biological properties and physical climate conditions• Various. Examples include: - Agriculture – a crop yield model can assess how changes in climate variables (such as available water, temperatures, and CO2 concentration) interact to produce changes in the crop production quantity and quality - Financial services – insurance companies often use catastrophe (Cat) models to assess the economic impact of a natural disaster• Various 149 These include indices, which can be calculated from the raw model output. 150 A full list of standard output GCM variables for CMIP5 can be found at https://pcmdi.llnl.gov/mips/cmip5/docs/standard_output. pdf?id=41 . 151 Information is available at a country level for certain countries (U.S., Brazil, China, Japan, India, Russia), and more granular subregions (Asia-Pacific, North America, EU, Middle East, etc.). 65 Executive Summary Table of Contents B. Getting Organized C. The Scenario Process D. Strategic Management Using Scenarios E. Disclosure: Demonstrating Strategy Resilience ConclusionA. Introduction Glossary, Abbreviations, References, and AcknowledgmentsAppendix 1: An Overview of Public Scenarios and Models Appendix 2: Scenario Construction Appendix 3: Summary of Selected Scenario Tools and Information Appendix 4: Interviewed Organizations",
    "new_id": 175
  },
  {
    "id": 15592,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes a limitation or gap in the information provided by both Jupiter Intel's ClimateScore™ Intelligence Platform and the OASIS Loss Modelling Framework regarding their intended use for financial and public sector decision-making, as outlined in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures: Guidance on Scenario Analysis for Non-Financial Companies?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Neither tool discloses the specific emissions scenarios used in their analyses, potentially limiting their utility for long-term climate-related strategic planning.",
      "A": "Both tools fail to provide any outputs related to financial risks or costs, making them unsuitable for sectors requiring detailed economic analysis.",
      "B": "Both platforms are restricted to physical risk assessments and do not address transition risks, which are critical for financial and public sector organizations.",
      "C": "The geographic coverage of both tools is insufficient for global application, as they only focus on localized regions such as New York City and South Florida.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "93",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Guidence 2020.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial DisclosuresName of Provider DetailsWeb Link Jupiter Intel What services do they provide? Analysis Tool ClimateScore™ Intelligence Platform: Predicts the probability and climate impact of extreme weather events. Users can select parameters (probability threshold, type of hazard, scenario, etc.). What are the outputs? Hazard-specific outputs: For each asset. Financial outputs not disclosed. What climate-related risks and opportunities are covered? Physical • Multiple, including flood, fire, heat, drought, cold, wind, and hail events, supply chain disruptionsWhat emissions scenario(s) and time horizon(s) are covered? Emissions scenario(s): Not disclosed Time horizon: Up to 50 years in the future What sectors can use this tool/data? What sectors are covered by the data or analysis? Intended users: Financial and public sector Sectors covered: Multiple asset types included (e.g., loading docks, hotel). Details not disclosed. What geography is covered? At what resolution (if disclosed)? Geography covered: New York City, South Florida, Houston, and Europe (global expansion is underway) Resolution: Hyper-local resolution (<1m for FloodScore™)Link Oasis HUB What services do they provide? Analysis Tool OASIS Loss Modelling Framework: An open source, web-based tool that provides a platform for developing, deploying, and executing catastrophe models. Users input hazard, exposure, and vulnerability data and the tool calculates risk and financial cost of events. What are the outputs? Damage risk and potential financial cost of events (e.g., average annual losses), loss tables, and loss exceedance curves What climate-related risks and opportunities are covered? Physical • Fire, flood (additional hazards not disclosed)What emissions scenario(s) and time horizon(s) are covered? Emissions scenario(s): Not disclosed Time horizon: Not disclosed What sectors can use this tool/data? What sectors are covered by the data or analysis? Intended users: Primarily insurance and reinsurance, but seeks to provide tools and utility to all sectors Sectors covered: Not disclosed What geography is covered? At what resolution (if disclosed)? Geography covered: Global Resolution: Not disclosedLink 1 Link 2Table A3-1: Selected Providers That Can Conduct a Scenario Analysis on Behalf of an Organization (Continued) 92 Executive Summary Table of Contents B. Getting Organized C. The Scenario Process D. Strategic Management Using Scenarios E. Disclosure: Demonstrating Strategy Resilience ConclusionA. Introduction Glossary, Abbreviations, References, and AcknowledgmentsAppendix 1: An Overview of Public Scenarios and Models Appendix 2: Scenario Construction Appendix 3: Summary of Selected Scenario Tools and Information Appendix 4: Interviewed Organizations",
    "new_id": 176
  },
  {
    "id": 15607,
    "question": "What implication arises from Novo Nordisk's decision to integrate long-term climate risks into its enterprise risk management system rather than treating scenario analysis as a standalone process, as discussed in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures: Guidance on Scenario Analysis for Non-Financial Companies?",
    "options": {
      "A": "It implies a strategic alignment aimed at embedding climate considerations into both tactical and long-term decision-making frameworks.",
      "B": "It suggests that Novo Nordisk prioritizes immediate operational risks over strategic considerations related to climate change.",
      "C": "It indicates that short-term risks are irrelevant to the company’s planning processes and will be phased out.",
      "D": "It reflects a shift toward outsourcing risk management responsibilities to external specialists for better efficiency.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "12",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Guidence 2020.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial DisclosuresBox B1 Integration of Scenario Analysis at Novo Nordisk Scenario analysis should not be treated as an independent, one-time exercise. Scenarios are most effective when integrated into a company’s regular planning and risk management processes and cycles, as well as corporate reporting processes. It is important that the scenario process is seen by the whole business — supply chains, procurement, product development, operations, and distribution — as an integral part of the company’s approach to planning across the value chain. Novo Nordisk is a global Danish healthcare company, established in Copenhagen in the 1920s. It produces insulin for over 30 million diabetes patients across 169 different countries (more than 29% of the global market), as well as pharmaceuticals for other chronic diseases. For Novo Nordisk, the main concern has been to minimize complexity by integrating scenario analysis into existing risk processes instead of creating a parallel process. In recent years, Novo Nordisk has expanded its enterprise risk management (ERM) processes to include emerging physical and transitional risks (3+ years). The company currently focuses on short-term risks of 0–3 years and emerging risks of 3–10 years. A long-term horizon at Novo Nordisk would be anything longer than 10 years. When planning new production facilities, for example, Novo Nordisk includes long-term risks (10+ years) related to climate change. Novo Nordisk is currently using its existing enterprise risk management system, which ranks risks depending on likelihood and impact, and reports to executive management. However, in order to incorporate emerging long-term climate risks, Novo Nordisk is investigating how these can be benchmarked directly to other risk types. This effort includes experimenting with adding a time or urgency dimension to the risk matrix. Moreover, the ERM processes are being shaped so that smaller risks are handled locally (e.g., building improvements), while bigger risks are reported to executive management if relevant at the tactical or strategic level. In this way, the risks can be used for future strategic decisions and evaluation of existing strategies. 4. ESTABLISH A STRONG, DEDICATED SCENARIO TEAM A dedicated scenario team comprised of business representatives is suggested for large- and midsized companies. Key positions on the scenario team often include a team leader, a facilitator, and an administrator. Team size depends on the scale and complexity of the company, but generally is only a handful of personnel working full-time on the scenario analysis effort while it is in process.15 The team leader should ideally be a senior person from the strategic planning or sustainability areas. The team leader manages the overall process, engages with stakeholders, communicates progress, and presents the results. They need strong project management and communication skills, as well as in-depth knowledge of the company and its industry. Team members should possess multi- disciplinary expertise across the company’s value chain, divisions, and functions, and understand different aspects of its business model, assets, operations, organizational structure, mission, and strategy. The team members should understand what scenarios are and what they are not, their purpose, and scenario characteristics. They should be able to apply historical, political, economic, social, and technological trends to the development of the scenarios. Finally, they should be able to draw upon specialists within the company or from the outside when necessary, and have a creative, imaginative, open-minded, and forward-looking mindset. A facilitator plays a key role on the team. This role keeps the scenario team and internal stakeholders focused, stimulating open- mindedness and urging those involved to go beyond conventional thinking. The facilitator should understand and have strong experience with scenario planning methods, and no conflicts of interest with a company’s scenario project. A facilitator can be someone internal or external to the company, as long as (s)he is acceptable to the executive sponsor and key executive decision- makers. Strong interpersonal and meeting facilitation skills are important.16 An administrator also plays an important role on the scenario team. It is important to have a dedicated administrator responsible for managing 15 Ralston and Wilson, The Scenario Planning Handbook: D",
    "new_id": 177
  },
  {
    "id": 15609,
    "question": "Which implication can be drawn about the role of the facilitator in scenario planning based on the integration of climate risks into Novo Nordisk's enterprise risk management system, as discussed in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures: Guidance on Scenario Analysis for Non-Financial Companies?",
    "options": {
      "B": "The facilitator ensures the scenario team explores unconventional thinking while aligning the process with executive-level expectations.",
      "A": "The facilitator's primary responsibility is to manage administrative tasks and ensure documentation of the scenario process.",
      "C": "The facilitator must avoid engaging with internal stakeholders to maintain objectivity in the scenario development process.",
      "D": "The facilitator's role is to directly rank risks within the enterprise risk management framework based on urgency and impact.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "12",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Guidence 2020.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial DisclosuresBox B1 Integration of Scenario Analysis at Novo Nordisk Scenario analysis should not be treated as an independent, one-time exercise. Scenarios are most effective when integrated into a company’s regular planning and risk management processes and cycles, as well as corporate reporting processes. It is important that the scenario process is seen by the whole business — supply chains, procurement, product development, operations, and distribution — as an integral part of the company’s approach to planning across the value chain. Novo Nordisk is a global Danish healthcare company, established in Copenhagen in the 1920s. It produces insulin for over 30 million diabetes patients across 169 different countries (more than 29% of the global market), as well as pharmaceuticals for other chronic diseases. For Novo Nordisk, the main concern has been to minimize complexity by integrating scenario analysis into existing risk processes instead of creating a parallel process. In recent years, Novo Nordisk has expanded its enterprise risk management (ERM) processes to include emerging physical and transitional risks (3+ years). The company currently focuses on short-term risks of 0–3 years and emerging risks of 3–10 years. A long-term horizon at Novo Nordisk would be anything longer than 10 years. When planning new production facilities, for example, Novo Nordisk includes long-term risks (10+ years) related to climate change. Novo Nordisk is currently using its existing enterprise risk management system, which ranks risks depending on likelihood and impact, and reports to executive management. However, in order to incorporate emerging long-term climate risks, Novo Nordisk is investigating how these can be benchmarked directly to other risk types. This effort includes experimenting with adding a time or urgency dimension to the risk matrix. Moreover, the ERM processes are being shaped so that smaller risks are handled locally (e.g., building improvements), while bigger risks are reported to executive management if relevant at the tactical or strategic level. In this way, the risks can be used for future strategic decisions and evaluation of existing strategies. 4. ESTABLISH A STRONG, DEDICATED SCENARIO TEAM A dedicated scenario team comprised of business representatives is suggested for large- and midsized companies. Key positions on the scenario team often include a team leader, a facilitator, and an administrator. Team size depends on the scale and complexity of the company, but generally is only a handful of personnel working full-time on the scenario analysis effort while it is in process.15 The team leader should ideally be a senior person from the strategic planning or sustainability areas. The team leader manages the overall process, engages with stakeholders, communicates progress, and presents the results. They need strong project management and communication skills, as well as in-depth knowledge of the company and its industry. Team members should possess multi- disciplinary expertise across the company’s value chain, divisions, and functions, and understand different aspects of its business model, assets, operations, organizational structure, mission, and strategy. The team members should understand what scenarios are and what they are not, their purpose, and scenario characteristics. They should be able to apply historical, political, economic, social, and technological trends to the development of the scenarios. Finally, they should be able to draw upon specialists within the company or from the outside when necessary, and have a creative, imaginative, open-minded, and forward-looking mindset. A facilitator plays a key role on the team. This role keeps the scenario team and internal stakeholders focused, stimulating open- mindedness and urging those involved to go beyond conventional thinking. The facilitator should understand and have strong experience with scenario planning methods, and no conflicts of interest with a company’s scenario project. A facilitator can be someone internal or external to the company, as long as (s)he is acceptable to the executive sponsor and key executive decision- makers. Strong interpersonal and meeting facilitation skills are important.16 An administrator also plays an important role on the scenario team. It is important to have a dedicated administrator responsible for managing 15 Ralston and Wilson, The Scenario Planning Handbook: D",
    "new_id": 178
  },
  {
    "id": 15610,
    "question": "Which function's expertise, as detailed in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures: Guidance on Scenario Analysis for Non-Financial Companies, is most critical for understanding both the upstream and downstream implications of climate-related risks on operations?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Site/Operations, since they link the upstream and downstream value chain while understanding local climate implications.",
      "A": "Brands, Marketing, Product Development, due to their forward-looking view on market evolution and customer behavior.",
      "B": "Procurement/Supply Chain, because they provide views on vulnerabilities and opportunities under climate impacts.",
      "D": "Sustainability/ESG, as they offer insights into environmental and social cause-effect relationships of climate change.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "22",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Guidence 2020.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial DisclosuresTable C2 Examples of Internal Stakeholders to Engage in Scenario Analysis Function Relevant ExpertiseHow This Expertise Can Benefit the Scenario Analysis Brands, Marketing, Product Development • Conduct customer, market analysis for business as usual • Have already seen the impact of environmental, social, and governance (ESG)/climate change on customer/consumer behavior • Understand customer/consumer behavior, needs, expectations, and trends • Understand policy changes• Provide a forward-looking view on market’s evolution, customers, consumer change in behavior, need, expectation, social activism in different scenarios, and time horizon • Provide insight into possible political and legal evolution in certain markets Procurement/ Supply Chain • Understand the complexity of the supply chain • Have already seen the physical impact of ESG/climate change on suppliers and supplies• Provide views on vulnerabilities and opportunities in the supply chain under a range of climate change impacts Site/Operations • Understand assets, technologies, infrastructure, market demand, and supply • Link between the upstream and downstream value chain• Understand the implications of local climate changes on operations Research and Development (R&D)/Innovation/ Technology • Work on future technological development • Provide views on plausible technological developments and breakthroughs Advocacy/Public Affairs • Global and regional policy trends • Provide views on future developments of climate policy and international and national climate action Sustainability/ESG • Understand environmental and social impacts of business• Provide insights on environmental and social cause-effect relationships of climate change Table C3 Examples of Engagement Topics and Questions Looking at the Current Situation Looking Back Looking Forward • What current climate-related risks do you think the company faces today and that could affect business strategy and ambitions? • What climate-related risks do you think are being underestimated by the company in their ability to meet their business strategy and ambitions? • What is your recent experience of actual climate-related impacts on your specific activity (and more broadly on the company’s business)?• What previous trends, cycles, or risks related to climate do you think might reoccur and impact business strategy and ambitions?• In your view, which climate-related risks do you think the company needs to get right to fulfill its ambition and mission? • What emerging trends or signals related to climate change concern you? • What do you think could be the potential implications on your specific activity (and more broadly on the company) for climate factors — such as (1) an increase in average global temperature and (2) a low- carbon economy — and when could these occur? 21 Executive Summary Table of Contents B. Getting Organized C. The Scenario Process D. Strategic Management Using Scenarios E. Disclosure: Demonstrating Strategy Resilience ConclusionA. Introduction Glossary, Abbreviations, References, and AcknowledgmentsAppendix 1: An Overview of Public Scenarios and Models Appendix 2: Scenario Construction Appendix 3: Summary of Selected Scenario Tools and Information Appendix 4: Interviewed Organizations",
    "new_id": 179
  },
  {
    "id": 15612,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why a company might initially limit the scope of its scenario analysis to a specific business unit or geography, and what risk this approach could introduce if not expanded later, as described in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures: Guidance on Scenario Analysis for Non-Financial Companies?",
    "options": {
      "D": "It enables the company to gain experience with scenario analysis while addressing critical vulnerabilities, but risks overlooking interconnected risks across the value chain.",
      "A": "It allows the company to focus on areas with minimal climate-related risks, ensuring quick wins, but may lead to overconfidence in unaffected sectors.",
      "B": "It helps the company align its planning horizons with traditional financial forecasts, but may result in insufficient consideration of long-term climate impacts.",
      "C": "It ensures compliance with TCFD recommendations by prioritizing high-impact regions, but could cause misallocation of resources toward less critical operations.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "18",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Guidence 2020.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial DisclosuresSome companies use both approaches — the exploratory approach when testing their strategies for resilience, and the normative approach for setting specific targets such as net-zero emissions. The TCFD Strategy recommendation and this guidance focus on the use of an exploratory approach (i.e., a company assessing a range of scenarios spanning a number of plausible futures). Companies may also use other special types of scenarios as part of their efforts to understand the implications of climate change as described in Box C1 .1.3 Scenario Structural Elements A scenario is structured around a number of basic elements such as a scope of coverage , a time horizon , and the choice of the number of scenarios used. 1.3.1 Scope of the Scenario Analysis To conduct an effective scenario process, a company needs to define the scope of its analysis. Ideally, scenario analysis should encompass the company as a whole, including supply and distribution chains.25 This is in line with the intent of the TCFD recommendations regarding disclosure of how current and potential climate-related risks and opportunities affect the company. Initially, however, a company may focus on a particular critical business unit, product line, geography, asset, or input(s) that may be highly impacted by climate-related risks or opportunities before expanding the scope of its scenario analysis. This narrower focus allows a company to gain experience with scenario analysis while at the same time focusing on a climate-critical aspect of its business. However, a company should quickly expand its scope to all of its operations and its entire value chain in a mature scenario analysis process. 1.3.2 Time Horizon Scenarios describe a future outcome at a particular time horizon. Choosing a time horizon involves a trade-off between too short — where developments may not be sufficiently differentiated — and too long — where uncertainties may overwhelm useful analysis. “The time horizon for scenarios should be short enough so that they are plausible but long enough for us to imagine that important changes with an impact on the future business can take place.” 26 In setting climate-related scenario time horizons, companies should challenge their thinking about traditional planning horizons, which are often too short. Scenario time horizons are typically longer than many corporate planning horizons. Scenario time horizons that are too short may result in simple extrapolations of current thinking and trends, and therefore not reveal the information needed to assess the resilience of the company’s climate- related strategy.Box C1 Special Types of Scenarios Stress tests are a type of scenario typically used in the financial sector, although some non-financial companies are beginning to use them. They use hypothetical, unfavorable scenarios to determine whether an organization has enough capital, earnings, and/or cash flow to withstand the impact of adverse developments. Stress tests focus on “tail risks” — risks that seemingly have a low probability but that could still present significant impacts. A close cousin is the reverse stress test , which uses scenarios and circumstances that would make a business model unworkable; reverse stress tests focus on identifying potentially fatal business vulnerabilities. Stress tests and reverse stress tests are specialized forms of scenarios. Another special type of scenario is the reference scenario , sometimes called a baseline or business as usual scenario . A reference scenario is used as a “yardstick” for comparing alternative scenarios. A reference scenario is based on future patterns of activity assuming that there will be no significant change in business priorities, or no major changes in external technology, economics, or policies, so that existing circumstances can be expected to continue unchanged. A reference scenario can take the form of a trend scenario. In this instance, existing development trends are extrapolated into the future. Or it can consist of a null scenario (i.e., one or more components are assumed to remain permanently or temporarily unchanged). A reference scenario can be helpful in highlighting the difference in change and impact between it (e.g., business as usual) and planning scenarios. 25 See Pettit, Fiksel and Croxton, Ensuring Supply Chain Resilience: Development of a Conceptual Framework , 2010; Norton, Ryan and Wang, Business Action for Clima",
    "new_id": 180
  },
  {
    "id": 15613,
    "question": "When determining the time horizon for scenario analysis, which factor is explicitly highlighted as crucial to ensure alignment with long-term climate change effects while avoiding overly narrow short-term perspectives, as described in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures: Guidance on Scenario Analysis for Non-Financial Companies?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The useful life of major company assets and alignment with Nationally Determined Contributions under the Paris Agreement.",
      "B": "Corporate capital planning and investment horizons exclusively.",
      "C": "Immediate financial performance metrics to satisfy short-term investor expectations.",
      "D": "The need to focus solely on trends observable within the next five years.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "76",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Guidence 2020.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosuresit may be useful to start with a more focused boundary such as a critical business unit or specific commodity inputs and, as experience is gained, expand scenario analysis to the full company. Next, a company should determine the time horizon over which the focal question(s) will be considered. For instance, will the scenarios address the focal question out to 2040, 2050, or some other time horizon? In determining the appropriate time horizon, companies may want to consider such factors as corporate capital planning and investment horizons, and the useful life of major company assets. In addition, a company may want to align scenario time horizons with those used in the scenarios of the climate research community. For example, a company might consider time horizons that align with the cycles for major refreshes of Nationally Determined Contributions under the Paris Agreement. “Using a time frame that extends only a few years into the future fails to take into account important questions whose answers might depend on climate change effects that will become perceptible several years or decades down the line, but which nonetheless might be deemed material to the value of a company today.” 172 Finally, determining the number of scenarios is important. Homogeneous assumptions about driver development or too few scenarios may impair the analysis. Too many scenarios can be overwhelming for decision-makers and complicate the use of scenarios. It is a judgment call as to the number of scenarios that will adequately cover the landscape of relevant impacts and uncertainties. 2.3 Step 3: Identify Driving Forces and Critical Uncertainties • Identify the driving forces of key patterns, trends, and variables relevant to the company’s focal question(s). • Identify critical uncertainties around the impacts of identified driving forces. Scenarios are built around a focal question(s) by examining and describing the external factors that may affect the outcomes to such a question.173 The goal is to construct a conceptual understanding of the business environment and its various climate-related relationships. 2.3.1 Identifying Driving Forces A typical method for identifying driving forces is a facilitated brainstorming session in a workshop setting. The workshop might be among scenario team members, internal stakeholders, or both. There are also other ways of identifying driving forces.174 A good starting point in identifying relevant driving forces is the assessment done in Step 1 (p. 71). A company may then extend that analysis into the future by brainstorming the climate- related physical and transition forces that are likely to continue playing out and that are critical to decisions related to the company’s focal question(s). Some points to consider include the following: 175 • the possible future outcomes caused by the force or driver; • what the force or driver will influence; and • what the force or driver is influenced by. 172 Wasim, Corporate (Non) Disclosure of Climate Change Information , 2019. 173 Chermack, Scenario Planning in Organizations: How to Create, Use, and Assess Scenarios , 2011; Haigh, Scenario Planning for Climate Change: A Guide for Strategists , 2019. Such factors are typically called drivers, forces, or driving forces in the scenario literature, but also may be described as trends, conditions, events, and the like. 174 Haigh, Scenario Planning for Climate Change: A Guide for Strategists , 2019; Ralston and Wilson, The Scenario Planning Handbook: Developing Strategies in Uncertain Times , 2006; Van Der Heijden, Bradfield and Burt, The Sixth Sense: Accelerating Organizational Learning with Scenarios , 2002. 175 Ralston and Wilson, The Scenario Planning Handbook: Developing Strategies in Uncertain Times , 2006. 75 Executive Summary Table of Contents B. Getting Organized C. The Scenario Process D. Strategic Management Using Scenarios E. Disclosure: Demonstrating Strategy Resilience ConclusionA. Introduction Glossary, Abbreviations, References, and AcknowledgmentsAppendix 1: An Overview of Public Scenarios and Models Appendix 2: Scenario Construction Appendix 3: Summary of Selected Scenario Tools and Information Appendix 4: Interviewed Organizations",
    "new_id": 181
  },
  {
    "id": 15615,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures a limitation or ambiguity in the tools provided by Moody’s Analytics and NCAR when assessing climate-related financial risks, as described in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures: Guidance on Scenario Analysis for Non-Financial Companies?",
    "options": {
      "B": "NCAR does not disclose geographic resolution for its datasets, and Moody’s Analytics does not specify emissions scenarios explicitly beyond alignment with broader frameworks.",
      "A": "Moody’s Analytics fails to provide any sector-specific analysis, while NCAR exclusively focuses on sovereign and corporate entities.",
      "C": "Both providers rely solely on deterministic projections without incorporating stochastic simulations into their models.",
      "D": "Moody’s Analytics covers only transition risks, whereas NCAR provides no data relevant to physical risks.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "102",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Guidence 2020.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial DisclosuresTable A3-2: Selected Scenario Tool and Data Providers (Continued) Name of Provider DetailsWeb Link Moody’s AnalyticsWhat services do they provide? Data and analytic tools that leverage Moody’s credit risk models and quantifies climate impacts in financial terms. What are the outputs? Climate-adjusted probability of default (Expected Default Frequency), VaR, Cross Industry/Sector, and Geolocation Overlay metrics to adjust internal rating, stress testing models, and scorecards. What climate-related risks and opportunities are covered? Both physical and transition risks • Includes risks and opportunities across all asset classes from sovereign, corporate, private firms, CRE, etc.What emissions scenario(s) and time horizon(s) are covered? Aligned with the Network for Greening the Financial System (orderly transition scenario, late/disorderly transition scenario, and a “hot house” scenario), time horizons up to 30 years. Beyond, proceed to simulate macroeconomic and financial series (a combination of “real- life” (deterministic) paths and “stochastic” (simulated) projections) and offer flexibility to select any scenarios. What sectors can use this tool/data? What sectors are covered by the data or analysis? Intended user: N/A Sectors covered: All What geography is covered? At what resolution (if disclosed)? Geography covered: Global Resolution: Not disclosedLink NCAR What services do they provide? Data Open source models, datasets, software tools, and user guides; analysis and visualization software for climate risk. What are the outputs? Datasets for physical risk (e.g., climate projections) What climate-related risks and opportunities are covered? Physical • Includes temperature, sea ice thickness, precipitation (full list not disclosed).What emissions scenario(s) and time horizon(s) are covered? Emissions scenario(s): Not disclosed Time horizon: Depends on dataset (some go to 2099) What sectors can use this tool/data? What sectors are covered by the data or analysis? Intended user: N/A Sectors covered: Not defined (depends on user’s interpretation and use of information) What geography is covered? At what resolution (if disclosed)? Geography covered: Global Resolution: Not disclosedLink 1 Link 2 101 Executive Summary Table of Contents B. Getting Organized C. The Scenario Process D. Strategic Management Using Scenarios E. Disclosure: Demonstrating Strategy Resilience ConclusionA. Introduction Glossary, Abbreviations, References, and AcknowledgmentsAppendix 1: An Overview of Public Scenarios and Models Appendix 2: Scenario Construction Appendix 3: Summary of Selected Scenario Tools and Information Appendix 4: Interviewed Organizations",
    "new_id": 182
  },
  {
    "id": 15620,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the implicit relationship between the 'right mindset' for disclosure and the materiality considerations outlined in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures: Guidance on Scenario Analysis for Non-Financial Companies?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Adopting the right mindset involves reevaluating what information to withhold, which directly influences how materiality is determined and applied.",
      "A": "The right mindset ensures compliance with legal standards, which is sufficient for determining materiality.",
      "B": "Materiality assessments override the need for a forward-looking mindset since they rely on existing reporting frameworks.",
      "D": "Materiality is solely based on quantitative financial implications, making the right mindset irrelevant to its determination.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "52",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Guidence 2020.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial DisclosuresDisclosure does not end at the strategy level. As climate-related investments, projects, and initiatives in the strategy are implemented via concrete capital, project, operations, and financial plans, a company should disclose more concrete quantitative financial implications, such as those in Table E2 (p. 50).103 For any given reporting cycle, therefore, a company should consider disclosing the financial implications of climate-related risks and opportunities across the complete planning horizon from near-term project, operating, and financial plans to longer- term strategy and scenarios. In other words, it should consider providing investors with information, as of the reporting date, on the financial implications of climate-related risks and opportunities in the current year and at various forward-looking intervals out to the scenario time horizon. Finally, the information around financial implications desired by investors will likely vary. Companies should engage their investors to understand investors’ expectations to help improve their disclosure. Further, industry consultation focusing on the financial implications of climate-related risks and opportunities and supporting methodologies also will help in facilitating disclosure improvements. 3. OTHER DISCLOSURE CONSIDERATIONS Other considerations around strategy-and- scenario-related disclosure include: where to disclose, quality of disclosures, confidential business information, and liability around forward- looking information. Many of these concerns are not unique to climate-related disclosures.3.1 Consideration 1: The Right Mindset Companies need to approach the disclosure of forward-looking information with the right mindset. Instead of adopting a compliance-based approach and asking “What are we required to report?” companies should ask themselves “What should we withhold?” 104 This is particularly true in the case of climate-related disclosures. 3.2 Consideration 2: Where to Disclose In the case of disclosures around strategy and forward-looking scenarios, companies should disclose material information in those portions of their annual report or integrated report dealing with strategy, management discussion and analysis of the company, and risks.105 Material financial implications related to company’s strategy should be disclosed in the appropriate financial statements or notes to the financial statements.106, 107 To the extent that additional detail and discussion of scenarios and strategy is warranted, which may not rise to the level of the annual report, companies should consider disclosing additional detail in other public reports, such as sustainability and non-financial reports, with appropriate cross-references in their annual reports and financial filings to alert investors to such information. 3.3 Consideration 3: Materiality The cornerstone of most disclosure standards is a determination of materiality. In its 2017 report, the TCFD did not define materiality but rather deferred to existing reporting standards and legal requirements, stating that “organizations should determine materiality for climate-related issues consistent with how they determine the materiality of other information included in their annual financial filings.” 108 103 Australian Accounting Standards Board/International Accounting Standards Board, Climate-related and other emerging risks disclosures: Assessing financial statement materiality using AASB/IASB Practice Statement 2 , 2019; True Price, The Business Case for True Pricing: why you will benefit from measuring, monetizing and improving your impact , 2014. 104 PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC), Guide to Forward-Looking Information , 2007. 105 See KPMG, Climate Disclosures within the Annual Report: An Australian Focus , 2020, p. 15 for disclosures of climate-related risks in annual reports and financial statements. 106 The TCFD recommendations call for companies to disclose the material implications of climate change, including material strategy and financial implications, in annual financial filings. The TCFD also recognized that the structure and content of financial filings differs across jurisdictions and, therefore, believes companies are in the best position to determine where and how the TCFD disclosures should be incorporated in financial filings. 107 If investors could reasonably expect that climate-related risks will have a significant impact on an entity, woul",
    "new_id": 183
  },
  {
    "id": 15621,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes why reverse stress tests are considered particularly valuable in assessing financial implications related to climate risks, as discussed in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures: Guidance on Scenario Analysis for Non-Financial Companies?",
    "options": {
      "D": "They identify circumstances that could render a company's business model unviable, providing insight into extreme but plausible risks.",
      "A": "They allow companies to precisely calculate the financial effects of hypothetical future scenarios.",
      "B": "They offer detailed projections of revenue potential under specific carbon pricing strategies.",
      "C": "They enable firms to directly translate scenario-based directional shifts into actionable capital budgets.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "50",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Guidence 2020.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial DisclosuresFigure E2 Determining Financial Implications by Time HorizonScenarios can help inform a company about these financial implications directionally, but only after formulating its strategy will a company be in a position to disclose more precise financial implications. Figure E2 shows how a company might think about disclosure of various financial implications and Table E2 (p. 50) provides some considerations around financial reporting concerning climate risks. For example, the financial effects of a company’s strategy in a longer time horizon might be characterized in terms of broad financial pathways or broad directional shifts in capital expenditures; as the strategy is implemented over time, capital budgets, project plans, and operational plans provide progressively more concrete estimates of financial effects. 2.3.2 Financial Implications of Scenarios Translating forward-looking scenarios into meaningful financial implications is difficult, but not impossible.100 One difficulty is that scenarios do not develop precise financial implications; they are hypothetical futures that only provide relative and directional indications (good/bad, up/down) and orders of magnitude (a lot/a little). For disclosures about the possible financial implications of scenarios, a company might consider disclosing qualitatively, and quantitatively where feasible, how a particular scenario might affect the potential orders of magnitude, ranges, or relative directional shifts in terms of the company’s assets; capital investments; earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization; and revenue potential. Reverse stress test scenarios may be useful for assessing the outer limits of financial impacts. Reverse stress tests are scenarios that a firm uses to assess and identify potential circumstances that would make its business model unviable. Sensitivity analysis around variations in carbon prices (internal or external), or variations in input prices (e.g., commodities, water, etc.), is another method for companies to explore the financial implications of various scenarios. 100 Rogelj, McCollum and Reisinger, Probabilistic cost estimates for climate change mitigation , 2013.Present 49Financial Implications Broad conceptualization of possible financial pathwaysStrategic Thinking Informed by Scenarios Strategic Planning Informed by Scenarios Capital Planning Project Planning, Financial Analyses of Strategic Projects & Initiatives Formulating Financial Strategy Formulating Operating Plans & BudgetsFinancial Implications Broad estimates of relative shifts in capital expenditures due to climate change Financial Implications Projections/estimates of potential returns on specific planned responses to climate-related risks and opportunities Financial Implications Estimates/actual climate change impacts on current revenues and costs, budgets & value of assets and liabilities>10 Years 5–10 Years 2–5 Years 0–2 Years Executive Summary Table of Contents B. Getting Organized C. The Scenario Process D. Strategic Management Using Scenarios E. Disclosure: Demonstrating Strategy Resilience ConclusionA. Introduction Glossary, Abbreviations, References, and AcknowledgmentsAppendix 1: An Overview of Public Scenarios and Models Appendix 2: Scenario Construction Appendix 3: Summary of Selected Scenario Tools and Information Appendix 4: Interviewed Organizations",
    "new_id": 184
  },
  {
    "id": 15622,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why a company might choose to involve external experts in their climate scenario analysis process, as discussed in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures – Guidance on Scenario Analysis for Non-Financial Companies?",
    "options": {
      "A": "To counteract internal biases such as groupthink and a business-as-usual mentality by leveraging outsider perspectives.",
      "B": "To ensure that the company strictly adheres to standardized public scenarios and models without customization.",
      "C": "To completely outsource the responsibility for scenario development and strategic decision-making to third-party entities.",
      "D": "To avoid the need for understanding or applying technical methodologies related to climate science and economic analysis.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "14-15",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Guidence 2020.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures• facilitating a climate-oriented scenario development process, including workshops; • challenging the process from an outsider and/or expert perspective; • building and using climate-related models and conducting (quantitative) scenario analysis; and • understanding and conveying important aspects of climate science. Two of the common pitfalls in scenario analysis are groupthink and a business as usual (BAU) mentality. Engaging external experts may help to counter these pitfalls. External experts may involve researchers, private-sector consulting firms, climate modeling experts, or companies with specialized datasets and tools. For example, some companies engage university researchers involved in climate scenario development and modeling. Researchers can help them understand relevant scenarios and models, identify relevant climate risks, and scale scenarios and models to the companies’ needs. Appendix 3 provides a sample of selected services, tools, and data available commercially or as open source. While external resources can be helpful and important, a company should carefully consider the roles that external experts will play and their relevance to a company’s needs. Different types of experts can play different roles. For example, scientific researchers can assist in technical, methodological, climate change, and economic analysis, while consulting firms can serve as experts in establishing scenario processes and facilitation. 13 Executive Summary Table of Contents B. Getting Organized C. The Scenario Process D. Strategic Management Using Scenarios E. Disclosure: Demonstrating Strategy Resilience ConclusionA. Introduction Glossary, Abbreviations, References, and AcknowledgmentsAppendix 1: An Overview of Public Scenarios and Models Appendix 2: Scenario Construction Appendix 3: Summary of Selected Scenario Tools and Information Appendix 4: Interviewed Organizations\n\n[Page 15]\nC. The Scenario Process",
    "new_id": 185
  },
  {
    "id": 15623,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between downscaling methods and their implications for company-level climate risk analysis, as discussed in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures – Guidance on Scenario Analysis for Non-Financial Companies?",
    "options": {
      "B": "While downscaling can provide more granularity, companies must evaluate whether the added resolution introduces uncertainties that outweigh its benefits for their specific needs.",
      "A": "Downscaling always improves the accuracy of climate models by incorporating finer resolutions, making it indispensable for precise regional analysis.",
      "C": "Statistical downscaling is universally preferred over dynamical downscaling due to its superior ability to handle complex interactions at smaller scales.",
      "D": "The standard downscaling protocol in Europe ensures consistent results across all regions, eliminating variability in model outputs.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "61",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Guidence 2020.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial DisclosuresBox A1-2 Downscaling One of the challenges companies face in using the output of greenhouse gas (GHG) global climate models (GCMs) is scale or spatial resolution. GCMs typically produce gridded resolutions of between 75 and 300km in size, with the average around 200km. By way of comparison, the direct distance from London to Paris is 344km. This means using a 200km scale to infer uniform changes in climate may not be adequate to address a particular company’s risk at smaller scales. The process to translate climate data from the global resolution climate model outputs to a more regional or local resolution is known as downscaling. There are different ways to do this, with the two most common approaches known as statistical and dynamical downscaling. Typical resolution for downscaling will depend on both the host model and regional climate model used. The standard downscaling protocol for Europe is 12km. Some agencies have provided regional downscaling to 2km, others between 12 and 50km. Companies should be aware that results may be increasingly uncertain the finer the resolution of the model is as more factors and interactions are taken into consideration. Sources: U.S. AID, A review of downscaling methods for climate change projections , U.S. Agency for International Development, Washington DC, 2014; UK Met Office, Regional Climate Modeling , 2019; CORDEX, “General Instructions for CORDEX integrations ,” 2009. 1.3 Some Models Need to Be Downscaled for Company-Level Use Models produce outputs at different spatial scales. Typically, physical climate models operate at a global or regional scale.125 In contrast, IAV models typically focus on regional and local scales. IAMs can work at both global and regional scales. See Box A1-2 on downscaling. For companies using IPCC, IEA, or other model outputs, the scale is important. Often global scales do not produce the level of granularity or focus needed by companies with specific geographical footprints. To use IPCC or IEA outputs, companies typically need to translate the scenarios and model outputs to the appropriate regional or local scale. Two initiatives to make regional climate model downscaling available are the World Climate Research Programme’s Coordinated Regional Climate Downscaling Experiment (CORDEX) and the UK Met Office’s PRECIS system. It is important to note that more granular resolutions do not necessarily mean better or more accurate outputs. Companies should consider whether the downscaling method used adds value to their analysis or provides a bias to their results. 2. IPCC, IEA, AND OTHER PUBLIC SCENARIOS126 2.1 IPCC Scenarios International climate researchers contributing to the IPCC assessments have developed hundreds of different emissions and socioeconomic scenarios at global, national, and other scales.127 In recent years, researchers have developed a new basis for the construction of comparable scenarios across research and modeling groups — Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs) and Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs).128 RCPs are “emissions scenarios” that include time series of emissions and concentrations of the full suite of greenhouse gases, aerosols, and chemically active gases, as well as land use/land cover. The word “representative” signifies that each RCP provides only one of many possible scenarios that would lead to the specific radiative forcing characteristics. The term “pathway” emphasizes the fact that not only the long-term concentration levels but also the trajectory taken over time to reach that outcome is of interest. RCPs are used to develop climate projections by informing physical climate system models; these models, in turn, project how the physical climate may change under different levels of radiative forcing driven by greenhouse gas concentrations. 125 A regional climate model is a smaller-scale version of a global model that simulates the climate at a local scale using more detailed regional topography and land-use characteristics (UK Met Office, Regional Climate Modeling , 2019). 126 Additional information on these scenarios can be found in Box A-1, Box A-2, and Figure A4 in TCFD, Technical Supplement – The Use of Scenario Analysis in Disclosure of Climate-related Risks and Opportunities , 2017. Also see Table A1-3 (p. 66) of this appendix for benefits and limitations of these scenarios. 127 IPCC, IPCC Special Report on Emissions Scenarios , 2000; Girod, Wie",
    "new_id": 186
  },
  {
    "id": 15624,
    "question": "Which approach would likely provide the most precise financial implications for a company formulating its strategy to address climate risks over a longer time horizon, as discussed in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures – Guidance on Scenario Analysis for Non-Financial Companies?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Detailed capital budgets and operational plans derived after strategy implementation.",
      "A": "Broad conceptualization of possible financial pathways informed by scenarios.",
      "B": "Reverse stress test scenarios identifying conditions that make the business model unviable.",
      "D": "Sensitivity analyses around variations in carbon prices or input costs.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "50",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Guidence 2020.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial DisclosuresFigure E2 Determining Financial Implications by Time HorizonScenarios can help inform a company about these financial implications directionally, but only after formulating its strategy will a company be in a position to disclose more precise financial implications. Figure E2 shows how a company might think about disclosure of various financial implications and Table E2 (p. 50) provides some considerations around financial reporting concerning climate risks. For example, the financial effects of a company’s strategy in a longer time horizon might be characterized in terms of broad financial pathways or broad directional shifts in capital expenditures; as the strategy is implemented over time, capital budgets, project plans, and operational plans provide progressively more concrete estimates of financial effects. 2.3.2 Financial Implications of Scenarios Translating forward-looking scenarios into meaningful financial implications is difficult, but not impossible.100 One difficulty is that scenarios do not develop precise financial implications; they are hypothetical futures that only provide relative and directional indications (good/bad, up/down) and orders of magnitude (a lot/a little). For disclosures about the possible financial implications of scenarios, a company might consider disclosing qualitatively, and quantitatively where feasible, how a particular scenario might affect the potential orders of magnitude, ranges, or relative directional shifts in terms of the company’s assets; capital investments; earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization; and revenue potential. Reverse stress test scenarios may be useful for assessing the outer limits of financial impacts. Reverse stress tests are scenarios that a firm uses to assess and identify potential circumstances that would make its business model unviable. Sensitivity analysis around variations in carbon prices (internal or external), or variations in input prices (e.g., commodities, water, etc.), is another method for companies to explore the financial implications of various scenarios. 100 Rogelj, McCollum and Reisinger, Probabilistic cost estimates for climate change mitigation , 2013.Present 49Financial Implications Broad conceptualization of possible financial pathwaysStrategic Thinking Informed by Scenarios Strategic Planning Informed by Scenarios Capital Planning Project Planning, Financial Analyses of Strategic Projects & Initiatives Formulating Financial Strategy Formulating Operating Plans & BudgetsFinancial Implications Broad estimates of relative shifts in capital expenditures due to climate change Financial Implications Projections/estimates of potential returns on specific planned responses to climate-related risks and opportunities Financial Implications Estimates/actual climate change impacts on current revenues and costs, budgets & value of assets and liabilities>10 Years 5–10 Years 2–5 Years 0–2 Years Executive Summary Table of Contents B. Getting Organized C. The Scenario Process D. Strategic Management Using Scenarios E. Disclosure: Demonstrating Strategy Resilience ConclusionA. Introduction Glossary, Abbreviations, References, and AcknowledgmentsAppendix 1: An Overview of Public Scenarios and Models Appendix 2: Scenario Construction Appendix 3: Summary of Selected Scenario Tools and Information Appendix 4: Interviewed Organizations",
    "new_id": 187
  },
  {
    "id": 15625,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes the limitation shared by both Vivid Economics (ViEW) and ThinkHazard! in their ability to provide comprehensive climate-related risk assessments, as discussed in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures – Guidance on Scenario Analysis for Non-Financial Companies?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Both tools fail to disclose the geographical resolution of their analyses, making it difficult to determine the precision of their outputs.",
      "A": "Both tools exclusively focus on physical climate risks without addressing transition risks or opportunities.",
      "B": "Neither tool specifies emissions scenarios or time horizons, limiting their capacity to model long-term climate impacts.",
      "C": "Both tools are restricted to energy sectors and do not provide analysis for non-energy sectors such as agriculture or manufacturing.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "107-108",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Guidence 2020.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial DisclosuresTable A3-2: Selected Scenario Tool and Data Providers (Continued) Name of Provider DetailsWeb Link Vivid Economics (ViEW)What services do they provide? Analysis Tool ViEW: A dynamic model of economic activity, energy production, CO2 emissions, and trade flows that can represent different countries. What are the outputs? Costs and benefits of different carbon policy options at the country or sector level (can be integrated with bottom-up models to provide a detailed analysis of individual sectors). What climate-related risks and opportunities are covered? Transition • Not specified, but relevant to carbon pricing and energy demand.What emissions scenario(s) and time horizon(s) are covered? Emissions scenario(s): Not disclosed Time horizon: Not disclosed What sectors can use this tool/data? What sectors are covered by the data or analysis? Intended users: Not defined (depends on user’s interpretation and use of information). Sectors covered: Energy sectors (renewable and non-renewable). Non- energy includes up to 12 agricultural sectors and 25 manufacturing sectors. What geography is covered? At what resolution (if disclosed)? Geography covered: Not disclosed Resolution: Not disclosedLink World Bank Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery What services do they provide? Analysis Tool ThinkHazard!: A free, web-based tool that assesses the level of physical climate hazards for a user-specified location and provides guidance on how to reduce risks associated with development projects. What are the outputs? A map with highlighted regions based on hazard categories (very low, low, medium, high) and high-level recommendations to reduce associated risks. What climate-related risks and opportunities are covered? Physical • River flood, urban flood, coastal flood, cyclone, water scarcity, extreme heat, wildfireWhat emissions scenario(s) and time horizon(s) are covered? Emissions scenario(s): N/A – current state Time horizon: Not disclosed What sectors can use this tool/data? What sectors are covered by the data or analysis? Intended users: Investors or stakeholders in development projects, development sector Sectors covered: Development projects and related assets What geography is covered? At what resolution (if disclosed)? Geography covered: Global Resolution: Not disclosedLink 106 Executive Summary Table of Contents B. Getting Organized C. The Scenario Process D. Strategic Management Using Scenarios E. Disclosure: Demonstrating Strategy Resilience ConclusionA. Introduction Glossary, Abbreviations, References, and AcknowledgmentsAppendix 1: An Overview of Public Scenarios and Models Appendix 2: Scenario Construction Appendix 3: Summary of Selected Scenario Tools and Information Appendix 4: Interviewed Organizations\n\n[Page 108]\nAppendix 4: Interviewed Organizations",
    "new_id": 188
  },
  {
    "id": 15627,
    "question": "Which statement accurately captures the relationship between scenario quality and the iterative nature of the process described, as discussed in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures – Guidance on Scenario Analysis for Non-Financial Companies?",
    "options": {
      "A": "High-quality scenarios must be plausible, internally consistent, and capable of evolving through periodic iteration based on new feedback and data.",
      "B": "Scenario quality is deemed sufficient if it challenges current assumptions, even if it lacks plausibility or internal consistency.",
      "C": "The iterative evaluation of scenarios ensures that all developed strategies remain fixed despite changes in external drivers.",
      "D": "Once scenarios are finalized, they are considered immutable and do not require further assessment or adaptation over time.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "73",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Guidence 2020.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial DisclosuresFigure A2-2 Detailed Overview of Scenario Process Establish Organizational Requirements for Scenario Analysis Structure, Governance, Processes, Stakeholders Quantify Aspects of Scenarios Where Necessary and Possible • Key (social, demographic, economic) trends and drivers • Company and industry key performance indicators • Plausible impacts on markets, suppliers, and customers • Impacts on asset value, productivity, revenue, costs, etc. Check Scenario Quality Plausible; Internally consistent; Logical line of reasoning; Makes sense to the intended audience; Surprising/Challenges current assumptions Draw Conclusions and Develop Strategy Options • How would the scenarios affect the company (risks and opportunities)? • How do the company’s current strategies, policies, and capabilities prepare the company for the scenarios? • What new strategy options should be considered now and in the future? • What signposts/warning signals would trigger implementation of future options? Identify Signpost Metrics to Monitor Future Developments • Identify thresholds for material changes in drivers • Identify metrics to warn of shifts in key uncertaintiesScenarios presented for feedback and revised as needed Feedback on Strategy OptionsFinalize Scenarios Use Selected Options to Inform Strategic Planning; Produce Strategic and Other Supporting Plans Iterate Scenario Analysis Periodically Evaluate Scenario Analysis ProcessAssess the External Environment Past and current trends, company’s current climate risks Formulate Focal Question How could climate-related physical and transition risks plausibly affect our company? What should we do? When? Identify Driving Forces Categories S – Social T – Technological E – Economic E – Environmental P – Political/Policy/Legal Formulate Baseline for Scenarios Using High-Impact/Low-Uncertainty Drivers (i.e., those drivers and trends likely to occur under any/most future states) Draft Narrative for Each Scenario • Draft initial scenarios using high-impact/high-uncertainty drivers • Describe how each driving force develops and its impact over the scenario time horizon • Describe how the driving forces could interact • Translate to a 2x2 matrix to determine scenario themes • Develop scenario narratives describing assumed cause-effect relationships among drivers, how drivers play out into the future (pathways), and anticipated outcomesDefine Time Horizon(s) (short, medium, long term) Rate and Rank Driving Forces Identify and rank uncertainties Identify and rank impactsSECTION C STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 SECTION E STEP 6• External to company • Relevant to focal question • Directly affect company or one of its key stakeholders • May bring positive or negative impacts 72 Executive Summary Table of Contents B. Getting Organized C. The Scenario Process D. Strategic Management Using Scenarios E. Disclosure: Demonstrating Strategy Resilience ConclusionA. Introduction Glossary, Abbreviations, References, and AcknowledgmentsAppendix 1: An Overview of Public Scenarios and Models Appendix 2: Scenario Construction Appendix 3: Summary of Selected Scenario Tools and Information Appendix 4: Interviewed Organizations",
    "new_id": 189
  },
  {
    "id": 15628,
    "question": "Which statement best captures the primary distinction between general equilibrium models and macro-econometric models as described in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures – Guidance on Scenario Analysis for Non-Financial Companies?",
    "options": {
      "B": "General equilibrium models assume optimal behavior of consumers and producers, while macro-econometric models rely on historical data and estimated parameters to simulate economic behavior.",
      "A": "Macro-econometric models are more detailed in their representation of multiple economic sectors compared to general equilibrium models.",
      "C": "General equilibrium models focus exclusively on energy technologies, whereas macro-econometric models evaluate broader climate policies.",
      "D": "Macro-econometric models require finer computational resolution to function effectively, unlike general equilibrium models.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "60",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Guidence 2020.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures• Climate-Economic IAMs are specialized IAMs focused on climate-economic interactions such as the following: 124 - Optimal growth (or welfare optimization) models represent the economy as a single all-encompassing sector. They are designed to determine the climate policy and investment levels that maximize welfare (future against present consumption) over time, by identifying the emission abatement levels for each time step. - General equilibrium models have a more detailed representation of the economy with multiple sectors and often include higher resolution of energy technologies and regional detail. Rather than seeking optimal policies, they consider the impacts of specific policies on economic, social, and environmental parameters. The richer representation of the economy comes at a cost of more complexity and modeling difficulties. - Partial equilibrium models provide a detailed analysis of the interaction between environmental impacts and a particular sector of the economy. These are usually used to assess potential climate-induced damages to a specific sector. - Energy system models can be considered as a sub-category of partial equilibrium models that provide a detailed account of the energy sector. These are used, among other reasons, to determine the least-cost ways of attaining greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reductions or the costs of alternative climate policies. They are often linked with general equilibrium or macro-econometric models in order to add insight to top-down approaches. - Macro-econometric models, like general equilibrium models, are used to evaluate alternative climate policies, but they differ in that they do not assume that consumers and producers behave optimally or that markets clear and reach equilibrium in the short term. Instead, they use historical data and econometrically estimated parameters and relations to dynamically and more realistically simulate the behavior of the economy.Box A1-1 Things to Know About Physical Climate Models • Climate models represent the physical processes in the atmosphere, ocean, land surface, and cryosphere. • Climate models divide the globe into a three- dimensional grid of cells representing specific geographic locations and elevations and calculate the conditions (e.g., temperature, wind speed, humidity, pressure) of each gridded cell. • Finer model resolution implies a larger number of grid cells and requires significant computing power. • Climate models are generally available to the public through academic institutes or government bodies. • Climate models vary in capability and complexity, and there is no single source of truth. Models differ regarding spatial resolutions (i.e., the size of the gridded cells); the representation of physical, chemical, or biological processes; the geographical focus of the model; and the model assumptions. • Individually, climate models have strengths and weaknesses, so climate scientists use elements or combinations (ensembles) of models. • Evolution in climate models is trending toward more complex models with interaction between physical, chemical, or biological factors. Sources: IPCC, “Special Report – Global Warming of 1.5°C ,” 2018; Carbon Brief, Climate Models , 2018; Climate Change in Australia, Climate Models , 2016. Models are typically used to quantify and project the various pathways resulting from scenarios. They use the drivers, constraints, and conceptual relationships described in a scenario to mathematically simulate the system in question and quantify the pathway(s) and outcomes of the scenario future. Models for physical risks, for instance, rely on climate science to project the physical climate changes being driven by emissions. Models of transition risks require a deeper understanding of socio- economic systems, their feedbacks, and potential responses to climate change, including potential changes in energy systems, policy changes, and technological changes. 124 Nikas, Doukas and Papandreou, A Detailed Overview and Consistent Classification of Climate-Economy Models in Understanding Risks and Uncertainties in Energy and Climate Policy , 2019. 59 Executive Summary Table of Contents B. Getting Organized C. The Scenario Process D. Strategic Management Using Scenarios E. Disclosure: Demonstrating Strategy Resilience ConclusionA. Introduction Glossary, Abbreviations, References, and AcknowledgmentsAppendix 1: An Overview of Public Scenarios an",
    "new_id": 190
  },
  {
    "id": 16094,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures an implied relationship between the principles for effective disclosures and the considerations for implementing TCFD recommendations, as outlined in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Overview?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The principle of clarity over time is primarily addressed through the materiality consideration, since long-term climate impacts necessitate constant updates to disclosed information.",
      "A": "The principle of comparability is directly supported by the consideration of reporting capabilities, as both emphasize consistency in metrics across industries.",
      "B": "The principle of reliability inherently conflicts with the need for ongoing collaboration, as external input may reduce objectivity in reported data.",
      "D": "The principle of relevance depends on placement decisions, as only disclosures included in mainstream financial filings are deemed pertinent to stakeholders.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "17",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD 2022.pdf",
    "source_text": "30 31Organizations are now able to draw on a wealth of examples and resources to accelerate their disclosures aligned with the TCFD recommendations. Once initial climate-related reporting is released, companies are encouraged to continue improving and developing their disclosures. Implementing the TCFD recommendations generally includes the following considerations:Implementing the TCFD RecommendationsImplementing the TCFD Recommendations Managing Climate-Related Issues Building appropriate internal processes to manage climate-related issues, as well as collecting necessary data and metrics. Existing and Future Reporting Requirements Reviewing requirements for financial and non-financial reporting and considering whether additional requirements will likely be released. Reporting Capabilities Developing processes and capacity to report information under the TCFD recommendations — subject to appropriate internal governance processes and in line with regulatory requirements. Materiality Taking the unique longer-term impacts and challenges of climate change into account when assessing materiality. All organizations are encouraged to report in line with the Governance and Risk Management recommendations, as well as report Scope 1 and Scope 2 GHG emissions regardless of materiality. Placement Determining the appropriate placement of disclosures — in mainstream (i.e., public) annual financial filings as recommended by the TCFD or other official company reports. Ongoing Collaboration and Improvement Organizations have expressed that participation in TCFD working groups, workshops, or even knowledge- sharing with peers and investors has been helpful in advancing climate- related disclosure. Adoption Volum e Five-Year Timefram e Fundamental Principles for Effective Disclosures 1 Disclosures should represent relevant information. 2 Disclosures should be specific and complete. 3 Disclosures should be clear, balanced, and understandable. 4 Disclosures should be clear over time. 5Disclosures should be comparable among companies within a sector, industry, or portfolio. 6 Disclosures should be reliable, verifiable, and objective. 7 Disclosures should be provided on a timely basis.Illustrative Implementation Path Broad understanding of the concentration of carbon-related assets in the financial system and the financial systems, exposure to climate-related risks. Greater adoption, further development of information provided (e.g., metrics and scenario analysis), and greater maturity in using information. Organizations begin to disclose in financial filings. Final TCFD Report released.More complete, consistent, and comparable information for market participants, increased transparency, and appropriate pricing of climate- related risks and opportunities. Climate-related issues viewed as mainstream business and investment considerations by both users and preparers. Companies already reporting under other frameworks implement the Task Force’s recommendations. Others consider climate-related issues within their businesses.",
    "new_id": 191
  },
  {
    "id": 16099,
    "question": "Which of the following most accurately reflects the relationship between the TCFD Knowledge Hub and the broader goals of implementing climate-related financial disclosures, as outlined in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Overview?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The TCFD Knowledge Hub supports companies in developing disclosures by providing tools that align with TCFD recommendations, thereby promoting consistency and comparability.",
      "A": "The TCFD Knowledge Hub primarily functions to enforce legal compliance with the TCFD recommendations.",
      "B": "Resources on the TCFD Knowledge Hub are designed to replace the need for workshops or preparer forums in achieving high-quality disclosures.",
      "C": "The TCFD Knowledge Hub serves as the sole repository for all official TCFD publications, excluding external contributions.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "19",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD 2022.pdf",
    "source_text": "34 35Select Resources on the TCFD RecommendationsImplementing the TCFD Recommendations TCFD Website Further information on the TCFD is available on our website at fsb-tcfd.org . The TCFD website includes all the TCFD’s publications, including the final recommendations, implementation guidance, report translations, recent status reports, examples of disclosure, and a series of workshops on TCFD implementation. TCFD Knowledge Hub The TCFD Knowledge Hub hosts over 700 resources that help companies identify, analyze, and report climate-related financial information. The Hub was created by the Climate Disclosure Standards Board (CDSB) and is now managed by CDP. Resources on the Hub support the adoption of the TCFD recommendations and the development of high-quality, consistent, and comparable climate-related financial disclosures. WBCSD Preparer Forums The World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) has worked with companies in several industries, such as oil and gas, electric utilities, transportation, and chemicals, in forums focused on implementation of the TCFD recommendations. The reports of these “preparer forums” are available on the WBCSD website .UNEP FI Reports on Climate-Related Risk and Scenario Analysis The United Nations Environment Programme Finance Initiative (UNEP FI) has led pilot projects on TCFD implementation for financial institutions. All reports and additional resources are available at the UNEP Fl website . Laws, Regulations, and Standards As support from the private sector has grown, governments and jurisdictions around the world, as well as international standard setters and stock exchanges, have begun to codify aspects of the TCFD recommendations into laws, regulations, and/or standards. As an example, the International Sustainability Standards Board was established by the International Financial Reporting Standards Foundation (IFRS) to deliver a comprehensive global baseline of sustainability-related disclosure standards and intends to use the TCFD and other frameworks as a basis for its work. More information can be found on the IFRS website . Additional Resources Many other organizations — such as the UN Principles for Responsible Investing and CDP — have worked to align with the TCFD recommendations and have released various resources to assist organizations with implementing and using climate- related financial disclosure. 34",
    "new_id": 192
  },
  {
    "id": 16532,
    "question": "Which of the following scenarios accurately reflects the reporting requirements for energy consumption within the steel sector boundary as outlined in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 7?",
    "options": {
      "A": "A company includes the combustion of all process by-product gases in its report but excludes any energy produced from outsourced waste heat recovery processes.",
      "B": "A company reports the consumption of coke used as a reducing agent in the blast furnace because it contributes to overall energy use.",
      "C": "A company excludes recovered Blast Furnace Gas (BFG) from its report since the gas originates from feedstock fuels, which are explicitly excluded.",
      "D": "A company reports energy generated from outsourced waste heat recovery as part of its self-generated non-fuel renewable energy consumption.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "153",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 7.pdf",
    "source_text": "152 • Figures you provide should be for the reporting year only (as defined by your answer to 1.4). • You should use the same approach as in question 7.30.1 to calculate the share of renewable energy consumed inside the steel sector boundary in this question. • This table is for gross energy consumption data only. You should not provide net consumption nor deduct for energy produced or exported from the organizational/sector boundary. Because feedstock fuels are excluded from this question, this approach should not lead to double counting. • Guidance on unit conversion is available in the following Technical Note: “Conversion of fuel data to MWh”. Activity (column 1) • You will be presented with a row for each activity selected in 7.30. Consumption of fuel (excluding feedstocks) • All fuel consumed for energy purposes inside the organizational/sector boundary should be included, regardless of whether the fuel was purchased or produced by the organization. Fuel consumed as a feedstock (used for the production of another fuel) should not be included. The produced fuel should still be included if it is consumed within the organizational boundary. • For example, consumption of reducing agents in the blast furnace (e.g. PCI coal and coke), or consumption of coal at the coke ovens should not be included. However, combustion of all process by-product gases should be included (in column 5). • If you do not have exact consumption data, you may alternatively estimate your company’s consumption by reviewing fuel and energy purchasing orders. • Companies that recover waste heat/gases generated from the consumption of fuel feedstocks in a primary industrial process and utilize the waste heat/gases to produce energy in a secondary process should report the consumption of the recovered waste heat/gases in this row, in column 5 “MWh consumed from waste heat/gases recovered from processes using fuel feedstocks inside steel sector boundary”. An example is the consumption of recovered Blast Furnace Gas (BFG), Coke Oven Gas (COG), and/or Smelting Reduction Gas (SRG) for use as a source of energy. Note that this only applies for processes within the steel sector boundary where the waste heat/gas is derived from fuel feedstocks – consumption of waste heat/gas that is derived from fuels should not be included, as this would be double counting. Consumption of purchased or acquired electricity, heat, steam and/or cooling • Companies that outsource the recovery of their waste heat/gases from processes using fuel feedstocks to a third party and purchase back the energy generated from these recovered waste heat/gases, should report the consumption of this purchased energy in column 5 “MWh consumed from waste heat/gases recovered from processes using fuel feedstocks inside steel sector boundary” for the relevant row (i.e. electricity, heat steam and/or cooling). Consumption of self-generated non-fuel renewable energy",
    "new_id": 193
  },
  {
    "id": 16536,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes a condition under which financial services sector companies should select 'Absolute target' or 'Intensity target' according to the provided guidance as outlined in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 7",
    "options": {
      "B": "When their targets pertain to operational emissions excluding Category 15 Investments.",
      "A": "When they have climate targets covering emissions from their investments.",
      "C": "When they are reporting on portfolio-wide Scope 3 emissions unrelated to investments.",
      "D": "When their targets include emissions reductions in business flights per employee.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "287-288",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 7.pdf",
    "source_text": "286 • In addition to any absolute targets, companies should disclose company-wide CO2 and/or fuel economy targets for products and, where relevant, for specific markets. Targets should be expressed in grams of CO2 per kilometer. Note for financial services sector companies: • Select “Absolute target” or “Intensity target” only if you have any climate targets covering your operational emissions, i.e. Scope 1, Scope 2 and Scope 3 emissions excluding Category 15 Investments. Select “Portfolio target” for any other climate target types related to your lending, investment and insurance portfolios. Note for capital goods sector companies: • Companies should consider reporting company-wide and/or product-level Scope 3 targets, and in particular, Scope 3 targets relating to the use of sold products. Additional information Examples of emissions reduction targets The following are examples of absolute targets: • Metric tons CO2e or % reduction from base year • Metric tons CO2e or % reduction in product use phase relative to base year • Metric tons CO2e or % reduction in supply chain relative to base year • Metric tons CO2e or % reduction per year • Metric tons CO2e or % reduction relative to 5 year rolling average of emissions • Cap on emissions in metric tons CO2e The following are examples of intensity targets: • Metric tons CO2e or % reduction per unit revenue (also per unit turnover; per unit gross sales) relative to base year • Metric tons CO2e or % reduction per full-time employee equivalent (also per hours worked; per operating hour; per guest night; per capita; per patient days) relative to base year • Metric tons CO2e or % reduction per unit of product (e.g. metric ton of paper; metric ton of aluminum) relative to base year • Metric tons CO2e or % reduction per passenger kilometer (also per km; per nautical mile) relative to base year • Metric tons CO2e or % reduction per square foot relative to base year • Cap on emissions relative to an activity (e.g. stabilizing emissions at x metric tons CO2e per metric to of steel produced) • Metric tons CO2e or % reduction per MWh • Metric tons CO2e or % reduction in emissions from business flights per employee Tags Authority type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level CC Questionnaire sector Question level All (7.53.1) Provide details of your absolute emissions targets and progress made against those targets.\n\n[Page 288]\n287 Question details Question dependencies • This question only appears if you select “Absolute target” in response to 7.53. Change from last year • Minor change Rationale Target setting plays a vital role in environmental action through its role in the successful execution of corporate strategies, as well as in the effective management of dependencies, impacts, risks, and opportunities. The question encourages organizations to set and make progress towards timebound, tracked, quantitative targets, informed by the guidance of leading initiatives and frameworks, such as the Science Based Targets initiative where available. Ambition Organizations make progress against emissions targets that reflect their full emissions inventory and are in line with the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) criteria. Response options • Please complete the following table. The table is displayed over several rows for readability. You are able to add rows by using the “Add Row” function at the bottom of the table.",
    "new_id": 194
  },
  {
    "id": 16552,
    "question": "Which scenario would most likely lead to an organization failing to meet the expectations outlined for reporting agricultural commodity emissions as described in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 7?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The organization excludes commodities deemed significant in terms of revenue but provides detailed explanations for each exclusion.",
      "A": "The organization reports emissions as a total figure despite having the capability to calculate per-unit production emissions.",
      "B": "The organization calculates emissions for all significant commodities but delays reporting due to internal data validation processes.",
      "D": "The organization intends to calculate emissions within two years and marks 'No' for current calculations in the reporting table.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "77-78",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 7.pdf",
    "source_text": "76 • Specify and explain any exclusions Additional information Please consult the GHG Protocol Agricultural Guidance (Chapters 8 & 9) for more information on how to report biogenic carbon and the GHG Protocol Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standards for information on standards and calculations. Tags Authority type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level CC Questionnaire Sector Question level AC, FB, PF Emissions Data – Agricultural Commodities (7.14) Do you calculate greenhouse gas emissions for each agricultural commodity reported as significant to your business? Question details Question dependencies This question only appears if you select \"Yes\" in response to the column \"Is this commodity considered significant to your business in terms of revenue?\" for any row of 1.22 or 1.23. Change from last year Modified question Rationale Agricultural commodities that are significant to your business in terms of revenue could be closely associated with large CO2 emissions and signal dependency on natural capital and its associated ecosystem services under threat by climate change.This question enables data users to gauge how prepared your organization is to respond to risks related to your reliance on agricultural commodities by assessing whether you collect and/or calculate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions data on these commodities. This information also provides further context to data users about the magnitude of the climate-related risks associated with your business where these commodities are not produced/sourced sustainably or managed carefully. Response options Please complete the following table. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Agricultural commodities GHG emissions calculated for this commodity Reporting emissions by Emissions (metric tons CO2e) Denominator: unit of production Change from last reporting year Please explain Explain why you do not calculate GHG emissions for this commodity\n\n[Page 78]\n77 Fixed rows based on selection of commodities in 1.23 Select from: • Yes • No, but we intend to calculate this data within the next two years • No, and we do not intend to calculate this data within the next two years Select from: • Total • Unit of production Numerical field [enter a number from 0-999,999,999,999 using a maximum of 10 decimal places] Select from: • Kilograms • Liters • Metric tons • Unit of product • Unit of revenue • Other, please specify Select from: • This is our first year of measurement • Much lower • Lower • About the same • Higher • Much higher Text field [maximum 2,000 characters] Text field [maximum 2,000 characters] [Fixed row] Requested content General • Organizations are encouraged to calculate GHG emissions data for all agricultural commodities specified as significant to their business in terms of revenue. Agricultural commodities (column 0) • Note that only those agricultural commodities that you indicated are significant in terms of revenue in 1.22 or 1.23 will appear in the list. Reporting emissions by (column 2) • This column is only presented if you select “Yes” in column 1 “GHG emissions calculated for this commodity”. • Organizations are encouraged to report the agricultural commodity associated emissions per unit of production, e.g. CO2e/kg of product. However, if you are unable to provide this, you may report your emissions as an absolute figure by selecting “Total”. Emissions (metric tons CO2e) (column 3) • This column is only presented if you select “Yes” in column 1 “GHG emissions calculated for this commodity”. • This figure should be representative of your reporting year, boundaries for data collection/calculation as indicated in column 3 “Reporting emissions by” and expressed in metric tons. Denominator: unit of production (column 4) • This column will appear only if you select “Unit of production” in column 2 “Reporting emissions by”. Change from last reporting year (column 5) • This column is only presented if you select “Yes” in column 1 “GHG emissions calculated for this commodity”. Please explain (column 6)",
    "new_id": 195
  },
  {
    "id": 16562,
    "question": "Which of the following best reflects an accurate synthesis of how load factor impacts emissions intensity calculations for passenger vehicles and why it is critical to report it separately from other metrics as described in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 7?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Load factor is used to convert per-vehicle emissions into per-passenger emissions, which ensures comparability across different transport modes but does not affect the denominator units chosen in column 4.",
      "A": "Load factor directly determines the total Scope 3 emissions reported in column 3, as it scales the numerator by the expected number of passengers over the vehicle’s lifetime.",
      "B": "Load factor adjusts the denominator of the emissions intensity figure, effectively normalizing emissions per unit of distance traveled by accounting for average occupancy rates.",
      "C": "Load factor modifies the annual distance traveled reported in column 9, ensuring that freight and passenger transport are weighted equally when calculating aggregate emissions.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "271-272",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 7.pdf",
    "source_text": "270 Select from: Drop down options determined by transport modes selected in 1.21 Numerical field [enter a number from 0-999,999,999,999 using a maximum of 10 decimal places] Numerical field [enter a number from 0-999,999,999,999 using a maximum of 10 decimal places] Select from: LDV • p.km • t.km • p.mile • t.mile HDV • p.km • t.km • p.mile • t.mile Rail • p.km • t.km • p.mile • t.mile Marine • p.km • t.km • p.mile • t.mile • p.nautical mile • t.nautical mile Aviation • p.km • t.km • p.mile • t.mile Numerical field [enter a number from 0-999,999,999,999,999 using a maximum of 6 decimal places], and no commas Percentage field [enter a percentage from -999 - 999 using a maximum of 2 decimal places] 7 8 9 10 11 Vehicle unit sales in reporting year Vehicle lifetime in years Annual distance in km or miles (unit specified by column 4) Load factor Please explain the changes, and relevant standards/methodologies used Numerical field [enter a number from 0-999,999,999,999 using a maximum of 2 decimal places] Numerical field [enter a number from 0-999,999,999,999 using a maximum of 2 decimal places] Numerical field [enter a number from 0-999,999,999,999 using a maximum of 2 decimal places] Text field [maximum 2,400 characters] Text field [maximum 2,400 characters] [Add row] Requested content General • This question requests primary intensity metrics that give an indication of the emissions performance of units sold by the transport OEM, normalized by units of transport and distance.\n\n[Page 272]\n271 • The metrics required in this question are all in the format of tons of CO2e, per unit of transport (passenger or ton), per unit of distance (kilometer or mile). Please see the Technical Note on “Measuring the emissions intensity of transport movements” for more information and guidance on the measurement of these indicators. for more information and guidance on the measurement of these indicators. • This emissions intensity metric is requested as an average for the total fleet of vehicles of a particular mode sold by the responding OEM. o For example, for an automobile manufacturer, this metric represents the average CO2e emitted by cars produced in the reporting year, per passenger, per kilometer travelled. This can be calculated from the average CO2e per vehicle kilometer metric by adding in a load factor for the average expected number of passengers. • The question is made up of 11 fields for each transport mode, whereby an intensity figure is requested, its numerator and denominator, as well as the input parameters and assumptions used to calculate this. This provides data users with the possibility to compare methods and gain an insight in the assumptions that OEMs use. • Any other metrics, such as intensity per vehicle instead of per passenger/ton, should not be reported here, but in question C-TO8.5. Activity (column 1) • Select the activity that you would like to provide data for. • Activity modes presented in drop-down options are determined by transport modes selected in response to 1.21. Emissions intensity figure (column 2) • Report the intensity figure that corresponds with the activity in column 1. • This is the direct emissions intensity figure, calculated using the numerator you are asked for in column 3, and the denominator reported in column 5 using the denominator units selected in column 4. Metric numerator (Scope 3 emissions: use of sold products) in Metric tons CO2e (column 3) • Provide the total emissions figure for the activity selected in column 1, in metric tons CO2e. • This figure is usually derived by multiplying the average emissions per kilometer per vehicle by the total number of all vehicle units sold in reported year (column 7) by the average annual distance in kilometers expected for each vehicle (reported in column 9), and then multiplied by the average vehicle lifetime in years (reported in column 8). Metric denominator (column 4) • Select the relevant metric denominator: o p.km – passenger-kilometers o t.km – ton-kilometers o p.mile – passenger-miles o t.mile – ton-miles o p.nautical mile – passenger-nautical miles o t.nautical mile – ton-nautical miles • You are expected to provide data separately for vehicles intended for passenger and freight modes of transport, respectively. You may choose to add more rows to split up your",
    "new_id": 196
  },
  {
    "id": 16563,
    "question": "Which of the following represents the most accurate synthesis of the relationship between Green-e certification, energy procurement strategies, and the implied environmental ambition of the organization as described in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 7?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The organization relies on a mix of on-site and off-site renewable energy procurement, with Green-e certification applied selectively based on the age of the generation facilities.",
      "B": "The organization exclusively procures renewable energy from on-site installations owned by third parties, with all purchases being Green-e certified to ensure compliance with RE100 standards.",
      "C": "While the organization uses Green-e certified RECs to meet its renewable energy goals, it also engages in off-site procurement contracts that extend beyond RE100 requirements for low-carbon solutions.",
      "D": "The organization’s renewable energy procurement is limited to Green-e certified RECs from wind farms, reflecting an exclusive focus on achieving carbon neutrality through third-party ownership models.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "193-194",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 7.pdf",
    "source_text": "192 owned by a third party (on-site PPA) Canada Purchase from an on-site installation owned by a third party (on-site PPA) Electricity Wind 4300 US-REC Canada Are you able to report the commissioning or re-powering year of the energy generation facility? Commissioning year of the energy generation facility (e.g. date of first commercial operation or repowering) Comment Vintage of the renewable energy/attribute (i.e. year of generation) Supply arrangement start year Ecolabel associated with purchased renewable electricity Yes 2013 Our operations in the USA have signed a PPA with a wind farm project to cover part of the electricity consumption during the period. From the project they receive US-RECs which are all Green-e certified. 2024 2013 Green-e Certified(R) Renewable Energy Yes 2020 We have bought 100,000 RECs from an Oklahoma wind farm. 2024 2020 Green-e Certified(R) Renewable Energy Yes 2021 2024 2021 Green-e Certified(R) Renewable Energy Yes 2021 We have established a contract with Solar Organization, a provider of solar energy solutions, where they 2024 2021 Green-e Certified(R) Renewable Energy\n\n[Page 194]\n193 own and manage all our on-site installations and we buy the electricity from them. Yes 2017 We have established a contract with Solar Organization, a provider of solar energy solutions, where they own and manage all our on-site installations and we buy the electricity from them. 2024 2017 Green-e Certified(R) Renewable Energy Tags Authority type RE100 Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level CC Questionnaire sector Question level All (7.30.18) Provide details of your organization’s low-carbon heat, steam, and cooling purchases in the reporting year by country/area. Question details Question dependencies This question only appears to RE100 members. This question only appears if you select “Yes” in response to “Consumption of purchased or acquired heat”, “Consumption of purchased or acquired steam” or “Consumption of purchased or acquired cooling” in response to 7.30. Change from last year No change Rationale Providing details of low-carbon heat, steam and cooling purchases by country/area provides data users with a more complete picture of an organization’s low carbon and renewable energy consumption. Ambition Companies procure, heat, steam and/or cooling from low-carbon technology types. Response options Please complete the following table. 1 2 3 4 5 6",
    "new_id": 197
  },
  {
    "id": 16606,
    "question": "Which scenario would most likely be excluded from reporting under the emissions reduction initiatives framework outlined in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 7?",
    "options": {
      "B": "A company implements a new HVAC system with marginally higher efficiency than standard replacements, without additional investment.",
      "A": "A business adopts a smart control system for production processes that reduces energy consumption and has a payback period of less than a year.",
      "C": "A firm invests in methane capture technology as part of its fugitive emissions reduction strategy while documenting associated costs and savings.",
      "D": "An organization switches to renewable energy sources but fails to report accompanying details required in sections 7.3, 7.7, and Energy-Related Activities.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "374",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 7.pdf",
    "source_text": "373 Requested content General • Companies are asked to provide information on any emissions reduction initiatives made. • There is no need to record every action – initiatives can be recorded on a programmatic level. Companies with large numbers of initiatives should prioritize those that have the potential to provide a meaningful contribution to emissions reductions. • It is acknowledged that maintenance activities can have a beneficial impact on carbon emissions. Only those activities that have either been part of a defined program of emissions reduction initiatives or where additional investment beyond standard maintenance/replacement has been made for the purposes of reducing emissions should be reported here. • Where initiatives are part of routine maintenance or necessary equipment replacement (e.g. necessary replacement of equipment that has an additional benefit in emissions reduction), enter the additional (premium) costs and additional monetary savings associated with the lower emissions model (if applicable). • It should be noted that not all emissions reduction initiatives carry with them a significant cost – many initiatives, such as resource efficiency, have fairly negligible investment costs yet offer potentially high monetary savings. These initiatives should be included in the table, with the minimal investment required reflected in the “Investment required” column, and by selecting the payback of less than a year option (if this is the case). Initiative category (column 1) • Select the option from the drop-down list that best describes the initiative. Note that these are broad categories only, with more detailed options provided in the “Initiative type” column. • Energy efficiency in buildings – Select this option for all energy efficiency initiatives relating to buildings, including those relating to the building fabric (e.g. insulation, draught-proofing, etc.) and those relating to building services (e.g. HVAC, BEMS etc.) • Energy efficiency in production processes – Select this option for all energy efficiency initiatives relating to processes (e.g. waste heat recovery, process optimization, compressed air, combined heat and power, automation, smart control systems, product/service design to improve energy efficiency etc.) • Waste reduction and material circularity – Select this option for circular economy and waste reduction initiatives (e.g. reuse, recycling, remanufacturing, product/service design to reduce waste etc.). • Fugitive emissions reductions – Select this option for initiatives to reduce fugitive emissions (e.g. methane capture, agricultural nitrous oxide reductions, refrigerant leakage reduction etc.) • Low-carbon energy consumption – Select this option for emissions reduction initiatives relating to increasing low-carbon energy consumption i.e. energy from renewable sources, nuclear plants and fossil-fuel plants fitted with carbon capture and storage. Note that if increasing low carbon energy consumption has been a component of your emissions reduction initiatives please also report the other accompanying information in 7.3, 7.7, , and section Energy-Related Activities. If you select “Solid biofuels”, “Liquid biofuels”, or “Biogas” you should specify whether any of the biofuels are derived from sustainable biomass and/or if they are being used for bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) in the “Comment” column (column 10). Refer to CDP’s Technical note on Biofuels for more information. Members of the RE100 initiative selecting this option should ensure to enter a figure in column 6 “Annual monetary savings”. • Low-carbon energy generation – Select this option for initiatives relating to the installation of low-carbon energy generating facilities (renewable, nuclear or fossil-fuel plants fitted with",
    "new_id": 198
  },
  {
    "id": 16638,
    "question": "Which scenario best aligns with the conditions under which an organization would provide details about its plans or barriers related to net zero carbon buildings as outlined in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 7?",
    "options": {
      "C": "An organization indicating it neither currently manages net zero carbon buildings nor intends to do so in the future.",
      "A": "An organization that already includes net zero carbon buildings in its portfolio and plans no further action.",
      "B": "An organization confirming it has retired carbon credits but does not plan to transition to net zero carbon buildings.",
      "D": "An organization actively retiring carbon credits to meet compliance needs without specific plans for net zero carbon buildings.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "474-475",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 7.pdf",
    "source_text": "473 (7.78) Explain your organization’s plan to manage, develop or construct net zero carbon buildings, or explain why you do not plan to do so. Question details Question dependencies This question only appears if you select “No, but we plan to in the future” or “No, and we do not plan to in the future” in response to 7.76 or 7.77. Change from last year No change Rationale This question helps CDP data users to understand the anticipated pace and extent of the transition to net zero carbon buildings and barriers that organizations are experiencing in delivering and operating them. Response options This is an open text question with a limit of 5,000 characters. Please note that when copying from another document into the portal, formatting is not retained. Requested content General • Explain your organization’s plan, including time-frame: o to include net zero carbon buildings in your portfolio (for organizations involved in real estate management); OR o to start developing or constructing net zero carbon buildings (for real estate developers and construction companies); • If you are not planning to start transitioning to net zero carbon buildings, explain why not. Tags Authority Type Capital Markets Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level CC Questionnaire Sector Question level CN, RE Project-based carbon credits (7.79) Has your organization retired any project-based carbon credits within the reporting year? Question details Change from last year Minor change Rationale Carbon credits are used by organizations for the purposes of compliance or as voluntary carbon offsets and can support the transition to a low carbon future. Information about carbon credits\n\n[Page 475]\n474 helps data users understand the extent to which companies are meeting their climate commitments through emission reductions or offsets. Ambition Companies prioritize emissions reductions in their value chain, and only use high-quality carbon credits to neutralize the impact of sources of residual emissions that cannot be eliminated through value-chain emissions reductions. Response options Select one of the following options: • Yes • No Requested content General • “Retiring” a credit means that the emissions reductions or removals associated with the credit have been claimed for compliance requirements or voluntary goals and cannot be used again, and the exact term used may vary, e.g. retired, surrendered, claimed or used. For further information, please check the Technical Note “Retirement vs. cancellation of instruments.” • Select “Yes” if you have retired credits during the reporting period, regardless of when you have acquired them. • Select “No” if you have not retired credits during the reporting period, regardless of whether you have acquired credits during the reporting period. • Examples of project-based carbon credits include: o Verified Carbon Units (VCUs) generated by projects under the VCS program. o Gold Standard Verified Emission Reductions (GSVERs) generated by projects under the Gold Standard. o Certified Emission Reductions (CERs) generated by activities under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM). Explanation of terms • Cancellation: The permanent removal of a carbon credit in an electronic registry without claiming the associated emission reductions or removals towards any voluntary or mandatory targets or other purposes. Cancellation may include the following purposes: compensating for reversals; compensation for any previous excess issuance; administrative cancellation for the purpose of re-issuing carbon credits for the same emission reductions or removals under a different carbon-crediting program. Only one single use should be associated with each cancellation and the use should be clearly specified. (ICVCM) • Retirement: The permanent removal of a carbon credit in a registry for the purpose of claiming the associated emission reductions or removals towards compliance requirements or voluntary goals. Only one single use should be associated with each retirement and the use should be clearly specified. (ICVCM) Tags Authority Type Capital Markets Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level CC Questionnaire Sector Question level All",
    "new_id": 199
  },
  {
    "id": 16650,
    "question": "Which scenario best illustrates a company failing to comply with the reporting requirements for Scope 2 emissions as outlined in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 7?",
    "options": {
      "D": "A company reports negative Scope 2 emissions under the market-based method due to renewable energy credits exceeding their total consumption.",
      "A": "A company provides Scope 2, location-based emissions data but omits Scope 2, market-based figures because they do not actively choose their electricity sources.",
      "B": "A company disaggregates its Scope 2 emissions by sector production activity but fails to include comments explaining the basis of calculation for each sector.",
      "C": "A company reports Scope 2 emissions for cement production activities using rounded figures without decimal precision.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "115-116",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 7.pdf",
    "source_text": "114 • Report your organization’s Scope 2 emissions in CO2e for the facility identified in column 1, on a market-based method, i.e. reflecting emissions from electricity that companies have purposefully chosen (or their lack of choice). • Negative numbers are not allowed as organizations are to report gross, not net figures. • Emissions figures should be for the reporting year only (as defined by your answer to 1.4). Tags Authority type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level CC Questionnaire Sector Question level All except FS and EU (7.20.3) Break down your total gross global Scope 2 emissions by business activity. Question details Question dependencies This question only appears if you select “By activity” in response to 7.20. Change from last year Minor change Rationale Reporting emissions by activity allows a more in-depth understanding of business risks related to future regulation and climate-related issues, and allows organizations to identify potential opportunities to reduce emissions associated with operational activities. Response options Please complete the following table. 1 2 3 Activity Scope 2, location-based (metric tons CO2e) Scope 2, market-based (metric tons CO2e) Text field [maximum 500 characters] Numerical field [enter a number from 0-99,999,999,999 using a maximum of 3 decimal places and no commas] Numerical field [enter a number from 0-99,999,999,999 using a maximum of 3 decimal places and no commas]. [Add row] Requested content Activity (column 1) • Using no more than 500 characters, disclose the activity you are disclosing Scope 2 emissions for. Scope 2, location-based (metric tons CO2e) (column 2) • Report your organization’s Scope 2 emissions in CO2e for the activity reported in column 1, on a location-based method, i.e. reflecting the average emissions intensity of grids on which energy consumption occurs. • Negative numbers are not allowed as organizations are to report gross, not net figures. • Emissions figures should be for the reporting year only (as defined by your answer to 1.4).\n\n[Page 116]\n115 Scope 2, market-based (metric tons CO2e) (column 3) • This column only appears if you select “We are reporting a Scope 2, market-based figure” in column “Scope 2, market-based” of 7.3. • Report your organization’s Scope 2 emissions in CO2e for the activity reported in column 1, on a market-based method, i.e. reflecting emissions from electricity that companies have purposefully chosen (or their lack of choice). • Negative numbers are not allowed as organizations are to report gross, not net figures. • Emissions figures should be for the reporting year only (as defined by your answer to 1.4). Requested content – [sector] (if applicable) Note for agricultural sectors • You should provide Scope 2 emissions data pertaining to all your relevant business activity areas (i.e., agriculture/forestry, processing/manufacturing, and/or distribution), as indicated in 1.11. Note for organizations responding to high-impact sector requests • If your company’s primary CDP sector is one of the following: OG, CO,TO, TS, MM, ST, CH or CE, the response to 7.20.3 is not required. Organizations responding to these requests are presented with additional questions on this topic (7.21,, 7.42, 7.42.1) relating specifically to activities in the sector. Your primary CDP sector is displayed in your response dashboard. Tags Authority type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level CC Questionnaire Sector Question level All except FS and EU (7.21) Break down your organization’s total gross global Scope 2 emissions by sector production activity in metric tons CO2e. Question details Change from last year Modified question Rationale Reporting emissions by activity allows a more in-depth understanding of business risks related to future regulation and climate-related issues, and allows organizations to identify potential opportunities to reduce emissions associated with operational activities. 1 2 3 4 Sector production activity Scope 2, location-based, metric tons CO2e Scope 2, market-based (if applicable), metric tons CO2e Comment Cement production activities Numerical field [enter a number from 0-99,999,999 using a maximum of 3 decimal places] Numerical field [enter a number from 0-99,999,999 using a maximum of 3 decimal places] Text field [maximum 2,400 characters]",
    "new_id": 200
  },
  {
    "id": 16663,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes why natural gas and fossil fuel-based combined heat and power (CHP) systems are explicitly excluded from classification as low-carbon technologies in the context of reporting as described in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 7?",
    "options": {
      "A": "They fail to meet the Scope 2 Quality Criteria of the GHG Protocol due to their high carbon intensity.",
      "B": "Their inclusion would contradict the purpose of tracking instruments designed to ensure zero or near-zero emissions.",
      "C": "They are not compatible with the sustainability certification standards required for biomass classification.",
      "D": "Their energy output is derived from blended sources, making them ineligible under the defined criteria.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "178",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 7.pdf",
    "source_text": "177 or another attribute tracking system). This option only applies when the entire national grid is over 95% low-carbon. Some current examples include Paraguay, Uruguay, and Ethiopia, but the list of countries/areas is subject to change as the market and the grids evolve. Companies selecting this option should provide supporting information in column 10 “Comment”. - Heat/steam/cooling supply agreement. A contract signed between the company consuming the heat/steam/cooling and a supplier who provides low-carbon heat/steam/cooling. - Other, please specify. Other sourcing methods not mentioned above that have been used to account for electricity, heat, steam or cooling at a zero or near-zero emission factor may be reported if the contractual instruments comply with the Scope 2 Quality Criteria of the GHG Protocol Scope 2 guidance. For more information on this refer to CDP Technical Note: Accounting of Scope 2 emissions. Low-carbon technology type (column 4) • Select the low-carbon technology type specified in the contractual instrument. • Please refer to the CDP Technical note on Biofuels for guidance on biomass/biofuel sustainability. If you select the option “Sustainable biomass”, provide the criteria used to classify the biomass as sustainable (e.g. certification) in column 10 “Comment”. • If you select either biomass option, specify in column 10 “Comment” if the biomass technology type refers to bioenergy plants fitted with carbon capture and storage (BECCS). • If you are unable to disaggregate by technology type or are buying instruments for blended electricity from various low-carbon or renewable sources, select either “Low-carbon energy mix, please specify” or “Renewable electricity mix, please specify”. • Note that natural gas and fossil fuel-based combined heat and power (CHP) are not considered low-carbon technologies and should not be included here. For more information on CDP’s definition of low-carbon, please refer to the \"Explanation of terms\". Low-carbon energy consumed via selected sourcing method in the reporting year (MWh) (column 5) • Note that all purchases of low-carbon energy (as defined in the \"Explanation of terms\") should be reported in this question, even if their associated emission factor is marginally above zero. • Tracking instrument used (column 6) • In markets where no certificates are available, the tracking instrument may be just an electricity supply contract with the supplier. In this case, select “Contract”. • If you select “Other, please specify” to report a tracking instrument not listed here, ensure that the instrument complies with the Scope 2 Quality Criteria of the GHG Protocol Scope 2 guidance and provide more information in column 10 “Comment”. For more information on this refer to the CDP Technical Note: Accounting of Scope 2 emissions. Country/area of origin (generation) of the low-carbon energy or energy attribute (column 7) • Note that this is referring to the country/area where the renewable electricity was generated and/or the country/area where the purchased attribute certificates were generated from. E.g. if you have a PPA with a solar energy generator supported by Guarantees of Origin certificates from Spain to cover your consumption in Spain, Italy,",
    "new_id": 201
  },
  {
    "id": 16670,
    "question": "Which scenario would result in a company reporting 'Total emissions in reporting year covered by target' as equal to the sum of emissions from both land-related and non-land related sources, but excluding bioenergy-related emissions as outlined in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 7?",
    "options": {
      "B": "The company has a target approved before the release of FLAG guidance, covering both land-related and non-land related emissions.",
      "A": "The company has a FLAG SBT that only covers GHG emissions related to land and agriculture, excluding bioenergy.",
      "C": "The company has a target that includes land-related emissions/removals associated with bioenergy and non-land related emissions.",
      "D": "The company’s target excludes all land-related emissions and only addresses non-land related emissions from energy/industry.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "300",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 7.pdf",
    "source_text": "299 • Scope 3, Category […] emissions in reporting year covered by target (metric tons CO2e) [One column for each Scope 3 category] (column 59-75) • A column will appear for each Scope 3 category selected in column 10 “Scope 3 categories”. • Note that emissions for all Scope 3 categories covered by a target should be reported every year. • Total Scope 3 emissions in reporting year covered by target (metric tons CO2e) [auto-calculated] (column 76) • This column only appears if you select “Scope 3” in column 8 “Scopes”. This column will be auto-calculated as the sum of each “Base year Scope 3, Category […] emissions covered by target (metric tons CO2e)” column which appears. • Total emissions in reporting year covered by target in all selected scopes (metric tons CO2e) [auto-calculated] (column 77) • This column will be auto-calculated as the sum of columns “Scope 1 emissions in reporting year covered by target (metric tons CO2e)”, “Scope 2 emissions in reporting year covered by target (metric tons CO2e)”, and “Total Scope 3 emissions in reporting year covered by target (metric tons CO2e)”If the target relates to a single Scope, this figure will be the same as the figure reported in either column 57, column 58, or column 76. • If the target encompasses multiple Scopes, this figure will be equal to the sum of the figures reported in columns 57, 58 and/or 76. • Land-related emissions covered by target (column 78) • A brief description of land-related emissions (i.e., GHG emissions from Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU)) is provided as additional information to this question. • In addition, refer to the CDP Technical Note on Science-Based Targets for further detail and how to assess your target against the Science Based Targets initiative’s criteria. • Yes, it covers land-related emissions only (e.g. FLAG SBT) – Select this option if your target only covers GHG emissions related to land and agriculture and excludes emissions and removals associated with bioenergy, in line with SBTi guidance. Companies that have followed the SBTi Forests, Land and Agriculture (FLAG) guidance to set their target should select this option. This option will primarily be applicable to companies in the Agricultural Commodities, Food, Beverage & Tobacco, and Paper & Forestry CDP sectors. • Yes, it covers land-related and non-land related emissions (e.g. SBT approved before the release of FLAG target-setting guidance) – Select this option if your target covers both GHG emissions related to land and agriculture and non-land related emissions from energy/industry. This option will be primarily applicable to companies in the Agricultural Commodities, Food, Beverage & Tobacco and Paper and Forestry CDP sectors whose target was approved by the SBTi before the release of the SBTi FLAG target-setting guidance. • Yes, it covers land-related emissions/removals associated with bioenergy and non-land related emissions (e.g. non-FLAG SBT with bioenergy) – Select this option if your target covers GHG emissions from the combustion, processing and distribution phase of bioenergy and/or land use emissions and removals associated with bioenergy feedstocks, in addition to non-land related emissions from energy/industry. This option could apply to companies in any CDP sector with a target that includes emissions from bioenergy. • No, it does not cover any land-related emissions (e.g. non-FLAG SBT) – Select this option if your target only covers non-land related emissions from energy/industry.",
    "new_id": 202
  },
  {
    "id": 16676,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why the document emphasizes disclosing methane reduction efforts specifically within oil and gas activities, rather than other operational areas, as outlined in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 7?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Because investors prioritize financial risks associated with methane emissions in oil and gas over other operational sectors.",
      "A": "Because methane emissions are exclusively generated from oil and gas activities, making them the sole focus for disclosure.",
      "B": "Because the document mandates reporting on all greenhouse gas emissions, but methane is highlighted due to its prevalence in oil and gas operations.",
      "D": "Because methane emissions from oil and gas activities pose a reputational risk that is disproportionately higher than in other sectors.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "384",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 7.pdf",
    "source_text": "383 (7.57) Describe your organization’s efforts to reduce methane emissions from your activities. Question details Change from last year • No change Rationale • Methane emissions represent significant direct emissions from oil and gas activities. Disclosing relevant information relating to your organization’s efforts to reduce methane emissions from your oil and gas activities can reduce the financial and reputational risk facing investors. Investors and other data users are interested in learning about methane reduction projects and collaborative initiatives. Response options • This is an open text question with a limit of 5,000 characters. Please note that when copying from another document into the portal, formatting is not retained. Requested content General • If methane emissions are relevant to your organization’s operations, then provide a company specific description of your organizations efforts to reduce methane emissions from your oil and gas activities, including: o Methane reduction projects; and o Collaborative initiatives to reduce methane emissions through mandatory and voluntary programs. • You will be able to provide information on your specific maintenance activities e.g. leak detection and repair, in question 7.60. • If methane emissions are not relevant to your operations, provide a company-specific description of why not. Methane reduction projects • Describe examples of the efforts your organization is taking to reduce its methane emissions, referring to any relevant emissions reduction activities you may have reported elsewhere in your CDP response. Collaborative initiatives to reduce methane emissions through mandatory and voluntary reduction programs • Please name any methane emissions reduction program(s) your organization participates in, and describe any focus areas or objectives, as well as any outcomes and achievements of your organization's participation. • Please also describe how the program relates to your organization's overall strategy for managing methane. Examples of voluntary methane emissions reduction programs include: o The Climate & Clean Air Coalition (CCAC) o The Global Methane Initiative (GMI) o US EPA Natural Gas STAR Program o US EPA Coalbed Methane Outreach Program o Our Nation’s Energy (One) Future Coalition • Please indicate where more information on your participation is available for interested parties to access. Tags Authority type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level CC Questionnaire sector Question level O&G",
    "new_id": 203
  },
  {
    "id": 16683,
    "question": "Which scenario accurately reflects the conditions under which a target would be marked as 'Revised' without being considered 'Achieved and maintained' in the reporting year, as outlined in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 7?",
    "options": {
      "D": "A company maintains 100% renewable energy consumption, but recalculates emissions due to a change in consolidation approach.",
      "A": "A company increases its renewable energy share to 100% in the reporting year but revises its base year due to an acquisition.",
      "B": "A company achieves less than 100% renewable energy but revises its target end date to align with future projections.",
      "C": "A company surpasses its renewable energy target and subsequently revises it to reflect higher ambition.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "346",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 7.pdf",
    "source_text": "345 (% 𝑠ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑙𝑜𝑤−𝑐𝑎𝑟𝑏𝑜𝑛 𝑜𝑟 𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑤𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑔𝑦 𝑖𝑛 𝑟𝑒𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟)−(% 𝑠ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑙𝑜𝑤−𝑐𝑎𝑟𝑏𝑜𝑛 𝑜𝑟 𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑤𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑔𝑦 𝑖𝑛 𝑏𝑎𝑠𝑒 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟)(% 𝑠ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑙𝑜𝑤−𝑐𝑎𝑟𝑏𝑜𝑛 𝑜𝑟 𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑤𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑔𝑦 𝑎𝑡 𝑒𝑛𝑑 𝑑𝑎𝑡𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑡𝑎𝑟𝑔𝑒𝑡)−(% 𝑠ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑙𝑜𝑤−𝑐𝑎𝑟𝑏𝑜𝑛 𝑜𝑟 𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑤𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑔𝑦 𝑖𝑛 𝑏𝑎𝑠𝑒 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟)×100% • E.g. if your target is to achieve 100% renewable electricity consumption in your European operations by the end of 2025 compared with 40% renewable electricity consumption in a base year of 2015, and in the reporting year you achieved 80% renewable electricity consumption, this column will display 66 as you have achieved 66% of your targeted increase in renewable electricity compared with the base year. • Negative values indicate a decrease in low carbon or renewable energy consumption or production compared to the base year. • Values greater than 100 indicate that you have exceeded your target. • If you are a member of the RE100 initiative, note that this column is not used to assess progress against your RE100 target. The RE100 target is considered to be achieved when the % share of renewable electricity in the reporting year is equal to 100%. Target status in reporting year (column 14) • New – Select this option for targets that have been set in the reporting year and are still in progress. • Underway – Select this option for targets that were set before the reporting year, with an end date in the future, that have not been achieved and continue to be pursued. • Achieved – Select this option for targets that have been achieved or exceeded in the reporting year. • Achieved and maintained – Select this option for targets that are in place to maintain a certain level of performance (e.g., to maintain 100% renewable energy consumption) and this has been achieved in the reporting year. • Expired – Select this option for targets with an end date within the reporting year, that have not been achieved or maintained and have therefore expired in the reporting year. • Revised – Select this option for targets that were set before the reporting year but a revision has been made to any of the elements in columns 2 to 12 in the reporting year, for example due to a recalculation or a change to the end date of the . Note that the target status should be reported as “revised” only for the reporting year when the update was conducted. • Replaced – Select this option for previously reported targets that have been replaced with another target in the reporting year, for example where a facility target has been incorporated into a organization -wide target. • Retired – Select this option for targets with an end date in the future, that have not been achieved, but will no longer be pursued. Provide more information as to why this target was retired in column 19 “ Explain target coverage and identify any exclusions” . Explain the reasons for the revision, replacement, or retirement of the target (column 15) • This column is only presented if you select “Revised”, “Replaced”, or “Retired” in response to “Target status in reporting year” (column 14) • Provide details of the revisions to the target in the reporting year and the reasons for making these revisions. • For SBTi-approved targets, this may include: o Revisions to target data (e.g. recalculation of base year emissions due to divestment, acquisition, mergers, change in boundary, including changes in consolidation approach). o Significant changes to the target data (that could compromise relevance and consistency), triggering a mandatory target recalculation (SBTi criteria 26 and 27). o Updates to the target due to 1) Triggered recalculation of the target; 2) revalidation process when submitting new targets when a company has other targets in place (e.g. due to increasing ambition, achievement of target ahead of time).",
    "new_id": 204
  },
  {
    "id": 16689,
    "question": "When reporting on a year-on-year rolling target, which condition must be satisfied regarding the date the target was set and its relationship to the base year and reporting framework, as outlined in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 7?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The target can be set before the base year but must align with the organization’s financial year as specified in column 18.",
      "B": "The target must be set no earlier than the base year, ensuring alignment with the reporting year's financial end date.",
      "C": "The target must always be set during the reporting year, regardless of whether it references absolute or intensity metrics.",
      "D": "The target date must fall within the reporting year and cannot predate the base year under any circumstances.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "354",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 7.pdf",
    "source_text": "353 Requested content General • To correctly report the progress against a maintenance target, i.e. a target to maintain a certain level of performance (e.g. to maintain a zero waste to landfill target for 100% of sites), you should treat it as a target to be met every year. In this case, the “base year” corresponds to the base year of the target that is being maintained and “target year” corresponds to the reporting year If you are a member of the EP100 and/or EV100 initiative, you can use this question to report on your progress towards achieving your target. • If you have interim targets, use the “Add Row” function to provide details about them separately. • Target reference number (column 1) • Select a unique target reference from the drop-down menu provided to identify this target in subsequent questions and to track progress against this target in subsequent reporting years. • Date target was set (column 2) • Enter the date on which your company has set the target. • This must be either before or during the reporting year but cannot be after the reporting year. It also cannot be after the end date of the target . • For year-on-year rolling targets, enter the date that you first set the target. This can be before the base year. • If the target was set based on financial years, enter the date year that applies to the end of your financial year and specify this in column 18 “ Explain target coverage and identify any exclusions” . • If you do not know the exact date on which your company set the target, enter the end of the year that your target was set. • Target coverage (column 3) • If your target applies to the whole organization, select “Organization-wide”. Note that “ organization” refers collectively to all the companies, businesses, organizations, other entities or groups that fall within your definition of the reporting boundary. • If your target does not relate to the whole organization, select the option that best describes the coverage of the target, and provide further details in column 18 “ Explain target coverage and identify any exclusions” . • E.g. if your target relates applies only to your office-based operations, select “Business activity”. • Target type: absolute or intensity (column 4) • Select whether the target is an absolute or an intensity target, regardless of whether you measure it in absolute (e.g. MWh) or relative (%) values. E.g. if your target is to increase the percentage of low-carbon vehicles in the company fleet, select “absolute”. • • Target category and metric (target numerator if reporting an intensity target) (column 5)",
    "new_id": 205
  },
  {
    "id": 16691,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why an organization would report 'No' in response to whether they implemented a response to impacts caused by their management practices, as described in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 7?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Because the identified impacts were exclusively positive, and no negative impacts required mitigation.",
      "A": "Because the organization has not identified any environmental impacts from its management practices.",
      "C": "Because the organization's suppliers failed to evaluate the effects of their management practices.",
      "D": "Because the organization lacks sufficient data to assess the environmental impacts of its practices.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "417-418",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 7.pdf",
    "source_text": "416 Description of impact (column 4) • Provide a brief description of the methods/tools used to assess the consequences of the implementation of your management practice on other environmental issues • Provide details on each of these impacts/effects, including: o their nature o the parts of your business that have been affected. Description of the response (column 6) • If applicable, describe your response to manage, mitigate, control, or adapt to these impacts/effects. • If you selected “No” in column 5 (“Have you implemented…?”), explain why you have not implemented a response to these impacts. Example response See example below, for guidance purposes only: Management practice reference number Overall effect Which of the following has been impacted? Description of impact Have you implemented any response(s) to these impacts? Description of the response(s) MP1 Positive Soil; Yield We adopted cover-cropping practices in 85% of our farms a year ago. It has already had positive impacts in the soil quality, such as reduced soil erosion, increased levels of soil organic matter, improved moisture retention. Also, the crop yield has increased by 15% compared to last year. No We have not implemented any response as we did not identify any negative impacts caused by this management practice. Tags Authority Type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level CC Questionnaire Sector Question level AC, FB, PF (7.70) Do you know if any of the management practices mentioned in 7.68.1 that were implemented by your suppliers have other impacts besides climate change mitigation/adaptation? Question details Question dependencies This question only appears if you select “Yes” in response to 7.68.\n\n[Page 418]\n417 Change from last year No change Rationale Organizations are encouraged to adopt, as well as to promote among their suppliers, a holistic approach regarding land management actions. This is important due to the complex interrelationships between climate change, deforestation, and water security issues. Knowledge of the implications of management practices adopted across the whole value chain that impacts other environmental aspects demonstrates a mature environmental stewardship approach to investors and other data users. Response options Select one of the following options: • Yes • No Requested content General • This question refers to any impacts, other than climate-related benefits, that may be occurring due to your implementation of agricultural/forestry management practices detailed in 7.68.1. For example, these impacts might refer to negative or positive effects on biodiversity, soil and water quality, or crop yield • You should select “Yes” if you have collected data on your supplier’s assessment of at least one management practice indicated in 7.68.1 that have impacted environmental aspects beyond climate. You will be able to provide details on these effects in the following question • Note that the effects you report should be a result of an evaluation carried out by your supplier(s) after the implementation of the practice. Select “No” if your supplier(s) have not carried out an evaluation of the effects of any specific management practice. Tags Authority Type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level CC Questionnaire Sector Question level AC, FB, PF",
    "new_id": 206
  },
  {
    "id": 16695,
    "question": "Which scenario accurately reflects the conditions under which fuel feedstocks contribute to Scope 3, Category 1 emissions, as introduced in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 7?",
    "options": {
      "C": "When they are used as starting materials in a process that converts them into other commodities or resources.",
      "A": "When they are combusted solely for energy purposes and not utilized as raw materials in a production process.",
      "B": "When they are consumed exclusively as inputs for energy generation without being transformed into other products.",
      "D": "When their upstream indirect emissions are categorized under Scope 3, Category 3 due to energy-related activities.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "128",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 7.pdf",
    "source_text": "127 • The sum of percentages reported here should not reach 100 unless all of Scope 3, Category 1 emissions, as reported in C6.5, are covered by the selected feedstocks. • Fuel feedstocks are also included and contribute to your Scope 3, Category 1 emissions insofar as they are consumed as feedstocks and not consumed solely for energy purposes. Upstream indirect emissions from the consumption of fuels for energy purposes is covered by Scope 3, Category 3 “Fuel- and Energy-Related Activities Not Included in Scope 1 or Scope 2”. Explain calculation methodology (column 3) • Provide a short description of the types and sources of data used to calculate the CO2e emissions of the selected feedstock in column 1, e.g. activity data, emission factors, GWPs and sources used. • Additionally, provide a description of the methods, assumptions, and allocation methods used. Explanation of terms Feedstocks: Feedstocks are starting materials, ranging from fossil fuels to biomass-based resources. These materials are fed into a process, and converted into other commodities or resources, which are either used directly or further transformed. For example, in the steel industry, coking coal is converted to coke, which is used in the steel production. In the petrochemical industry, gaseous feedstocks (ethane, propane, or butane) are used to produce high value chemicals. Scope 3, Category 1: Purchased goods and services: The category of Scope 3 emissions, as per GHG Protocol Corporate Value Chain (Scope 3) Accounting and Reporting Standard, that includes all upstream (i.e., cradle-to-gate) emissions from the production of products purchased or acquired by the reporting company in the reporting year, not otherwise included in Categories 2 – 8. Products include both goods (tangible products) and services (intangible products). High Value Chemicals (Steam cracking): High value chemicals (HVCs) produced via steam cracking include ethylene, propylene from the pyrolysis gas of steam crackers, benzene (contained amounts, excluding extracted amounts), butadiene (also contained), acetylene, and hydrogen sold (as fuel). Steam cracking: Steam cracking is the main method of breaking down large molecules of hydrocarbons, in which a gaseous or liquid hydrocarbon is diluted with steam and then heated. The main product for steam cracking process is HVCs. Tags Authority type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level CC Questionnaire Sector Question level CH (7.25.1) Disclose sales of products that are greenhouse gases. Question details Change from last year No change",
    "new_id": 207
  },
  {
    "id": 16697,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes why an organization might choose to assess life cycle emissions using a 'cradle-to-gate + end-of-life stage' approach rather than a 'cradle-to-grave' approach, as outlined in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 7?",
    "options": {
      "D": "It allows for a narrower focus on production and disposal phases, excluding the use phase which is often harder to measure.",
      "A": "It provides a more comprehensive evaluation of all potential environmental impacts beyond just greenhouse gas emissions.",
      "B": "It aligns with international standards that mandate reporting only up to the point of product delivery to consumers.",
      "C": "It simplifies assessments by disregarding emissions from the acquisition of raw materials.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "422",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 7.pdf",
    "source_text": "421 Product GHG inventory A subset of an LCA that focuses only on the climate change impact (i.e. life cycle emissions). A product GHG inventory is a compilation and evaluation of the inputs, outputs, and potential GHG impacts of a product system throughout its life cycle. See the GHG Protocol’s Product Life Cycle and Reporting Standard for further details. Tags Authority Type Capital Markets Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level CC Questionnaire Sector Question level CG (7.71.1) Provide details of how your organization assesses the life cycle emissions of its products or services. Question details Question dependencies This question only appears if you select “Yes” in response to 7.71. Change from last year No change Rationale To acquire an overall understanding of the total carbon impact of a product or service, it is necessary to assess emissions from the production process and use phase, but also emissions associated with the acquisition and disposal of the materials that make up the product. This question provides data users with information on your organization’s approach to assessing product life cycle emissions, including the life cycle stages covered and the methodologies used. Response options Please complete the following table: 1 2 3 4 Products/services assessed Life cycle stage(s) most commonly covered Methodologies/standards/tools applied Comment Select from: • All existing products/services • All new products/services under development • All existing and new products/services • Representative selection of products/services • On a case-by-case basis Select from: • Cradle-to-gate • Cradle-to-grave • Cradle-to-cradle/closed loop production • Cradle-to-gate + end-of-life stage • Gate-to-gate • Use stage • End-of-life stage • Other, please specify Select all that apply: • Bilan Carbone • EU Product Environmental Footprint (EUPEF) • French Product Environmental Footprint • GHG Protocol Product Accounting & Reporting Standard • ISO 14025 • ISO 14040 & 14044 • ISO 14067 Text field [maximum 2,400 characters]",
    "new_id": 208
  },
  {
    "id": 16698,
    "question": "Which scenario would most likely necessitate a recalculation of base year emissions without directly altering the reported emissions inventory methodology, boundary, or reporting year definition, as described in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 7?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The discovery of significant errors in previous responses that impacted the accuracy of prior emissions data.",
      "B": "A change in the organizational structure due to mergers or acquisitions that does not affect emission calculations.",
      "C": "An update to the emissions factors used in calculations while maintaining the same overall methodology.",
      "D": "A shift in the company’s operational focus toward non-emitting activities without modifying its emissions reporting approach.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "14",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 7.pdf",
    "source_text": "13 Explanation of terms Structural changes: Structural changes include mergers, acquisitions, divestments, and outsourcing/insourcing of emitting activities (refer to chapter 5 of the GHG Protocol Corporate Standard for more information). Tags Authority type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level CC Questionnaire Sector Question level All (7.1.2) Has your emissions accounting methodology, boundary, and/or reporting year definition changed in the reporting year? Question details Question dependencies This question only appears if you select “No” in response to 7.1. Change from last year No change Rationale Changes in emissions calculation methodology, reporting boundary approach, and/or reporting year could result in a significant impact on the base year emissions and compromise the consistency and relevance of a company’s GHG emissions inventory. This question provides data users with important context to any changes in emissions that may trigger base year emissions recalculation. 1 2 Change(s) in methodology, boundary, and/or reporting year definition? Details of methodology, boundary, and/or reporting year definition change(s) Select all that apply: • Yes, a change in methodology • Yes, a change in boundary • Yes, a change in reporting year definition • No, but we have discovered significant errors in our previous response(s) • No Text field [maximum 2,500 characters] [Fixed row] Requested content Change(s) in methodology, boundary, and/or reporting year definition? (column 1) • Select all change(s) that occurred in the reporting year. If none of the changes occurred in the reporting year, select “No”. • Further details on each of the options are provided below: - Change in methodology: This refers to changes that occurred due to modifications in the way that the emissions inventory is calculated, e.g., changes in emissions factors used or changes in methodology protocol followed.",
    "new_id": 209
  },
  {
    "id": 16699,
    "question": "Which of the following statements accurately reflects a necessary condition for determining an organization's total coal production as outlined in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 7?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Production data must be converted into metric tons if the raw data is provided in other units, and this applies to all coal types reported.",
      "A": "The organization must exclusively report thermal coal production, as it constitutes the majority of global emissions.",
      "C": "Proven reserves are sufficient for calculating total production without requiring additional information on actual extraction quantities.",
      "D": "The heating value of the coal type must always be confirmed using LHV or HHV before reporting production figures.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "226-227",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 7.pdf",
    "source_text": "225 • Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI) Attainment Ratio: a fleet-wide metric derived by dividing the total number of ships that achieved minimum EEDI by the total number of ships in the fleet. • Revenue ton-kilometer (revenue-ton.km): a metric ton of revenue load transported over one kilometer. • Revenue ton-mile (revenue-ton.mile): a metric ton of revenue load transported over one mile. • Revenue ton-nautical mile (revenue-ton.nautical mile): a metric ton of revenue load transported over one nautical mile. • Available Seat Kilometer (ASK): the number of seats available multiplied by the distance flown in kilometers. • Available Seat Mile (ASM): the number of seats available multiplied by the distance flown in miles. • Revenue per Available Seat Kilometer (RASK): This metric evaluates operating income by the ASK (Available Seat Kilometer). ASK is the number of seats available multiplied by the distance flown in kilometers. • Revenue per Available Seat Mile (RASM): This metric evaluates operating income by the ASM (Available Seat Mile). ASM is the number of seats available multiplied by the distance flown in miles. Tags Authority type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level CC Questionnaire sector Question level TS Production Data (7.37) Disclose coal reserves and production by coal type attributable to your organization in the reporting year. Question details Change from last year No change Rationale Fossil fuels are the largest source of global emissions and coal is the most carbon intensive fossil fuel. It is therefore important to have transparency about the production and reserves of coal attributable to organizations. The split between thermal coal and metallurgical coal is also important. Thermal coal has higher transition risk because consumers can substitute it with other sources of energy. Response options Please complete the following table. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Coal type Proven reserves Probable reserves Production (million metric tons) Energy content of production Heating value Emission factor of production (metric tons Comment\n\n[Page 227]\n226 (million metric tons) (million metric tons) (GJ per metric ton) CO2e per metric ton) Thermal coal Numerical field [enter a number from 0-999,999 using a maximum of 2 decimal places] Numerical field [enter a number from 0-999,999 using a maximum of 2 decimal places] Numerical field [enter a number from 0-999,999 using a maximum of 2 decimal places] Numerical field [enter a number from 1-35 using a maximum of 2 decimal places] Select from: • LHV • HHV • Unable to confirm heating value Numerical field [enter a number from 0-9,999 using a maximum of 4 decimal places] Text field [maximum 2,400 characters] Metallurgical coal Other coal Total coal [Fixed row] Requested content Coal type (column 1) • This column specifies the coal type for which you are disclosing reserves, production, and other information. • Thermal coal is coal that is combusted for energy purposes, e.g. thermal power generation. • Metallurgical coal includes coking coals and blast furnace coals (PCI), or any other coal used in the steel industry. Proven reserves (million metric tons) (column 2) • Enter your organization’s proven reserves of the coal grade you are reporting. • You should apply the same methodology for estimating reserves as used in your annual reporting. You will be asked to explain which listing requirements or other methodologies you have used to provide reserves data in 7.44. • If your raw data is not in metric tons, then you should convert it. For example, from short tons, multiply by 0.907185 to calculate metric tons. Common conversion factors are included in the Technical Note “Units of Measure Conversions”. Probable reserves (million metric tons) (column 3) • Enter your organization’s probable reserves of the coal grade you are reporting. • You should apply the same methodology for estimating reserves as used in annual reporting. • If your raw data is not in metric tons, then you should convert it. For example, from short tons, multiply by 0.907185 to calculate metric tons. Common conversion factors are included in the Technical Note “Units of Measure Conversions”. Production (million metric tons) (column 4) • Enter your organization’s production of the coal type you are reporting.",
    "new_id": 210
  },
  {
    "id": 16700,
    "question": "Which condition must be met for an organization to report its refinery net production in the context of Scope 3 emissions, as outlined in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 7?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The organization must confirm it operates within the 'Downstream' sector and affirmatively answers the prior question on refinery product breakdown.",
      "A": "The organization must exclusively produce liquefied petroleum gas and diesel fuels.",
      "B": "The organization must utilize oil as its sole feedstock during the reporting year.",
      "D": "The organization must disclose all products consumed on-site during refinery operations.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "251-252",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 7.pdf",
    "source_text": "250 Response options Please complete the following table. 1 2 3 Feedstock Throughput (Million barrels) Comment Oil Numerical field [enter a number from 0-9,999 using a maximum of 2 decimal places] Text field [maximum 2,400 characters] Other feedstocks Total [Fixed row] Requested content Throughput (Million barrels) (column 2) • Enter the throughput for the reporting year in million barrels for the feedstocks (oil or other feedstocks) relevant to your organization. • The “Other feedstocks” option is in the “Feedstock” column to allow flexibility in the reporting of refined products. The total row should equal the sum of rows above it (i.e. oil and other feedstocks). Additional information Explanations of the feedstocks listed are available in the following Technical Note: “Fuel Definitions”. Tags Authority type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level CC Questionnaire sector Question level OG (7.43.2) Are you able to break down your refinery products and net production? Question details Question dependencies This question only appears if you select “Downstream” in response to 1.19. Change from last year No change Rationale It is important to take account of refinery net production and product slate in order better understand the sources of Scope 3 category 11 “use of sold product” emissions from organizations. It is also useful to investors for broadly indicating the spread of the organization across the various petroleum product markets. Response options Select one of the following options: • Yes • No Requested content General\n\n[Page 252]\n251 • Select “Yes” if you can disclose your refinery products and net production in the reporting year. • Refinery products can include, but are not limited to, liquefied petroleum gas, gasolines, naphtha, kerosene, diesel fuels, fuel oils, lubricants, waxes, asphalt and tar, petroleum coke and still gas for example. Tags Authority type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level CC Questionnaire sector Question level OG (7.43.3) Disclose your refinery products and net production in the reporting year in million barrels per year. Question details Question dependencies This question only appears if you select “Yes” in response to 7.43.2. Change from last year No change Rationale It is important to take account of refinery net production and product slate in order better understand the sources of Scope 3 category 11 “use of sold product” emissions from organizations. It is also useful to investors for broadly indicating the spread of the organization across the various petroleum product markets. Response options Please complete the following table. 1 2 Product produced Refinery net production (Million barrels) *not including products used/consumed on site Select from: • Liquified petroleum gas • Gasolines • Naphtha • Kerosenes • Diesel fuels • Fuel oils • Lubricants • Waxes • Asphalt and tar • Petroleum coke • Still gas • Other, please specify Numerical field [enter a number from 0-9,999 using a maximum of 2 decimal places] [Add row] Requested content General • Provide the net production figures for your refinery products, for more information on the products listed see the explanation of terms. • If you select “Other, please specify,” provide a label for the product produced.",
    "new_id": 211
  },
  {
    "id": 16701,
    "question": "When calculating total renewable energy consumption, which of the following scenarios would require splitting the energy source into renewable and non-renewable components according to the provided guidelines, as outlined in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 7?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Blended fuels composed partially of biomass-derived materials and partially of fossil fuel derivatives.",
      "A": "Electricity generated exclusively from solar panels installed on-site.",
      "B": "Steam produced entirely from geothermal resources without any additional inputs.",
      "C": "Waste energy recovered directly from industrial processes powered by natural gas.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "142",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 7.pdf",
    "source_text": "141 • If you do not have exact consumption data, you may alternatively estimate your company’s consumption by reviewing fuel and energy purchasing orders. Consumption of self-generated non-fuel renewable energy • If your organization produces renewable energy that is not based on fuel (such as solar, wind, hydro, geothermal, marine), then any consumption of this energy should be entered here. • Consumption of renewable fuels (such as solid and liquid biofuels and biogas) should be excluded because these are accounted for in the row “Consumption of fuel (excluding feedstock)”. • All forms of non-fuel renewable energy - electricity, heat, steam, or cooling – shall be included. Total energy consumption • The data entered in each column of this row should equal the sum of all the above rows (if the above rows have been fully disclosed for). • If you do not disclose data for specific energy carriers in the rows above, but you are able to enter the total energy consumed by your organization, then you should do so. Heating value (column 2) • This column is only applicable to the consumption of fuels because it is a measure of combustion energy. In the other rows you should select \"Unable to confirm heating value”. • Fuel energy data in HHV is typically used in the United States and Canada, whereas LHV is more commonly the unit used in other countries/areas and by international bodies. If you do not know the unit applicable to your raw data, you may wish to infer it based on the location from which the data is sourced, i.e. if the fuel related data is sourced from outside of the United States and Canada, then it is likely that LHV is applicable. MWh from renewable sources (column 3) • Waste energy should not be included if it is derived from fossil fuels. • Hydrogen should not be included if it is derived from fossil fuels. • Blended fuels deriving from both renewable and non-renewable sources should be split by the proportion contained from each source. For municipal waste and refuse-derived fuel, only the fraction of the fuel that is derived from biomass can be included as renewable energy, when calculating renewable energy consumption totals. Further explanations of municipal waste and a glossary of fuel definitions is provided in the CDP Technical Note: “Fuel Definitions”. MWh from non-renewable sources (column 4) • All energy not identified as deriving from renewable sources should be entered, e.g. coal, oil, natural gas, etc. • Direct consumption of nuclear fuel should not be included, as this is covered in more detail in questions for electric utilities. Consumption of purchased or acquired electricity, steam, heat and/or cooling from nuclear sources, however, should be included.",
    "new_id": 212
  },
  {
    "id": 16702,
    "question": "Which principle ensures consistency in reporting energy generation across organizations with varying operational scopes within or outside the steel sector, as described in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 7?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The exclusion of double-counting when one energy carrier is used to produce another within the same installation.",
      "B": "The inclusion of all self-consumption values to reflect total energy use.",
      "C": "The mandatory reporting of renewable energy sources as a percentage of gross generation.",
      "D": "The separation of heat and steam recovery processes from fuel feedstock calculations.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "171",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 7.pdf",
    "source_text": "170 Explanation of terms • Gross generation: covers the total output from all generating installations or facilities without deducting for amount of generated electricity, steam, heat or cooling used by those installations or facilities for the purpose of generation. Deducting this self-consumption of output gives the net generation. To avoid double-counting, consumption of one energy carrier (i.e. electricity, heat, steam, or cooling) to produce another (i.e. electricity, heat, steam, or cooling) within the same installation should not be included. For example, the generation of steam which is consumed in a steam turbine for the generation of electricity should not be included. Tags Authority type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level CC Questionnaire sector Question level MM (7.30.13) Provide details on the electricity, heat, and steam your organization has generated and consumed for steel production activities. Question details Question dependencies This question only appears if you select “Yes” to “Generation of electricity, heat, steam, or cooling” in response to 7.30. Change from last year Modified guidance Rationale Question 7.30.9 has been modified and represented here for the steel sector. This enables consistency of reporting across organizations with varying coverage over activities that may be separate from the steel sector or independent of the production activities defining the steel sector. Response options Please complete the following table: 1 2 3 4 5 Energy Carrier Total gross generation inside steel sector boundary (MWh) Generation that is consumed by the organization inside steel sector boundary (MWh) Generation from renewable sources inside steel sector boundary (MWh) Generation from waste heat/gases recovered from processes using fuel feedstocks inside steel sector boundary (MWh) Electricity Numerical field [enter a number from 0-999,999,999,999 using a maximum of 2 decimal places] Numerical field [enter a number from 0-999,999,999,999 using a maximum of 2 decimal places] Numerical field [enter a number from 0 to 9,999,999,999 using up to 2 decimal places and no commas] Numerical field [enter a number from 0 to 9,999,999,999 using up to 2 decimal places and no commas] Heat Steam",
    "new_id": 213
  },
  {
    "id": 16703,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the reason why net Scope 1 emissions intensity could be lower than gross Scope 1 emissions intensity, and how this relates to alternative fuels and raw materials (AFR), as introduced in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 7?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Net Scope 1 emissions decrease due to the displacement of fossil fuels by AFR, which are treated as having zero emissions despite their actual combustion outputs.",
      "A": "Net Scope 1 emissions are reduced because AFR inherently produce fewer direct emissions during combustion compared to fossil fuels.",
      "C": "Net Scope 1 emissions are adjusted downward as AFR completely eliminate CH4 and NO2 emissions that would otherwise occur with conventional fuels.",
      "D": "Net Scope 1 emissions reflect a reduction solely from energy efficiency improvements achieved through the use of AFR.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "265",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 7.pdf",
    "source_text": "264 Cement equivalent Cementitious products Low-CO2 materials [Fixed row] Requested content General • The figure provided for direct emissions (Scope 1) intensity may be derived by following the guidance in the SBTi Cement Guidance. Accounting standards and detailed calculation methodology can be found in the link provided. • In distinction from the CSI approach, you are encouraged to modify your fuel emission factors to include minor emissions of CH4 and NO2 that result from combustion. • Further information on the definition of the cement sector boundary (encompassing “cement production activities”) is provided in the guidance to questions 7.19 and 7.21. • Complete the table for each of the output products. • Your emissions intensity figures should be for the reporting year only (as defined by your answer to 1.4). • If you do not produce one of the cementitious products, enter 0 (zero) in the relevant field. • Intensity for each process route is the aggregate of emissions divided by the aggregate of product produced. This equates to the weighted average intensity per production activity inside the organizational boundary. • The conventional output products are defined in the accounting standards set by the CSI (where clinker, cementitious products, and cement equivalent, have ID’s 8, 21a, and 21b, respectively). • Emission intensities of “Cement equivalent” and “Cementitious products” production includes the emissions resulting from the production of clinker. Calculation information is provided by the CSI. Gross Scope 1 emissions intensity, metric tons of CO2e per metric ton (column 2) • Enter the Gross Scope 1 emissions intensity for each of the products produced by your organization, in metric tons of CO2e per metric ton. • The term “Gross” aligns with the definition provided for question 7.6. This excludes emissions from biomass or biomass derived wastes. Net Scope 1 emissions intensity, metric tons of CO2e per metric ton (column 3) • Enter the net Scope 1 emissions intensity for each of the products produced by your organization, in metric tons of CO2e per metric ton. • Net emissions are gross emissions minus credits for indirect GHG savings. Credits may be awarded for the use of “alternative fuels and raw materials (AFR). AFR come in the form of recovered wastes which displace the use of fossil fuels. Subtracting credits is in-effect applying a zero-emission factor to the combustion of these wastes. For more information, refer to the SBTi Cement Guidance. Scope 2 location-based emissions intensity, metric tons of CO2e per metric ton (column 4) • Enter the Scope 2 emissions intensity for each of the products produced by your organization, in metric tons of CO2e per metric ton. • You should provide location-based Scope 2 emissions intensity.",
    "new_id": 214
  },
  {
    "id": 16704,
    "question": "If an organization generates both electricity and heat from a single plant configuration while also exporting part of the generated electricity, which response would accurately reflect the reporting requirements for fuel consumption according to the provided guidance, as described in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 7?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Include the total fuel consumed in the relevant categories regardless of whether the electricity, steam, or cooling is exported or used internally.",
      "A": "Report only the fuel consumed for generating heat, as electricity is partially exported and thus not fully utilized by the organization.",
      "B": "Exclude all fuel consumption data related to exported electricity but include it under 'Consumption of fuel for co-generation or tri-generation.'",
      "D": "Allocate fuel consumption proportionally between self-consumption and export, reporting only the self-consumption portion under respective energy applications.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "156-157",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 7.pdf",
    "source_text": "155 Consumption of fuel for the generation of electricity Select from: • Yes • No Consumption of fuel for the generation of heat Consumption of fuel for the generation of steam Consumption of fuel for the generation of cooling Consumption of fuel for co-generation or tri-generation [Fixed row] Requested content General • Information you provide should be for the reporting year only (as defined by your answer to 1.4). • This question drives the columns presented in question 7.30.7. • Companies who consume fuel for any applications not listed such as transportation, industrial process plant and equipment etc. should select ‘Consumption of fuel for the generation of heat’. • It does not matter whether your organization consumes or exports the electricity, steam, or cooling generated; if your organization generates any electricity, steam, or cooling from fuel combustion (thermal generation), then you should select ‘Yes’ in the relevant field. • Co-generation is also known as combined heat and power (CHP). Tri-generation is also known as combined cooling, heat and power (CCHP). Combined cooling and power (CCP) is another system in which energy carriers are generated together. If your organization generates from any single configuration of plant in which electricity, steam, heat, or cooling are generated as simultaneous useful outputs, then you should select ‘Yes’ for the consumption of fuel for co-generation or tri-generation. Tags Authority type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level CC Questionnaire sector Question level All except FS (7.30.7) State how much fuel in MWh your organization has consumed (excluding feedstocks) by fuel type. Question details Question dependencies This question only appears if you select “Consumption of fuel (excluding feedstock)” in 7.30. Change from last year Modified guidance Rationale Scope 1 greenhouse gas emissions are directly associated with the consumption of fuel for energy purposes. This question provides data users with more transparency regarding the type of fuel an organization has consumed. Total consumption of fuels and their consumption for different energy applications also provides insight on the way in which fuels are used by the organization, which can allow for a fairer and more\n\n[Page 157]\n156 consistent understanding of corporate energy and emissions from data users. Response options Please complete the following table: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Fuels (excluding feedstocks) Heating value Total fuel MWh consumed by the organization MWh fuel consumed for self-generation of electricity MWh fuel consumed for self-generation of heat MWh fuel consumed for self-generation of steam MWh fuel consumed for self-generation of cooling MWh fuel consumed for self- cogeneration or self-trigeneration Comment Sustainable biomass Select from: • LHV • HHV • Unable to confirm heating value Numerical field [enter a number from 0 to 9,999,999,999 using up to 2 decimal places and no commas] Numerical field [enter a number from 0 to 9,999,999,999 using up to 2 decimal places and no commas] Numerical field [enter a number from 0 to 9,999,999,999 using up to 2 decimal places and no commas] Numerical field [enter a number from 0 to 9,999,999,999 using up to 2 decimal places and no commas] Numerical field [enter a number from 0 to 9,999,999,999 using up to 2 decimal places and no commas] Numerical field [enter a number from 0 to 9,999,999,999 using up to 2 decimal places and no commas] Text field [maximum 2,400 characters] Other biomass Other renewable fuels (e.g. renewable hydrogen) Coal Oil Gas Other non-renewable fuels (e.g. non-renewable hydrogen)",
    "new_id": 215
  },
  {
    "id": 16705,
    "question": "Which of the following scenarios would require an electric utility company to report its emissions intensity using both megawatt hours generated and megawatt hours purchased, as outlined in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 7?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The company both generates its own electricity and purchases additional power from external suppliers.",
      "A": "The company exclusively generates power through hydroelectric facilities.",
      "B": "The company has recently incorporated renewable energy credits into its accounting practices.",
      "C": "The company’s boundary for inventory calculation shifted from financial control to operational control.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "260",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 7.pdf",
    "source_text": "259 changes in methodology protocol followed. If your Scope 1+2 emissions intensity has changed as a result a change in Scope 2 accounting practices for low-carbon energy, you should select this option. o Change in boundary – a change in your organization’s emissions intensity due to a change in the boundary used for your inventory calculation, i.e. changing from financial control to operational control. This option could also apply if you have incorporated facilities into your inventory that were excluded in previous years. o Change in physical operating conditions – a change that occurred due to changes in the weather that cannot be accounted for under the other options available, e.g. increased production of hydroelectricity because of increased rainfall. o Unidentified – select this option if you are not able to identify the reason for the change in your Scope 1+2 emissions intensity from the previous year. Please explain (column 9) • Expand on the reason(s) selected in column 8, providing regional, sectoral and/or operational context. • Explain the degree to which different factors influenced the change in your intensity figure. • If you selected “Other emissions reduction initiatives” in column 8, specify the initiatives that contributed to the change, including those reported in 7.55.2. • You may also use this column to provide any additional explanation that is relevant to capture the full complexity of the emissions intensity change. Requested content – [sector] Note for coal sector companies: • Coal sector companies are requested to provide an emissions intensity figure per unit of currency total revenue and in addition, per metric ton of coal. Note for electric utility sector companies: • Electric utility sector organizations are requested to provide an emissions intensity figure per unit of currency total revenue and in addition, report your organization’s gross global combined Scope 1 and 2 emissions intensity per MWh of gross power generated and/or per MWh of power transmitted and/or per MWh of power purchased – make sure to select megawatt hour generated (MWh) and/or megawatt hour transmitted (MWh) and/or megawatt hour purchased (MWh). Note for oil and gas sector companies: • Oil and gas sector organizations are requested to provide an emissions intensity figure per unit of currency total revenue. • Please note that question 7.48 asks oil and gas organizations to provide the intensity figures for Scope 1 emissions (metric tons CO2e) per unit of hydrocarbon category. Note for transport OEMs and transport services sector companies: • Transport OEMs and transport services sector organizations are requested to provide an emissions intensity figure per unit of currency total revenue. • Please note that, dependent on the extent you are able to disaggregate your emissions intensity for each transport mode between Scopes 1, 2, and 3: Category 4 upstream transportation and distribution, transport services organizations are asked to provide primary intensity (activity-based) metrics that are appropriate to emissions from transport activities in Scope 1, 2, and 3 in question 7.51. Note for real estate sector companies:",
    "new_id": 216
  },
  {
    "id": 16706,
    "question": "Which of the following statements accurately reflects a necessary condition for reporting emissions savings under an initiative type that involves bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS), as outlined in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 7?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Reporting BECCS-related savings requires specifying details in the 'Comment' column regardless of whether the biofuels are sustainable.",
      "B": "The biofuels must be derived exclusively from sustainable biomass to qualify for reporting.",
      "C": "Annual monetary savings must always be reported in column 6 when selecting BECCS as part of the initiative type.",
      "D": "Emissions savings from BECCS can only be reported if they occur in Scope 2, market-based categories.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "375",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 7.pdf",
    "source_text": "374 carbon capture and storage) at your own site or at others on behalf of your clients. If you select “Solid biofuels”, “Liquid biofuels”, or “Biogas” you should specify whether any of the biofuels are derived from sustainable biomass and/or if they are being used for bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) in the “Comment” column (column 10). Refer to CDP’s Technical note on Biofuels for more information. Members of the RE100 initiative selecting this option should ensure to enter a figure in column 6 “Annual monetary savings”. • Non-energy industrial process emissions reductions – Select this option only for initiatives to reduce emissions from industrial production processes which chemically or physically transform materials (e.g. CO2 from the calcinations step in cement manufacturing, CO2 from catalytic cracking in petrochemical processing, PFC emissions from aluminum smelting etc.) • Company policy or behavioral change – Select this option for initiatives relating to a change in company policy (e.g. value chain engagement, a new procurement policy) or an organizational behavioral change (e.g. resource efficiency improvements such as reducing paper use, waste management improvements such as reducing food waste etc.). Note that changes in company transportation policies should not be reported here but under the initiative category “Transportation”. • Transportation – Select this option for initiatives relating to employee travel and commuting and the company fleet. • Other, please specify – If none of the listed categories are applicable to your initiative, select this option and specify the initiative. • Note that a selection must be made for both column 1 and column 2. Your data will not be saved if either column is left blank. Initiative type (column 2) • Select the type of initiative you have undertaken from the drop-down options provided. Note that only initiative types relative to the initiative category selected in the previous column will be displayed in the portal. • If none of the provided options are applicable to your initiative, select “Other, please specify” and provide details of the initiative type. • Note that a selection must be made for both column 1 and column 2. Your data will not be saved if either column is left blank. Estimated annual CO2e savings (metric tons CO2e) (column 3) • Enter the expected annual CO2e savings in all emission Scopes, in metric tons, occurring with the initiative in place. It is acknowledged that this figure is likely to be an estimate. • Where savings occur on a non-annual basis, average the savings so that an annual figure can be provided. • Where the initiative has not been in place for the entire reporting period, estimate and report the emissions that would be saved in a 12-month period, so that an annual figure can be provided. Scope(s) (column 4) • The “Scope 2 (market-based)” dropdown only appears if you select “We are reporting a Scope 2, market-based figure” in column “Scope 2, market-based” of 7.3. • Select the Scope(s) and/or Scope 3 categories where the emission reductions are expected to occur.",
    "new_id": 217
  },
  {
    "id": 16707,
    "question": "Which scenario would most likely require a utility company to report transmission and distribution losses under Scope 1 rather than Scope 2, as outliend in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 7?",
    "options": {
      "B": "A utility that owns both generation assets and the infrastructure for transmitting and distributing electricity within the same market.",
      "A": "A utility that operates solely as a distributor of electricity purchased from independent power producers.",
      "C": "A utility that reports market-based figures for Scope 2 emissions and has no ownership of generation assets.",
      "D": "A utility that provides only low-voltage distribution services and sources all its electricity from external suppliers.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "210-211",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 7.pdf",
    "source_text": "209 Tags Authority type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level CC Questionnaire sector Question level EU (7.33.1) Disclose the following information about your transmission and distribution business. Question details Question dependencies This question only appears if you select “Yes” in response to 7.33. Change from last year Minor change Rationale A set of quantitative disclosures is put forward that allows electric utility organizations with a transmission and distribution business(s) to characterize their grid operations. These companies often operate within strict regulatory and contractual clauses, and therefore are provided with the opportunity to provide a narrative description to explain such instances. Response options Please complete the following table. 1 2 3 4 5 Country/area/region Voltage level Annual load (GWh) Annual energy losses (% of annual load) Scope where emissions from energy losses are accounted for Select from: Country/area/region drop-down list Select from: • Transmission (high voltage) • Distribution (low voltage) Numerical field [enter a number from 0 - 999,999 using a maximum of 2 decimal places] Numerical field [enter a number from 0-100 using a maximum of 2 decimal places] Select from: • Scope 1 • Scope 2 (location-based) • Scope 2 (market-based) 6 7 8 9 10 Emissions from energy losses (metric tons CO2e) Length of network (km) Number of connections Area covered (km2) Comment Numerical field [enter a number from 0-99,999,999,999 using a maximum of 3 decimal places] Numerical field [enter a number from 0-99,999,999,999 using a maximum of 2 decimal places] Numerical field [enter a number from 0-99,999,999,999 using a maximum of 2 decimal places] Numerical field [enter a number from 0-99,999,999,999 using a maximum of 2 decimal places] Text field [maximum 2,400 characters] [Add row] Requested content General • If applicable, you should disclose the transmission and/or distribution related information from both your subsidiaries who are solely transmission and/or distribution and subsidiaries who provide both generation and transmission and/or distribution.\n\n[Page 211]\n210 Country/area/region (column 1) • Select from the drop-down list the country/area/region in which your organization has transmission and distribution (T&D) activities. Annual energy losses (% of annual load) (column 4) • This figure provides a measure of the power dissipated in the form of useless heat through the grid. Scope where emissions from energy losses are accounted for (column 5) • The “Scope 2 (market-based)” dropdown only appears if you select if “We are reporting a Scope 2, market-based figure” in column “Scope 2, market-based” of 7.3 • In markets where the utility owns the generation assets and the T&D infrastructure, the utility would account for T&D losses in Scope 1. If the utility is a separate entity from power generating assets, the emissions from T&D losses would fall under Scope 2. Emissions from energy losses (metric tons CO2e) (column 6) • Negative numbers are not allowed as reporting needs to be gross, not net figures. • Emission figures should be for the reporting year only. • For further information, please see GHG Protocol Scope 2 Guidance. Length of network (km) (column 7) • Length of network (km) is the total length of the routes, not cables, between different points of the network in kilometers. Number of connections (column 8) • This is the number of connections in the network, either at supply side or delivery point and interconnections. Area covered (km2) (column 9) • This is the area serviced by the transmission or distribution network, expressed in kilometer squared. Explanation of terms • Annual load (also known as “System load”): the annual electricity delivered to the grid system by generating units expressed in GWh. • Transmission and distribution losses (also known as “Technical losses”): the difference between system load and energy delivered to distribution grids/consumer, expressed as a percentage per energy delivered to the grid. Tags Authority type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level CC Questionnaire sector Question level EU",
    "new_id": 218
  },
  {
    "id": 16708,
    "question": "Which statement accurately captures the relationship between base year emissions reporting and its implications for organizations aiming to align with a 1.5°C pathway, as outlined in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 7?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Setting a base year allows organizations to establish a consistent performance benchmark, which is critical for assessing progress toward reducing emissions in line with a 1.5°C-aligned pathway.",
      "A": "Base year emissions are irrelevant to determining alignment with a 1.5°C pathway as long as current emissions show a reduction.",
      "B": "Organizations must report base year emissions primarily to demonstrate that Scope 3 emissions have been reduced by at least 17% annually.",
      "D": "The base year is only used for Scope 1 emissions reporting and does not apply to Scope 2 or Scope 3 emissions under any circumstances.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "29-30",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 7.pdf",
    "source_text": "28 the production and transportation of fuel. Estimated percentage of total Scope 3 emissions = 100% x 13,700/80,000 = 17% Tags Authority type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level CC Questionnaire Sector Question level All Scope 1, 2, and 3 Emissions Inventory Section Overview Reporting emissions is essential for understanding and reducing harmful climate impacts . This section requests details of your emissions data, and is aligned with TCFD Metrics & Targets recommended disclosure b) Disclose Scope 1, Scope 2, and, if appropriate, Scope 3 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and the related risks. This section also requests details on the verification status that applies to organizations’ reported Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions. (7.5) Provide your base year and base year emissions. Question details Change from last year Minor change Rationale A meaningful and consistent comparison of emissions over time requires that organizations set a performance datum with which to compare current emissions. Ambition Companies disclose that their Scope 1 emissions in the reporting year have reduced in line with a 1.5 °C-aligned pathway. 0 1 2 3 Scope Base year end Base year emissions (metric tons CO2e) Methodological details Scope 1 Date field [enter a date between 01/01/1990-19/11/2025] Numerical field [enter a number from 0-999,999,999,999 using a maximum of 3 decimal places and no commas] Text field [maximum 2,500 characters]\n\n[Page 30]\n29 Scope 2 (location-based) Scope 2 (market-based) Scope 3 category 1: Purchased goods and services Scope 3 category 2: Capital goods Scope 3 category 3: Fuel-and-energy-related activities (not included in Scope 1 or 2) Scope 3 category 4: Upstream transportation and distribution Scope 3 category 5: Waste generated in operations Scope 3 category 6: Business travel Scope 3 category 7: Employee commuting Scope 3 category 8: Upstream leased assets Scope 3 category 9: Downstream transportation and distribution Scope 3 category 10: Processing of sold products Scope 3 category 11: Use of sold products Scope 3 category 12: End of life treatment of sold products Scope 3 category 13: Downstream leased assets",
    "new_id": 219
  },
  {
    "id": 16709,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why the 'Intensity figure in reporting year for total Scope 3' is described as auto-calculated, and how it contrasts with other fields requiring manual input, as outlined in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 7?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The auto-calculation derives its value exclusively from pre-existing intensity figures in individual Scope 3 categories, contrasting with fields dependent on direct numerical or percentage inputs.",
      "A": "The auto-calculation ensures consistency across all Scope 3 categories by aggregating manually entered data without allowing overrides, unlike fields where users directly specify values.",
      "B": "The auto-calculation simplifies reporting by eliminating the need for any user-provided numerical inputs, which distinguishes it from percentage fields that require explicit entry.",
      "C": "The auto-calculation prioritizes real-time updates over accuracy, making it fundamentally different from static fields that demand precise manual entries.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "307-308",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 7.pdf",
    "source_text": "306 • Category 7: Employee commuting • Category 8: Upstream leased assets • Category 9: Downstream transportation and distribution • Category 10: Processing of sold products • Category 11: Use of sold products • Category 12: End-of-life treatment of sold products • Category 13: Downstream leased assets • Category 14: Franchises • Category 15: Investments [does not appear to FS] • Other (upstream) • Other (downstream) 14 15-31 32 33 34 35 Intensity figure in base year for Scope 2 Intensity figure in base year for Scope 3, Category […] [One column for each Scope 3 category] Intensity figure in base year for total Scope 3 [auto-calculated] Intensity figure in base year for all selected Scopes [auto-calculated] % of total base year emissions in Scope 1 covered by this Scope 1 intensity figure % of total base year emissions in Scope 2 covered by this Scope 2 intensity figure Numerical field [enter a number from 0- 999,999,999,999 using a maximum of 10 decimal places and no commas] Numerical field [enter a number from 0-999,999,999,999 using a maximum of 10 decimal places and no commas] Numerical field [enter a number from 0- 999,999,999,999 using a maximum of 10 decimal places and no commas] Numerical field [enter a number from 0- 999,999,999,999 using a maximum of 10 decimal places and no commas] Percentage field [enter a percentage from 0-100 using a maximum of 2 decimal places] Percentage field [enter a percentage from 0-100 using a maximum of 2 decimal places] 36-52 53 54 55 56 57 % of total base year emissions in Scope 3, Category […] covered by this Scope 3, Category […] intensity figure [One column for each Scope 3 category] % of total base year emissions in Scope 3 (in all Scope 3 categories) covered by this total Scope 3 intensity figure % of total base year emissions in all selected Scopes covered by this intensity figure End date of target Targeted reduction from base year (%) Intensity figure at end date of target for all selected Scopes [auto-calculated]\n\n[Page 308]\n307 Percentage field [enter a percentage from 0-100 using a maximum of 2 decimal places] Percentage field [enter a percentage from 0-100 using a maximum of 2 decimal places] Percentage field [enter a percentage from 0-100 using a maximum of 2 decimal places] [DD/MM/YYYY] between 19/11/2020and 31/12/2100 Percentage field [enter a percentage from 0-100 using a maximum of 2 decimal places] Numerical field [0-999,999,999,999] 58 59 60 61 62-78 79 % change anticipated in absolute Scope 1+2 emissions % change anticipated in absolute Scope 3 emissions Intensity figure in reporting year for Scope 1 Intensity figure in reporting year for Scope 2 Intensity figure in reporting year for Scope 3, Category […] [One column for each Scope 3 category] Intensity figure in reporting year for total Scope 3 [auto-calculated] Percentage field [enter a percentage from -999-999 using a maximum of 2 decimal places] Percentage field [enter a percentage from -999-999 using a maximum of 2 decimal places] Numerical field [enter a number from 0-999,999,999,999 using a maximum of 10 decimal places and no commas] Numerical field [enter a number from 0-999,999,999,999 using a maximum of 10 decimal places and no commas] Numerical field [enter a number from 0-999,999,999,999 using a maximum of 10 decimal places and no commas] Numerical field [enter a number from 0-999,999,999,999 using a maximum of 10 decimal places and no commas] 80 81 82 83 84 85 Intensity figure in reporting year for all selected Scopes [auto-calculated] Land-related emissions covered by target % of target achieved relative to base year [auto-calculated] Target status in reporting year Explain the reasons for the revision, replacement, or retirement of the target Explain target coverage and identify any exclusions",
    "new_id": 220
  },
  {
    "id": 16710,
    "question": "Which scenario would require an organization to report fuel consumption under 'Consumption of fuel for co-generation or tri-generation' despite not explicitly generating electricity as a primary output, as outlined in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 7?",
    "options": {
      "A": "An organization that generates heat and steam simultaneously from a single plant configuration but exports all outputs.",
      "B": "An organization using fuel solely for transportation purposes, without thermal generation of energy carriers.",
      "C": "An organization generating cooling and electricity independently from separate plant systems.",
      "D": "An organization producing heat exclusively for industrial processes with no simultaneous useful outputs.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "156-157",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 7.pdf",
    "source_text": "155 Consumption of fuel for the generation of electricity Select from: • Yes • No Consumption of fuel for the generation of heat Consumption of fuel for the generation of steam Consumption of fuel for the generation of cooling Consumption of fuel for co-generation or tri-generation [Fixed row] Requested content General • Information you provide should be for the reporting year only (as defined by your answer to 1.4). • This question drives the columns presented in question 7.30.7. • Companies who consume fuel for any applications not listed such as transportation, industrial process plant and equipment etc. should select ‘Consumption of fuel for the generation of heat’. • It does not matter whether your organization consumes or exports the electricity, steam, or cooling generated; if your organization generates any electricity, steam, or cooling from fuel combustion (thermal generation), then you should select ‘Yes’ in the relevant field. • Co-generation is also known as combined heat and power (CHP). Tri-generation is also known as combined cooling, heat and power (CCHP). Combined cooling and power (CCP) is another system in which energy carriers are generated together. If your organization generates from any single configuration of plant in which electricity, steam, heat, or cooling are generated as simultaneous useful outputs, then you should select ‘Yes’ for the consumption of fuel for co-generation or tri-generation. Tags Authority type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level CC Questionnaire sector Question level All except FS (7.30.7) State how much fuel in MWh your organization has consumed (excluding feedstocks) by fuel type. Question details Question dependencies This question only appears if you select “Consumption of fuel (excluding feedstock)” in 7.30. Change from last year Modified guidance Rationale Scope 1 greenhouse gas emissions are directly associated with the consumption of fuel for energy purposes. This question provides data users with more transparency regarding the type of fuel an organization has consumed. Total consumption of fuels and their consumption for different energy applications also provides insight on the way in which fuels are used by the organization, which can allow for a fairer and more\n\n[Page 157]\n156 consistent understanding of corporate energy and emissions from data users. Response options Please complete the following table: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Fuels (excluding feedstocks) Heating value Total fuel MWh consumed by the organization MWh fuel consumed for self-generation of electricity MWh fuel consumed for self-generation of heat MWh fuel consumed for self-generation of steam MWh fuel consumed for self-generation of cooling MWh fuel consumed for self- cogeneration or self-trigeneration Comment Sustainable biomass Select from: • LHV • HHV • Unable to confirm heating value Numerical field [enter a number from 0 to 9,999,999,999 using up to 2 decimal places and no commas] Numerical field [enter a number from 0 to 9,999,999,999 using up to 2 decimal places and no commas] Numerical field [enter a number from 0 to 9,999,999,999 using up to 2 decimal places and no commas] Numerical field [enter a number from 0 to 9,999,999,999 using up to 2 decimal places and no commas] Numerical field [enter a number from 0 to 9,999,999,999 using up to 2 decimal places and no commas] Numerical field [enter a number from 0 to 9,999,999,999 using up to 2 decimal places and no commas] Text field [maximum 2,400 characters] Other biomass Other renewable fuels (e.g. renewable hydrogen) Coal Oil Gas Other non-renewable fuels (e.g. non-renewable hydrogen)",
    "new_id": 221
  },
  {
    "id": 16711,
    "question": "Which scenario best aligns with the expectations for organizations reporting on non-climate-related impacts of their land management practices, as outlined in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 7?",
    "options": {
      "B": "An organization identifies neutral effects of a specific practice on soil and water while detailing implemented measures to mitigate unintended consequences.",
      "A": "An organization reports exclusively on climate-related impacts of its agroforestry projects, ignoring effects on biodiversity and water quality.",
      "C": "An organization evaluates the positive and negative effects of its soil conservation techniques on biodiversity and yield but does not disclose responses to these impacts.",
      "D": "An organization claims a significant improvement in crop yield without specifying which management practice caused the effect or conducting an evaluation post-implementation.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "415-416",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 7.pdf",
    "source_text": "414 Rationale Organizations are encouraged to move towards a more holistic approach regarding their land management actions. This is important due to the complex interrelationships between climate change, deforestation, and water security issues. An understanding of the implications of your management practices on other environmental aspects demonstrates a mature environmental stewardship approach to investors and other data users. Response options Select one of the following options: • Yes • No Requested content General • This question refers to any impacts, other than climate benefits, that may be occurring due to your implementation of any of the agricultural/forestry management practices detailed in 7.67.1. For example, these impacts might refer to negative or positive effects on biodiversity, soil and water quality, or crop yield • You should select “Yes” if you have measured the effects of at least one management practice indicated in 7.67.1 on environmental aspects beyond climate. You will be able to provide details on these effects in the following question • Note that the effects you report should be a result of an evaluation carried out by your organization after the implementation of the practice. Select “No” if you have not carried out an evaluation of the effects of any specific management practice. Tags Authority Type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level CC Questionnaire Sector Question level AC, FB, PF (7.69.1) Provide details on those management practices that have other impacts besides climate change mitigation/adaptation and on your management response. Question details Question dependencies This question only appears if you select “Yes” in response to 7.69. Change from last year No change Rationale This question gathers data on impacts - other climate-related - of management practices implemented in your land. Organizations are encouraged to move towards a more holistic approach regarding their land management actions. This is important due to the complex interrelationships between climate change, deforestation, and water security issues. An understanding of the implications of your management practices on other environmental aspects demonstrates a mature environmental stewardship approach to investors and other data users.\n\n[Page 416]\n415 Response options Please complete the following table. You are able to add rows by using the “Add Row” button at the bottom of the table. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Management practice reference number Overall effect Which of the following has been impacted? Description of impact Have you implemented any response to these impacts? Description of the response Select from: MP1, MP2…MP20 Select from: • Positive • Negative • Neutral • Mixed Select all that apply: • Biodiversity • Soil • Water • Yield • Other, please specify Text field [maximum 2,400 characters] Select from: • Yes • No Text field [maximum 2,400 characters] [Add Row] Requested content General • Identify and explain any impacts that occurred because of any agricultural/forestry management practice implemented in your own land, as reported in 7.67.1. You should not report effects that are climate-related, as these are already captured earlier in your disclosure. Provide effects associated with other environmental issues, e.g. on biodiversity, soils, water. Management practice reference number (column 1) • When referring to a specific management practice or action, please make sure you select the same identifier for this management practice as in 7.67.1. For example, if you would like to disclose other effects of “agroforestry” which you already disclosed in terms of climate-related effects, you should select in this column the same identifier that refers to this practice in in 7.67.1. Overall effect (column 2) • This refers to the overall effect of your management practice on other environmental issues. Which of the following has been impacted? (column 3) • Indicate which environmental issues have been affected by your management practice. Select all options that apply. • If none of the reasons are applicable to your organization, select “Other, please specify” and indicate the additional area(s) that have been impacted by your management practices.",
    "new_id": 222
  },
  {
    "id": 16712,
    "question": "Which statement accurately captures the nuanced distinction between the attributional and consequential approaches to estimating avoided emissions, considering their implications for evaluating low-carbon products, as described in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 7?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The attributional approach compares emissions of a low-carbon product to a reference product, whereas the consequential approach assesses total emissions changes across all activities influenced by the product's introduction.",
      "A": "The attributional approach evaluates system-wide changes in emissions, while the consequential approach focuses solely on comparing life-cycle emissions of specific products.",
      "B": "Both approaches prioritize the baseline scenario as the primary determinant of whether a product qualifies as low-carbon.",
      "D": "The consequential approach is primarily concerned with energy efficiency improvements, while the attributional approach emphasizes the decarbonization of high-emitting industries.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "446",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 7.pdf",
    "source_text": "445 emissions with a zero emissions factor and, providing that the grid average factor is not zero, this would enable that third party to avoid emissions. Explanation of terms • Baseline scenario: A reference case that represents the events or conditions most likely to occur in the absence of the low-carbon product in the consequential approach to estimating avoided emissions. • Reference product: The product against which the low-carbon product is compared in the attributional approach to estimating avoided emissions. • Attributional approach: The most commonly used approach at present to estimate avoided emissions - measures the difference in total life-cycle GHG emissions between the low-carbon product(s) or service(s) and a reference product or service that provides an equivalent function. • Consequential approach: Measures the sum of total, system-wide changes in emissions or removals occurring because of the low-carbon product(s) or service(s) when compared to a baseline (business-as-usual) scenario without the low-carbon product. This approach helps to answer the question “What are the GHG impacts related to the full share of the activities that are expected to change when producing, consuming, and disposing of the product?”. Additional information How do you define a low-carbon product? • Despite the increasing focus from investors on low-carbon products, there remains a level of ambiguity over the definition of what constitutes a ‘low-carbon product’. Instead, there has been a greater focus on the benefits of their creation and use, one of which is aiding in the transition towards a net-zero carbon economy operating within the limits set out by leading climate scientists to ensure that global average temperature increase above pre-industrial level stays below 1.5°C. • Taxonomies, such as the Climate Bonds Taxonomy, are similarly based on this scientific criterion. At this stage, CDP encourages companies to use this criterion when evaluating whether a product is low carbon or not (i.e., companies should evaluate a product or service as low carbon if it is compatible with the level of decarbonization required to keep global temperature increase to 1.5°C compared to pre-industrial temperatures). • Therefore, while CDP encourages the development of common definitions across global markets about what constitutes a ‘low-carbon product’, companies should evaluate their low-carbon products in relation to their contribution to a net-zero carbon economy. Different goods and services will have pertinent characteristics in which they can do this. This can include improving the energy efficiency of certain technologies so that they are consistent with avoiding dangerous climate change or contributing to the decarbonization of high-emitting industries. Tags Authority Type Capital Markets Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level CC Questionnaire Sector Question level All (except FS)",
    "new_id": 223
  },
  {
    "id": 16713,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures a potential limitation in identifying major emission sources, as implied by CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 7?",
    "options": {
      "D": "An organization might fail to identify some significant emission sources due to incomplete knowledge or assumptions about their relative impact.",
      "A": "Organizations may rely on industry-average data for all Scope 3 emissions, which can lead to overestimation.",
      "B": "The exclusion of certain emission sources within organizational boundaries is justified only when they are immaterial to operations.",
      "C": "Emissions from outsourced waste treatment are always excluded because they fall outside operational control.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "134",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 7.pdf",
    "source_text": "133 Major sources of emissions (column 11) • Describe significant sources of emissions for which you have provided a figure. The following list of examples is non-exhaustive: • Scope 1 emissions may be equipment in which fuel is burnt to provide heat (e.g. ovens, driers or kilns); emissions from organization owned or controlled vehicles; emissions from production processes e.g. in cement manufacture; • Scope 2 emissions may include electricity used to power production lines, lighting in offices, electricity for data centers, etc.; and • Scope 3 covers a broader range of possible sources. For example, the “Scope 3, Business travel” category would include air travel for organization employees; the “Scope 3, Capital goods” category would include the manufacture of steel to make heavy machinery or infrastructure; and the “Scope 3, Waste generated in operations category” would include emissions from out-sourced treatment of organic waste. Please explain how you have identified the GHG source, including major limitations to this process and assumptions made (column 13) • Organizations often have many different sources of emissions and this question seeks to understand how you have selected major emission sources. • The GHG Protocol Corporate Standard states organization should report on all emissions within their chosen organizational boundary. This defines the sources of emissions on which you are going to report. There are three options: sources in which the organization has an equity share; sources over which the organization has financial control; sources over which the company has operational control. If you exclude any sources within the boundary, you are asked to disclose and justify those exclusions. • However, it may be that you have been limited by your knowledge of potential emission sources or made assumptions about which sources were the largest. Or alternatively, that certain sources do not play a role for the specific products your customers are purchasing from you. Please explain the thinking behind your selection including the difficulties that you encountered. Where published information has been used, please provide a reference (column 14) • To allocate emissions to your customer you may have used your own (primary) data in answering this question. Alternatively, you may have relied on publications that give industry-average (secondary) data for particular materials or processes or you may have used a mixture of both. In order to make the origin of the data clear, provide references where published information has been used, as well as flag where they have been used. Additional information For further information on allocation methods and dividing emissions of different goods and services between your respective customers, see Chapter 8 (page 86) of the GHG Protocol Corporate Value Chain (Scope 3) Accounting and Reporting Standard. Tags Authority type Supply Chain Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level CC Questionnaire Sector Question level All",
    "new_id": 224
  },
  {
    "id": 16714,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes the rationale behind allowing abbreviated statements for third-party verification or assurance as outlined in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 7?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Abbreviated statements are allowed when confidential information is included, provided they still confirm the specific data points relevant to emissions reporting.",
      "B": "Abbreviated statements are permitted to reduce administrative burdens on companies seeking verification for all Scope 3 categories.",
      "C": "Abbreviated statements serve as a temporary measure until full verification can be completed within triennial cycles.",
      "D": "Abbreviated statements are accepted only for biennial or triennial verification processes and must cover all prior reporting years comprehensively.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "57-58",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 7.pdf",
    "source_text": "56 and distribution • Scope 3: Processing of sold products • Scope 3: Use of sold products • Scope 3: End-of-life treatment of sold products • Scope 3: Downstream leased assets • Scope 3: Franchises [Add row] Relevant standard drop-down options: • AA1000AS • ABNT NBR ISO 14064-3:2007 (Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas) • Advanced technologies promotion Subsidy Scheme with Emission reduction Target (ASSET) • Airport Carbon Accreditation (ACA) des Airports Council International Europe • Alberta Technology Innovation and Emissions Reduction (TIER) • ASAE3000 • Attestation standards established by AICPA (AT105) • Australian National GHG emission regulation (NGER) • California Mandatory GHG Reporting Regulations (CARB) • Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants (CICA) Handbook: Assurance Section 5025 • Carbon Trust Standard • Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) verification standard • The Climate Registry's General Verification Protocol (also known as California Climate Action Registry (CCAR)) • Compagnie Nationale des Commissaires aux Comptes (CNCC) • Corporate GHG verification guidelines from ERT • DNV VeriSustain Protocol/ Verification Protocol for Sustainability Reporting • Dutch Standard 3000A • Earthcheck Certification • ERM GHG Performance Data Assurance Methodology • European Union Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) • IDW PS 821: IDW Prüfungsstandard: Grundsätze ordnungsmäßiger Prüfung oder prüferischer Durchsicht von Berichtenim Bereich der Nachhaltigkeit • IDW AsS 821: IDW Assurance Standard: Generally Accepted Assurance Principles for the Audit or Review of Reports on Sustainability Issues • ISAE3000 • ISAE 3410 • ISO14064-1 • ISO14064-3 • Japan voluntary emissions trading scheme (JVETS) guideline for verification • Korean GHG and energy target management system • NMX-SAA-14064-3-IMNC: Instituto Mexicano de Normalización y Certificación A.C • RevR6 procedure for assurance of sustainability report • Saitama Prefecture Target-Setting Emissions Trading Program • SGS Sustainability Report Assurance • Spanish Institute of Registered Auditors (ICJCE)\n\n[Page 58]\n57 • SSAE 3000 • Standard 3810N Assurance engagements relating to sustainability reports of the Royal Netherlands Institute of Registered Accountants • State of Israel Ministry of Environmental Protection, Verification of GHG and emissions reduction in Israel Guidance Document • Swiss Climate CO2 Label for Businesses • Thai Greenhouse Gas Management Organisation (TGO) Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Verification Protocol • Toitū Envirocare’s carbonreduce certification standard • Tokyo Emissions Trading Scheme • Other, please specify Requested content General • If you are reporting third party verification or assurance underway, your entries into the table should reflect the emissions that are being subject to verification/assurance for the current reporting year, with the exception of the attached statement, which will relate to a previous year. • CDP understands that you may seek verification for reasons other than reporting to CDP and that confidential information may be included within your detailed verification statement. In this case, it is sufficient for your verifier/assurer to attest to the Scope and level of assurance/verification through correspondence such as an abbreviated statement as long as this covers the data points outlined below (see guidance for column 5 Attach your statement here’). Scope 3 category (column 1) • Select the Scope 3 categories your verification/assurance statement covers. • For more information on Scope 3 categories, refer to the Greenhouse Gas Protocol’s Corporate Value Chain (Scope 3) Accounting and Reporting Standard. Verification or assurance cycle in place (column 2) • A biennial verification/assurance process is where Scope 3 emissions are verified once every two years and triennial verification/assurance process where Scope 3 emissions are verified once every three years. • You may refer to the further information in 7.9on annual, biennial and triennial processes for further information on annual, biennial and triennial processes. Status in the current reporting year (column 3) • Please select the option most appropriate to your company Type of verification or assurance (column 4) • This column relates to the type of verification or assurance that has been awarded.",
    "new_id": 225
  },
  {
    "id": 16715,
    "question": "Which of the following represents a necessary condition for conducting an effective life cycle emissions assessment in new construction or major renovation projects, according to the rationale provided in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 7?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Both operational and embodied emissions must be evaluated to understand total carbon impact.",
      "A": "Assessments must always occur during the operation phase to ensure accuracy.",
      "C": "Projects should only be assessed if they meet specific predetermined criteria set by external bodies.",
      "D": "The use of standardized tools such as EN 15978 is optional but recommended for comprehensive analysis.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "426",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 7.pdf",
    "source_text": "425 (7.72.1) Provide details of how your organization assesses the life cycle emissions of new construction or major renovation projects. Question details Question dependencies This question only appears if you select “Yes, quantitative assessment”, “Yes, qualitative assessment”, or “Yes, both qualitative and quantitative assessment” in response to 7.72. Change from last year No change Rationale To acquire an overall understanding of a built project’s total carbon impact, it is necessary to assess both the anticipated operational emissions and the embodied emissions. Low-carbon design practices, especially those targeting embodied carbon, are most efficient as well as most cost-effective in the early phases of a project. This question provides data users with information on how early in a project you normally assess carbon emissions, as well as life cycle stages and methodologies most commonly applied. Response options Please complete the following table: 1 2 3 4 5 Projects assessed Earliest project phase that most commonly includes an assessment Life cycle stage(s) most commonly covered Methodologies/standards/tools applied Comment Select from: • All new construction and major renovation projects • New construction and major renovation projects meeting certain criteria (please specify) • On a case by case basis Select from: • Pre-design phase • Design phase • Construction • Operation Select from: • Cradle-to-gate • Cradle-to-practical completion/handover • Use stage • End-of-life stage • Cradle-to-grave • Whole life • Other, please specify Select all that apply: • BBCA Label (Bâtiment Bas Carbone) • E+C- Label (Énergie Positive & Réduction Carbone) • Embodied Carbon in Construction Calculator (EC3) Tool • EN 15978 • EN 15804 • GHG Protocol - Product Life Cycle Accounting and Reporting Standard • ISO 14040/44 • ISO 14025 • One Click LCA • The Carbon Smart Materials Palette® • Whole life carbon assessment for the built environment (RICS) • Other, please specify Text field [maximum 2,400 characters] [Fixed row] Requested content General",
    "new_id": 226
  },
  {
    "id": 16716,
    "question": "If an organization selects 'Unit of production' in column 2 for reporting emissions, which combination of responses would lead to the appearance of column 4 while ensuring compliance with GHG emissions data calculation encouragement as described in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 7?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The organization selects 'Yes' in column 1 and provides a unit of production denominator in column 4.",
      "A": "The organization selects 'Yes' in column 1 and specifies 'Metric tons' in column 3.",
      "B": "The organization selects 'No, but we intend to calculate this data within the next two years' in column 1 and provides a numerical value in column 3.",
      "D": "The organization selects 'No, and we do not intend to calculate this data within the next two years' in column 1 and specifies 'Liters' in column 4.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "78",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 7.pdf",
    "source_text": "77 Fixed rows based on selection of commodities in 1.23 Select from: • Yes • No, but we intend to calculate this data within the next two years • No, and we do not intend to calculate this data within the next two years Select from: • Total • Unit of production Numerical field [enter a number from 0-999,999,999,999 using a maximum of 10 decimal places] Select from: • Kilograms • Liters • Metric tons • Unit of product • Unit of revenue • Other, please specify Select from: • This is our first year of measurement • Much lower • Lower • About the same • Higher • Much higher Text field [maximum 2,000 characters] Text field [maximum 2,000 characters] [Fixed row] Requested content General • Organizations are encouraged to calculate GHG emissions data for all agricultural commodities specified as significant to their business in terms of revenue. Agricultural commodities (column 0) • Note that only those agricultural commodities that you indicated are significant in terms of revenue in 1.22 or 1.23 will appear in the list. Reporting emissions by (column 2) • This column is only presented if you select “Yes” in column 1 “GHG emissions calculated for this commodity”. • Organizations are encouraged to report the agricultural commodity associated emissions per unit of production, e.g. CO2e/kg of product. However, if you are unable to provide this, you may report your emissions as an absolute figure by selecting “Total”. Emissions (metric tons CO2e) (column 3) • This column is only presented if you select “Yes” in column 1 “GHG emissions calculated for this commodity”. • This figure should be representative of your reporting year, boundaries for data collection/calculation as indicated in column 3 “Reporting emissions by” and expressed in metric tons. Denominator: unit of production (column 4) • This column will appear only if you select “Unit of production” in column 2 “Reporting emissions by”. Change from last reporting year (column 5) • This column is only presented if you select “Yes” in column 1 “GHG emissions calculated for this commodity”. Please explain (column 6)",
    "new_id": 227
  },
  {
    "id": 16717,
    "question": "Which of the following scenarios would most likely render a company's reported science-based target invalid under the provided framework outlined in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 7?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The company reports a target covering Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions while omitting Scope 3 emissions that constitute a majority of its total greenhouse gas emissions.",
      "A": "The company commits to seek validation by the Science Based Targets initiative but does not specify whether its target aligns with 1.5°C, well-below 2°C, or 2°C thresholds.",
      "B": "The company sets a base year for emissions prior to January 1, 1900, despite having accurate data available for later years.",
      "C": "The company includes all relevant greenhouse gases in its target but uses commas in numerical fields where decimals are required.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "289-290",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 7.pdf",
    "source_text": "288 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Target reference number Is this a science-based target? Science Based Targets initiative official validation letter Target ambition Date target was set Target coverage Greenhouse gases covered by target Abs1-Abs100 Select from: • Yes, and this target has been approved by the Science Based Targets initiative • Yes, we consider this a science-based target, and the target is currently being reviewed by the Science Based Targets initiative • Yes, we consider this a science-based target, and we have committed to seek validation of this target by the Science Based Targets initiative in the next two years • Yes, we consider this a science-based target, but we have not committed to seek validation of this target by the Science Based Targets initiative within the next two years • No, but we are reporting another target that is science-based • No, but we anticipate setting one in the next two years • No, and we do not anticipate setting one in the next two years [Attachment(s)] Select from: • 1.5°C aligned • Well-below 2°C aligned • 2°C aligned • Other, please specify [DD/MM/YYYY] between 01/01/1900 and 19/11/2025 Select from: • Organization-wide • Business division • Business activity • Site/facility • Country/area/region • Product-level • Other, please specify Select all that apply: • Carbon dioxide (CO2) • Methane (CH4) • Nitrous oxide (N2O) • Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) • Perfluorocarbons (PFCs) • Sulphur hexafluoride (SF6) • Nitrogen trifluoride (NF3) 8 9 10 11 12 13 14-30 Scopes Scope 2 accounting method Scope 3 categories End date of base year Base year Scope 1 emissions covered by target (metric tons CO2e) Base year Scope 2 emissions covered by target (metric tons CO2e) Base year Scope 3, Category […] emissions covered by target (metric tons CO2e) [One column for each Scope 3 category] Select all that apply: Select from: Select all that apply: • Category 1: Purchased goods and services [DD/MM/YYYY] between Numerical field [enter a number from 0-999,999,999,999 using a Numerical field [enter a number from 0-999,999,999,999 using a Numerical field [enter a number from 0-999,999,999,999 using a\n\n[Page 290]\n289 • Scope 1 • Scope 2 • Scope 3 • Location-based • Market-based • Category 2: Capital goods • Category 3: Fuel-and-energy-related activities (not included in Scopes 1 or 2) • Category 4: Upstream transportation and distribution • Category 5: Waste generated in operations • Category 6: Business travel • Category 7: Employee commuting • Category 8: Upstream leased assets • Category 9: Downstream transportation and distribution • Category 10: Processing of sold products • Category 11: Use of sold products • Category 12: End-of-life treatment of sold products • Category 13: Downstream leased assets • Category 14: Franchises • Category 15: Investments [does not appear to FS] • Other (upstream) • Other (downstream) 01/01/1900 and 19/11/2025 maximum of 3 decimal places and no commas] maximum of 3 decimal places and no commas] maximum of 3 decimal places and no commas] 31 32 33 34 35-51 52 53 Base year total Scope 3 emissions covered by target (metric tons CO2e) Total base year emissions covered by target in all selected Scopes (metric tons CO2e) Base year Scope 1 emissions covered by target as % of total base year emissions in Scope 1 Base year Scope 2 emissions covered by target as % of total base year emissions in Scope 2 Base year Scope 3, Category […] emissions covered by target as % of total base year emissions in Scope 3, Category […] (metric Base year total Scope 3 emissions covered by target as % of total base year emissions in Scope Base year emissions covered by target in all selected Scopes as % of total base year",
    "new_id": 228
  },
  {
    "id": 16718,
    "question": "Which scenario would most likely lead to a discrepancy between the emissions figures reported in question 7.7 and those reported here, assuming all guidance is followed, according to CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 7?",
    "options": {
      "A": "An organization with activities across multiple sectors excludes emissions from business divisions unrelated to the presented high-intensity sector.",
      "B": "An organization operating solely within one sector includes emissions from electricity imported from an entity outside its sector boundary but owned by the wider organization.",
      "C": "An organization reports net instead of gross emissions, resulting in negative numbers being reflected in their submission.",
      "D": "An organization mistakenly includes methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions as part of Scope 1 rather than incorporating them into Scope 2 emission factor calculations.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "117",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 7.pdf",
    "source_text": "116 Chemicals production activities Coal production activities Metals and mining production activities Oil and gas production activities (upstream) Oil and gas production activities (midstream) Oil and gas production activities (downstream) Steel production activities Transport OEM activities Transport Services activities [Fixed row] Requested content General • This question requests gross global Scope 2 emissions (location- and market-based) by sector production activity, i.e. aggregated across all business divisions and/or facilities. • This question is based on question 7.7but is sector specific. Emissions deriving from the generation of electricity, steam, heat, and cooling that is purchased or acquired for consumption outside of your presented sector, should not be reported here. See the guidance in 7.19 for sector boundary definition. • If your organization only operates within the presented sector, then the emissions figures you report here are still likely to be lower than the figures you reported in 7.7. This is because for this question CDP encourages you to exclude activities that are not dependent on being in the presented high-intensity sector. The purpose is to improve the consistency and accuracy of sector emissions reporting. • If your organization operates in or owns assets across multiple sectors, then you should report emissions only for the presented sectors business division(s). Therefore, the figures you report here should be lower than the figures you reported in 7.7. • If your organization is active across multiple high intensity sectors, complete this table as it is presented. • Emissions must be reported in gross, not net figures. Therefore, negative numbers are not allowed. • Emission figures should be for the reporting year only (as defined by your answer to 1.4). • If your organization imports electricity, steam, heat or cooling from an entity which is outside the sector boundary, but is nonetheless owned by the wider organization, then you should count for this here as a Scope 2 emission. Because the emissions occur outside of your Scope 1 boundary, they are Scope 2 emissions. • Emissions estimates are acceptable, as long as there is transparency with regards to the estimation approach (what is estimated and how) and the data used for the analysis is adequate to support the objectives of the inventory. • For more information on how to report Scope 2 emissions, see the Technical Note on “Accounting of Scope 2 emissions”, where you can find guidance on emission factors and the types that can be applied. Please also note that CH4 and N2O from electricity production should be included in the emissions factor calculation. • For further information, see GHG Protocol Scope 2 Guidance. • When accounting for your Scope 2 emissions, and should you need more information than provided in this guidance, you may want to consult your electricity suppliers, carbon advisor or verifier/assurer.",
    "new_id": 229
  },
  {
    "id": 16719,
    "question": "Which of the following most accurately reflects the conditions under which products from different locations can be differentiated in terms of their greenhouse gas footprints, as outlined in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 7?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Differentiation is permissible unless it is prohibited by the specific product footprinting methodology applied.",
      "A": "Products can always be differentiated based on location, as local fuel types and electricity generation methods inherently lead to different footprints.",
      "C": "Differentiation is only allowed if explicitly prohibited by the product footprinting methodology being used.",
      "D": "Products cannot be differentiated by location since doing so would violate standardized reporting requirements.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "437",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 7.pdf",
    "source_text": "436 999,999,999,999 using a maximum of 2 decimal places] 1000 using a maximum of 10 decimal places] • Bilan Carbone • French Product Environmental Footprint • Greenhouse Gas Accounting Questionnaire Sector Guidance for Pharmaceutical Products and Medical Devices • GHG Protocol Product Accounting & Reporting Standard • ISO 14040 & 14044 • ISO 14025 • EU Product Environmental Footprint (EUPEF) • PAS 2050 • WBCSD Life Cycle Metrics for Chemical Products • Other, please specify [Add row] Requested content General • Disclosers must check that the requesting members presented in this table are correct for their organization for the reporting period. Requesting member (column 1) • Note that only the requesting member you select in this column will be able to see the data relevant to them. If you enter any information without selecting a requesting member here, your answer will not be viewable at all. • Add a row for each product or service supplied to each requesting member that you are able to provide data for. Name of good/service (column 2) • Please provide the name of the product you will be providing data for. Description of good/service (column 3) • Please describe the good or service for which you are supplying product lifecycle GHG data. This may be a good such as a “180-gram tube of toothpaste in a cardboard package” or a service such as the “design of a color A5 advertising flyer.” This will be referred to as “a unit” in column 5 of 7.73.3. • Products from different locations may have markedly different footprints due to local circumstances, such as the use of different types of fuel or different generation methods used to create electricity for the grid. As long as it is not prohibited under the product footprinting methodology that you use, then you can differentiate between products made at different locations. You should however:",
    "new_id": 230
  },
  {
    "id": 16720,
    "question": "Which of the following most accurately reflects a necessary condition for an organization to claim that its management practices mitigate climate change effects as described in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 7?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The organization must provide a detailed description of methods used, including why the practice was chosen and how it improves business resilience.",
      "A": "The practice must be applicable company-wide and not limited to selected regions or facilities.",
      "B": "The practice must result in measurable CO2e savings within the first year of implementation.",
      "D": "The organization must use tools like the Cool Farm Tool to quantify emissions reductions across all implemented practices.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "406-407",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 7.pdf",
    "source_text": "405 • Land use change • Low carbon energy use • Low tillage and residue management • Livestock management • Manure management • Nitrogen-fixing plants as cover crop • Organic farming • Practices to increase wood production and forest productivity • Permanent soil cover (including cover crops) • Pest, disease and weed management practices • Reducing energy use • Reforestation • Restoration • Replacing fossil fuels by renewable energy sources • Restoration of degraded lands and cultivated organic soils • Rice management • Seed variety selection • Selective logging • Selecting species to maximize carbon capture • Species introduction • Timing of farm operations • Waste management • Other, please specify [Add Row] Requested content General • If your organization undertakes many actions, please prioritize those that have had or/is expected to have the greatest benefit to your business (e.g. in reducing CO2e emissions, saving costs, increasing productivity). Management practice reference number (column 1) • Select an identifier for each of your management practices. This reference number shall be used to track progress on your specific project in the following years. • You may report up to 20 management practices Management practice (column 2) • Select the option that best describes the management practice adopted by your organization. • If none of the options are applicable to your organization, select ‘Other, please specify’ and indicate the management practice that you have undertaken. If you need more than 40 characters, please use column 3 (Description of…)\n\n[Page 407]\n406 Description of management practice (column 3) • Provide a brief company-specific description of your practice, including the methods and tools used to implement it • Indicate which parts of your business the management practice is applicable (e.g. company-wide, selected facilities or regions). • Provide an explanation as to why you have chosen this practice and how you expect this to mitigate climate change effects and improve your business resilience • Specify a timeframe for which you expect to receive benefits from the implementation of this practice Primary climate change related benefit (column 4) • Select the primary benefit (or expected benefit) provided by your action • If none of the options are applicable to your organization, select ‘Other, please specify’ and indicate the primary climate change related benefit you expect to experience Estimated CO2e savings (metric tons CO2e) (column 5) • Provide an estimated CO2e savings figure associated with the action you selected in column 2 (Management practice). This should reflect the total CO2e in metric tons that has been saved (or is expected to be saved) due to the specific implemented practice Please explain (column 6) • Specify and provide a description of the methods and tools used to calculate your figure reported in column 5, and indicate any exclusions Example response See example below, for guidance purposes only: Management practice reference number Management practice Description of management practice Primary climate change-related benefit Estimated CO2e savings (metric tons CO2e) Please explain MP1 Permanent soil cover (including cover crops) We adopted cover crops for all our farms in Argentina, Uruguay and Brazil (85% of our direct operations). We have implemented cover-cropping practices because it reduces soil exposure/erosion, increases soil organic matter content, improves water retention, soil structure and overall soil health. Benefits are already expected after the first year, in our case the coming reporting year. Emissions reductions (mitigation) 287 We quantified the benefits of reducing our GHG emissions using the Cool Farm Tool and included in the assessment all our farms where we currently use cover crops. Results: 1437 kg CO2e per hectare per year reduction in GHG emissions. As we manage 200 hectares, we expect a total emissions reduction per year of 287 tCO2e.",
    "new_id": 231
  },
  {
    "id": 16721,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why organizations are instructed to report gross figures for Scope 2 emissions rather than net figures, as outlined in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 7?",
    "options": {
      "D": "To ensure that emissions data reflects the total operational impact without adjustments for offsets or renewable energy credits.",
      "A": "To align with regulatory requirements that mandate the inclusion of all indirect emissions in financial reporting.",
      "B": "To simplify the calculation process by avoiding the need to account for negative emissions from carbon capture technologies.",
      "C": "To provide a standardized method for comparing emissions across industries, regardless of their use of renewable energy.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "115-116",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 7.pdf",
    "source_text": "114 • Report your organization’s Scope 2 emissions in CO2e for the facility identified in column 1, on a market-based method, i.e. reflecting emissions from electricity that companies have purposefully chosen (or their lack of choice). • Negative numbers are not allowed as organizations are to report gross, not net figures. • Emissions figures should be for the reporting year only (as defined by your answer to 1.4). Tags Authority type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level CC Questionnaire Sector Question level All except FS and EU (7.20.3) Break down your total gross global Scope 2 emissions by business activity. Question details Question dependencies This question only appears if you select “By activity” in response to 7.20. Change from last year Minor change Rationale Reporting emissions by activity allows a more in-depth understanding of business risks related to future regulation and climate-related issues, and allows organizations to identify potential opportunities to reduce emissions associated with operational activities. Response options Please complete the following table. 1 2 3 Activity Scope 2, location-based (metric tons CO2e) Scope 2, market-based (metric tons CO2e) Text field [maximum 500 characters] Numerical field [enter a number from 0-99,999,999,999 using a maximum of 3 decimal places and no commas] Numerical field [enter a number from 0-99,999,999,999 using a maximum of 3 decimal places and no commas]. [Add row] Requested content Activity (column 1) • Using no more than 500 characters, disclose the activity you are disclosing Scope 2 emissions for. Scope 2, location-based (metric tons CO2e) (column 2) • Report your organization’s Scope 2 emissions in CO2e for the activity reported in column 1, on a location-based method, i.e. reflecting the average emissions intensity of grids on which energy consumption occurs. • Negative numbers are not allowed as organizations are to report gross, not net figures. • Emissions figures should be for the reporting year only (as defined by your answer to 1.4).\n\n[Page 116]\n115 Scope 2, market-based (metric tons CO2e) (column 3) • This column only appears if you select “We are reporting a Scope 2, market-based figure” in column “Scope 2, market-based” of 7.3. • Report your organization’s Scope 2 emissions in CO2e for the activity reported in column 1, on a market-based method, i.e. reflecting emissions from electricity that companies have purposefully chosen (or their lack of choice). • Negative numbers are not allowed as organizations are to report gross, not net figures. • Emissions figures should be for the reporting year only (as defined by your answer to 1.4). Requested content – [sector] (if applicable) Note for agricultural sectors • You should provide Scope 2 emissions data pertaining to all your relevant business activity areas (i.e., agriculture/forestry, processing/manufacturing, and/or distribution), as indicated in 1.11. Note for organizations responding to high-impact sector requests • If your company’s primary CDP sector is one of the following: OG, CO,TO, TS, MM, ST, CH or CE, the response to 7.20.3 is not required. Organizations responding to these requests are presented with additional questions on this topic (7.21,, 7.42, 7.42.1) relating specifically to activities in the sector. Your primary CDP sector is displayed in your response dashboard. Tags Authority type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level CC Questionnaire Sector Question level All except FS and EU (7.21) Break down your organization’s total gross global Scope 2 emissions by sector production activity in metric tons CO2e. Question details Change from last year Modified question Rationale Reporting emissions by activity allows a more in-depth understanding of business risks related to future regulation and climate-related issues, and allows organizations to identify potential opportunities to reduce emissions associated with operational activities. 1 2 3 4 Sector production activity Scope 2, location-based, metric tons CO2e Scope 2, market-based (if applicable), metric tons CO2e Comment Cement production activities Numerical field [enter a number from 0-99,999,999 using a maximum of 3 decimal places] Numerical field [enter a number from 0-99,999,999 using a maximum of 3 decimal places] Text field [maximum 2,400 characters]",
    "new_id": 232
  },
  {
    "id": 16722,
    "question": "Which scenario best illustrates a company incorrectly claiming revenue from low-carbon products based on the definitions and guidance provided in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 7?",
    "options": {
      "A": "A company attributes revenue from a product made with virgin materials to its low-carbon portfolio because the baseline scenario indicates potential future emission reductions.",
      "B": "A company calculates revenue from a product line using recycled materials but excludes deductions for sales returns and discounts as required by financial reporting standards.",
      "C": "A company includes revenue from a product that reduces emissions during the use stage but does not account for its higher cradle-to-gate emissions compared to the reference product.",
      "D": "A company reports revenue from a service that supports recycling efforts without assessing whether it qualifies as a low-carbon product under the attributional approach.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "455",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 7.pdf",
    "source_text": "454 Revenue generated from low-carbon product(s) or service(s) as % of total revenue in the reporting year (column 13) • State the revenue generated from the low-carbon product(s) or service(s) described in column 4 as a percentage of your organization’s total revenue in the reporting year. • Enter the figure for ‘revenue’ as would be declared in your financial statement (sometimes referred to a ‘turnover’ or ‘sales’). Under the International Financial Reporting Standard this would be the inflow of income arising in the course of an entity’s ordinary activities, with deductions made (such as for sales returns, allowances and discounts). This figure is commonly used by investors to assess the income-generating ability of a business. Explanation of terms • Baseline scenario: A reference case that represents the events or conditions most likely to occur in the absence of the low-carbon product in the consequential approach to estimating avoided emissions. • Reference product: The product against which the low-carbon product is compared in the attributional approach to estimating avoided emissions. • Gate-to-gate: The emissions and removals attributed to a studied product while it is under the ownership or control of the reporting company. • Cradle-to-gate: A partial life cycle assessment from material acquisition (cradle) through to when the product leaves the reporting company’s gate (i.e. immediately following the product’s production). Includes the material acquisition & pre-processing stage and the production stage. • Cradle-to-grave: A full life cycle assessment of emissions and removals attributed to a studied product from material acquisition through to the material or product end-of-life (grave). Includes the material acquisition & pre-processing stage, production stage, use stage and end-of-life stage. • Cradle-to-cradle/closed loop production: A full life cycle assessment from material acquisition though to end-of-life material or product recycling (i.e. cradle-to-grave + recycling). • Life cycle stages (in line with the GHG Protocol Product Life Cycle Accounting and Reporting Standard): o Material acquisition & pre-processing stage: A life cycle stage that begins when resources are extracted from nature and ends when the product components enter the gate of the studied product’s production facility. o Production stage: A life cycle stage that begins when the product components enter the production site for the studied product and ends when the finished studied product leaves the production gate. o Use stage: A life cycle stage that begins when the consumer takes possession of the product and ends when the used product is discarded. o End-of-life stage: A life cycle stage that begins when the used product is discarded by the consumer and ends when the product is returned to nature (e.g. incinerated) or allocated to another product’s life cycle. Example response See below Worked examples of low-carbon products Example 1: Company A is a paper production company. It has a range of products that can be classified as low-carbon as these products are made from recycled material so have comparatively lower emissions than paper made from virgin material.",
    "new_id": 233
  },
  {
    "id": 17412,
    "question": "Which of the following scenarios would NOT require reporting as a water discharge according to the ultimate destination of the treated wastewater within an organization's direct operations, as outlined in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 8-13?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Untreated wastewater discharged directly to a third-party utility within the organization’s reporting boundary.",
      "A": "Treated wastewater released into a river after meeting acceptable quality standards for domestic use.",
      "C": "Wastewater transferred to a municipal plant outside the organization’s reporting boundary for further treatment.",
      "D": "On-site treated wastewater infiltrating groundwater through a soakaway system.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "195",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 8-13.pdf",
    "source_text": "194 Explanation of terms • Brackish surface water/seawater: Surface water in which the concentration of salts is high and far exceeds normally acceptable standards for municipal, domestic or irrigation use (at least higher than 10,000 mg/l TDS). Seawater has a typical concentration of salts above 35,000 mg/l TDS. • Fresh surface water, including wetlands, rivers and lakes: Water that is naturally occurring water on the Earth's surface and has a low concentration of dissolved solids. For the purposes of reporting water accounting data to CDP, this surface water source includes water of a quality generally acceptable for, or requiring minimal treatment to be acceptable for, domestic, municipal or agricultural uses (at least <10,000 mg/l TDS, though a range of additional quality properties may also be considered). “High quality” fresh water sources considered acceptable for potable use are typically characterized as having concentrations of dissolved solids less than 1,000 mg/l. • Discharges to groundwater: Discharge to groundwater, by human activity or natural activity, refers to a destination beneath the soil surface, such as a water bearing layer of rock (aquifer). Examples of discharges to groundwater include disposal of sewage, trade effluent and surface water run-off from urban areas, through such methods as spreading basins, soakaways, swales or injection wells. • Third-party destinations: This includes municipal wastewater plants, public or private utilities, and other organizations involved in the transport, treatment, disposal or further use of wastewater. • Note that to qualify as a third-party destination, “other organizations” using your wastewater must be outside your reporting boundary given in question 1.5. • Any of your wastewater that has been treated on your own site should be reported as discharge according to its ultimate destination (for example, to groundwater), as this is where any potential risks for the company lie. Water discharge: The sum of effluents and other water leaving the boundaries of the organization (or facility) and released to surface water, groundwater, or third parties over the course of the reporting period (adapted from GRI Standard 306-1, 2016). Tags Authority Type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level W only Questionnaire Sector Question level All (except FS) Discharges by level(s) of treatment (9.2.9) Within your direct operations, indicate the highest level(s) to which you treat your discharge. Question details Question dependencies This question only appears if you indicate in 9.2 that you monitor the following water aspect(s): • Water discharges – volumes by treatment method Change from last year No change",
    "new_id": 234
  },
  {
    "id": 17417,
    "question": "Under which condition would an organization be most justified in excluding data related to water aspects from its disclosure, based on the provided rationale and response options, as outlined in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 8-13?",
    "options": {
      "C": "When the exclusion involves facilities recently acquired through a merger, and incorporation into reporting will occur next year.",
      "A": "When the exclusion represents less than 1% of total water volume and is located in a region with low water stress.",
      "B": "When the data pertains to shared premises where collection challenges exist but could reasonably be addressed within two years.",
      "D": "When internal resources are deemed insufficient due to organizational size, despite the excluded data being judged as relevant.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "145-146",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 8-13.pdf",
    "source_text": "144 For further information on allowable exclusions, please refer to the GHG Protocol and the CDP Water Security Scoring Methodology. Tags Authority Type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level W only Questionnaire Sector Question level All (except FS) (9.1.1) Provide details on these exclusions. Question details Question dependencies This question only appears if you select “Yes” in response to 9.1. Change from last year Modified guidance Rationale An organization’s disclosure must be comprehensive and representative to ensure data user confidence in the information reported. As such, organizations are encouraged to report on any exclusions to their disclosure including any geographies, facilities, and other water aspects Ambition The organization reports on all exclusions from the reporting boundary and does not have any significant exclusions from their disclosure. Response options Please complete the following table. You are able to add rows by using the “Add Row” button at the bottom of the table 1 2 3 4 Exclusion Description of exclusion Reason for exclusion Primary reason why data is not available Select from: • Business activities • Country/geographical area • Facilities • Specific groups, businesses, or organizations • Water aspects • Other, please specify Text field [maximum 1,500 characters] Select from: • Data is not available • Divestiture • Recent acquisition or merger • Small volume [rainwater] • Shared premises • Water used for internal WASH services • Water supply network • Other, please specify Select from: • Challenges associated with data collection and/or quality • Data collection is in progress • Judged to be unimportant or not relevant • Lack of internal resources capabilities\n\n[Page 146]\n145 or expertise (e.g., due to organization size) • No standardized procedure for collecting data • Not an immediate strategic priority • We are planning to collect the data within the next two years • Other, please specify 5 6 7 8 Completion date of acquisition or merger Data from the merger/acquisition will be incorporated in the next reporting year Percentage of water volume the exclusion represents Please explain [DD/MM/YYYY] Select from: • Yes • No Select from: • Less than 1% • 1-5% • 6-10% • 11-20% • 21-30% • 31-40% • 41-50% • 51-60% • 61-70% • 71-80% • 81-90% • 91-99% • 100% • Unknown Text field [maximum 1,500 characters] [Add row] Requested content General • Organizations should report on all exclusions. Any environmental performance data relating to groups, companies, businesses or organizations that is relevant for your organization to disclose under your chosen consolidation approach, as indicated in 6.1, but not included in your disclosure of water related data should be disclosed here. • The significance of an exclusion will depend on factors such as the sector and related business activities of the company; the geographical location, including if the exclusion represents operations in a specific place (as well as the watershed context of that location, such as whether it is under high levels of water stress); and the environmental impact of the exclusion relative to the whole. The qualitative information provided should address the above points as much as possible. • If your organization has multiple exclusions, add a row for each. Exclusion (column 1)",
    "new_id": 235
  },
  {
    "id": 17419,
    "question": "Which of the following represents a scenario where an organization's response would *not* align with the guidance provided for reporting plastics-related targets, as described in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 8-13?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The organization provides details about a target to increase the proportion of post-consumer recycled content in plastic packaging while omitting active targets achieved during the reporting year.",
      "A": "The organization reports a target to reduce total weight of virgin content in plastic polymers produced but does not specify whether it plans to achieve this within two years.",
      "B": "The organization includes a target to eliminate single-use plastic products and specifies that this target is planned but not yet active or achieved during the reporting year.",
      "C": "The organization reports only on a previously achieved target to reduce microplastic emissions without including any active targets for the current reporting period.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "271-272",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 8-13.pdf",
    "source_text": "270 Targets (10.1) Do you have plastics-related targets, and if so what type? Question details Question dependencies This question only appears if you select “Yes…” in response to column “Plastics mapping” of 1.24.1. Change from last year Modified guidance Rationale Organizations need to set and progress targets that address their plastics-related dependencies, impacts, risks, and opportunities. This question allows organizations to demonstrate to data users their commitment to reduce plastic usage, reduce or eliminate virgin content in plastics, eliminate problematic and unnecessary plastics, transition to reuse systems, reduce microplastic emissions, and increase circularity. Ambition • Organizations set and take action towards timebound, measurable plastics-related targets. Response options Please complete the following table: 1 2 3 Targets in place Target type and metric Please explain Select from: • Yes • No, but we plan to within the next two years • No, and we do not plan to within the next two years Grouped option (multi-select group; multi-select option) from dropdown list below: Text field [maximum 5,000 characters] [Fixed row] Target type and metric (column 2) Plastic polymers • Reduce the total weight of virgin content in plastic polymers produced and/or sold • Increase the proportion of post-consumer recycled content in plastic polymers produced and/or sold • Reduce or eliminate the use of hazardous substances • Reduce the use of polymers with properties that may hinder their reusability, recyclability and disposal • Other plastic polymers target, please specify Plastic packaging • Reduce the total weight of plastic packaging used and/or produced • Eliminate problematic and unnecessary plastic packaging • Eliminate single-use plastic packaging • Reduce the total weight of virgin content in plastic packaging • Increase the proportion of post-consumer recycled content in plastic packaging • Increase the proportion of renewable content from responsibly managed sources in plastic packaging\n\n[Page 272]\n271 • Increase the proportion of plastic packaging that is recyclable in practice and at scale • Increase the proportion of plastic packaging that is reusable • Increase the proportion of plastic packaging that is compostable • Reduce or eliminate the use of hazardous substances • Other plastic packaging target, please specify Plastic goods/products • Eliminate single-use plastic products • Reduce the total weight of plastics in our goods/products • Increase the proportion of plastic goods/products which are reusable • Eliminate problematic and unnecessary plastics within our goods/products • Reduce the total weight of virgin content in plastic goods/products • Increase the proportion of post-consumer recycled content in plastic goods/products • Increase the proportion of renewable content from responsibly managed sources in plastic goods/products • Increase the proportion of our goods/products that are recyclable in practice and at scale • Increase the proportion of our goods/products that are compostable • Other plastic goods/products target, please specify Microplastics • Eliminate the use of primary microplastics and plastic particles • Reduce the potential release of microplastics and plastic particles • Other microplastics target, please specify End-of-life management • Increase the proportion of recyclable plastic waste that we collect, sort, and recycle • Increase the proportion of recyclable plastic waste that is collected, sorted, and recycled • Increase the proportion of plastic waste which is prepared for reuse or composted • Reduce the proportion of plastic waste which is sent to landfill and/or incinerated • Reduce the proportion of plastic waste which is mismanaged • Other end-of-life management target, please specify Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) • Ensure compliance with EPR policies and schemes • Adhere to eco-design requirements • Other Extended Producer Responsibility target, please specify Other • Other, please specify Requested content General • Only report active targets or targets that have been achieved during the reporting year. Target type and metric (column 2) • This column only appears if you select “Yes” in column 1 “Targets in place”. • The drop-down options presented are linked to the type of target selected. Please explain (column 3) • You may provide any further details useful to CDP data users, including:",
    "new_id": 236
  },
  {
    "id": 17422,
    "question": "Which scenario most accurately reflects the conditions under which an organization must provide a detailed explanation for not reporting values tied to fossil fuel assets, as outlined in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 8-13?",
    "options": {
      "A": "An organization involved in retail banking only, without any commercial or institutional lending activities related to fossil fuels.",
      "B": "An organization that exclusively offers life and health insurance but does not engage in financing fossil fuel assets.",
      "C": "An organization planning to assess its fossil fuel exposure within the next five years, regardless of its current lending practices.",
      "D": "An organization that provides financing to renewable energy projects while also insuring thermal coal operations.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "389-390",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 8-13.pdf",
    "source_text": "388 Primary reason for not providing a value for the financing and/or insurance to fossil fuel assets (column 7) • This column only appears if any “No” option is selected in column 1 “Reporting values of the financing and/or insurance of fossil fuel assets”. • If, for example, your organization provides strictly retail banking only (no commercial, institutional or business lending), select “Other, please specify”. Please explain why you are not providing a value for the financing and/or insurance to fossil fuel assets (column 8) • This column only appears if any “No” option is selected in column 1 “Reporting values of the financing and/or insurance of fossil fuel assets”. • Ensure your explanation is organization-specific and provides details as to why you do not provide a value for the financing and/or insurance to fossil fuel assets. • For example, if your organization provides strictly retail banking only (no commercial, institutional or business lending), provide details here. • If you plan to assess your exposure within the next 2 years provide details of how you plan to do this. • If you wish to provide any additional context to your disclosure, including any plans or timelines your organization has for completely phasing out financing and/or insurance of fossil fuel assets, you can also do that in this column. Explanation of terms • Fossil fuel assets: assets tied to carbon-based fuels from fossil hydrocarbon deposits, including coal, oil, and natural gas. • Met coal: metallurgical coal, also known as coking coal, is used to produce coke, the primary source of carbon used in steelmaking. It differs from thermal coal by its carbon content and its coking ability. • Thermal coal: coal used for energy and heating. Tags Authority Type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level CC only Questionnaire Sector Question level FS Only (12.4) Does your organization provide finance and/or insurance to companies in the commodity value chain? If so, for each commodity and portfolio, state the values of your financing and/or insurance in the reporting year. Question details Question dependencies This question appears for organizations in the Financial Services sector who report in 1.10 that they undertake banking, investing and “General(non-life)” insurance underwriting activities. The question does not appear for organizations who report that they only insure “Life and/or Health”. Rows are presented according to the reported organizational activities.\n\n[Page 390]\n389 Change from last year No change Rationale The production of certain key agricultural commodities has caused more than 60% of forest loss in Latin America and Southeast Asia, usually resulting in a permanent loss. While not all commodity production is necessarily harmful, understanding the concentrations of commodity-related assets in portfolios will enable financial institutions to understand where there is the potential for deforestation impacts and where enhanced policies are needed to prevent them. Ambition Financial services companies measure and disclose their financing and insurance of agricultural commodities to understand the potential impact on deforestation. Response options 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Financing and/or insurance of commodity Finance or insurance provided to companies operating in the value chain for this commodity Commodity value chain stage coverage Portfolio exposure (unit currency – as specified in 1.2) New loans advanced in reporting year (unit currency – as specified in 1.2) Total premium written in reporting year (unit currency – as specified in 1.2) % value of the exposure in relation to your total portfolio value Lending to companies operating in the timber products value chain Select from • Yes • No • Unknown Select all that apply: • Production • Processing • Trading • Manufacturing • Retailing Numeric field [enter a number from 0-999,999,999,999,999 using a maximum of 2 decimal places and no commas] Numeric field [enter a number from 0-999,999,999,999,999 using a maximum of 2 decimal places and no commas] N/A Percentage field [enter a percentage from 0-100 using a maximum of one decimal] Lending to companies operating in the palm oil value chain N/A Lending to companies operating in the cattle products value chain N/A Lending to companies operating in the soy value chain N/A Lending to companies N/A",
    "new_id": 237
  },
  {
    "id": 17423,
    "question": "According to CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 8-13, under which condition might a company exclude collected rainwater from its water withdrawal or discharge volumes, and why?",
    "options": {
      "B": "If including rainwater would result in discharge volumes exceeding withdrawal volumes, provided the error in the water balance is less than 5%.",
      "A": "If the company operates in a jurisdiction where rainwater is not legally considered a withdrawal source, as this would simplify reporting.",
      "C": "If the company lacks sufficient data to estimate rainwater volumes accurately, as zero should only be used for actual zero volumes.",
      "D": "If rainwater is managed solely for preventing flooding, as it does not contribute to production-related dependencies.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "212",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 8-13.pdf",
    "source_text": "211 Requested content Note: Organizations responding to an electric utilities, metals & mining, coal, or oil & gas sector request should refer to additional sector-specific guidance on this question at the end of the \"Requested content” section. General • This question asks for water accounting data only for facilities with substantive water-related dependencies, impacts, risks, and/or opportunities – not for all facilities. • Refer to CDP's water accounting definitions before completing this question. • Enter data for each facility (or groups of facilities) you identified in 9.3 with substantive water-related dependencies, impacts, risks, and/or opportunities. The table has a maximum of 100 rows. If your organization has over 100 facilities with substantive water-related dependencies, impacts, risks, and/or opportunities, report the 100 facilities with the highest levels of dependencies, impacts, risks, or opportunities. This may be based on facilities located in areas with water stress, facilities with the highest risk exposure, or other factors. • The data reported in this question should be based on the relevant facility boundary (see Explanations of terms). • The appearance of columns in this question is driven by your selection in column 3 “Value chain stage” and column 5 “Withdrawals or discharges in the reporting year”. • Only report Tier 1 supplier facilities if relevant to your selection in column 3 “Value chain stage”. • Report volumetric data in megaliters per year for the reporting year you stated in response to 1.4. (1 megaliter = 1 million liters or 1000 m3). • If estimating or extrapolating to provide complete coverage, give an explanation in column 29 “Please explain”. Remember that a zero should only be used for reporting zero volumes and not for an absence of data. • If you do not have a figure for any of the facilities you disclose here, you may provide an estimate. Explain this in column “Please explain”. For withdrawals, data may be collected from several sources, including water meters, water bills, calculations derived from other available water data or the organization’s own estimates if neither water meters nor bills or reference data exist. • Cooling water: Cooling water (freshwater or sea water) is often withdrawn in large quantities and discharged back to its original source with negligible losses or variation in quality. However, this volume should be included in your water accounts. • Rainwater: If a company is managing rainwater (for example, by harvesting for use or storage, or to prevent flooding), or is dependent on it for production of goods or the delivery of services, it should try to estimate and disclose it as a withdrawal from the hydrological system into the company boundary. Note that in some jurisdictions rainwater is considered a withdrawal source and organizations are required to report its collection and use. o Companies may choose to exclude collected rainwater and domestic sewage from their water withdrawal/discharge volumes only if the resulting error in their water balance would be less than 5%. This avoids your discharge volumes being larger than your withdrawals. o Including rainwater helps companies better understand their water dependency and risks. For some companies, precipitation/rainwater volumes may constitute a principal input of water at site level. This includes run-off where it must be managed. In these cases, excluding rainwater from",
    "new_id": 238
  },
  {
    "id": 17425,
    "question": "When reporting on embedded soy, which of the following scenarios most accurately reflects the conditions under which an organization would select 'Unknown origin' for the soybean production source and also choose 'Not disclosing' for the first-level administrative division, as outlined in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 8-13?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The organization lacks knowledge of the soybean's country of origin but possesses information about the administrative division, which it cannot disclose due to confidentiality agreements.",
      "A": "The organization knows both the country of soybean production and the specific administrative division but is legally restricted from sharing this information.",
      "B": "The organization is unaware of the specific administrative division within a known country of soybean production and is also unable to disclose any related supplier details.",
      "D": "The organization has no knowledge of either the soybean’s country of origin or its administrative division but still identifies the type of supplier for the commodity.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "35",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 8-13.pdf",
    "source_text": "34 • If you are reporting on embedded soy, refer to the origin of the soybean production, rather than the origin of the animal that consumed the soy. If you do not know the origin of where the soybean was produced before it became embedded into another product, then select “Unknown origin”. First level administrative division (column 3) • Select the first level administrative division within the country from which your sourced volume originates. • If your organization has information on the first level administrative division but is unable to disclose this, select “Not disclosing”. • If your organization does not know the first level administrative division, select “Unknown”. Specify the states or equivalent jurisdictions (column 4) • Column appears if you select “States/equivalent jurisdictions” in column “First level administrative division”. • Provide details on the states or equivalent jurisdictions within each country from which your sourced volume originates. For instance, this could be a federal state, a department, or a province (e.g. the state of Mato Grosso in Brazil). • If your sourced volumes originate from more than one state (or equivalent jurisdiction) in the same country, list each state or equivalent jurisdiction separated by a semicolon (e.g., Mato Grosso; Amazonas; Acre). Volume sourced from country/area of origin (metric tons) (column 5) • State the volume in metric tons that is sourced from the country/area of origin for the specified commodity. • If your organization both produces and sources commodities, this volume should only relate to the sourced volume. • The volume should include all of your “sourced volume” as reported in 8.2. For clarity on what is meant by “sourced volume” refer to the “Explanation of terms”. • The volumes disclosed per commodity should sum up to 100% (+/- 5%) of the sourced volume reported in 8.2. Source (column 6) • The source refers to the type of supplier you source the commodity from. Select the option that best reflects the source of your commodities. • If you source the commodity from more than one type of supplier, you may select all that apply. For example, a processor may source timber to produce pulp from their own plantations as well as from smallholders. • If none of the available options are suitable, select “Other, please specify” and a text box will appear for you to complete. List of supplier production and primary processing sites: names and locations (column 7) (optional) • This request is optional. You may provide a list of your suppliers' production and primary processing sites. Examples of information useful to data users are names and locations including country, region, longitude and latitude (alternatively, geo-referenced maps, addresses generating locations on google maps, or shapefiles). • Palm oil mill lists should use the conventions of the universal mill list. See Universal Mill List: A Standardized Methodology for Creating a Global Database of Palm Oil Mills | World Resources Institute (WRI). Please explain (column 8) • For sourced volume of unknown origin, provide an explanation on the strategy adopted to assure this volume is not associated with deforestation or conversion.",
    "new_id": 239
  },
  {
    "id": 17448,
    "question": "Which scenario would most likely justify not reporting values for taxonomy-aligned non-life insurance activities, based on the implicit reasoning in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 8-13?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The organization does not consider taxonomy alignment strategically important due to its size and scope.",
      "A": "The organization is focused exclusively on life insurance and has no non-life insurance activities.",
      "B": "The organization lacks internal resources or expertise but plans to develop them within a year.",
      "C": "The organization is awaiting updates to national taxonomies before committing to reporting procedures.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "400",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 8-13.pdf",
    "source_text": "399 places and no commas] places and no commas] 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 Gross premiums written for taxonomy-aligned non-life insurance and reinsurance activities Total premiums written “Do No Significant Harm” requirements met Details of “Do No Significant Harm” analysis Details of calculation Primary reason for not providing values of the financing and/or insurance Explain why you are not providing values of the financing and/or insurance Numeric field [enter a number from 0-999,999,999,999,999 using a maximum of 2 decimal places and no commas] Numeric field [enter a number from 0-999,999,999,999,999 using a maximum of 2 decimal places and no commas] Select from • Yes • No Text field [maximum 2,500 characters] Text field [maximum 2,500 characters] Select from: • Lack of internal resources, capabilities, or expertise (e.g., due to organization size) • No standardized procedure • Not an immediate strategic priority • Judged to be unimportant or not relevant • Other, please specify Text field [maximum 2,500 characters] [Fixed Row] Requested content Portfolio (column 0) • The rows which appear are driven by the activities you selected in question 1.10. Reporting values of the financing and/or insurance of activities or sectors that are eligible under or aligned with a sustainable finance taxonomy (column 1) • Indicate whether you are able to report values of your financing and/or insurance of activities or sectors that are eligible under or aligned with a sustainable finance taxonomy. • For companies subject to the EU Taxonomy for Sustainable Activities, refer to the economic activities listed under the Climate Delegated Act Annex I and II. • If a national taxonomy is under development and you are therefore not reporting values of the financing and/or insurance of activities or sectors that are eligible under or aligned with",
    "new_id": 240
  },
  {
    "id": 17452,
    "question": "Which of the following accurately reflects a logical implication or distinction regarding water sources and their management as described in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 8-13?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Third-party destinations for wastewater exclude organizations using the wastewater if they are within the reporting boundary specified in question 1.5.",
      "B": "Non-renewable groundwater is defined by its ability to recharge within 50 years, making it suitable for long-term agricultural use.",
      "C": "Produced water from oil and gas activities can be classified as recycled water if reused within a single business process cycle.",
      "D": "High-quality fresh surface water, acceptable for potable use, is characterized by having less than 1,000 mg/l of dissolved solids.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "220",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 8-13.pdf",
    "source_text": "219 a facility; for example, to provide a street cleaning service or when used in fields that are remote from a processing plant. • Facility reference number: Used to track information related to a facility that is disclosed in different questions. The number is not specific to an organization, but simply avoids an organization having to repeat contextual information such as river basin and facility name. • Fresh surface water, including rainwater, water from wetlands, rivers and lakes: Water that is naturally occurring water on the Earth's surface in ice sheets, ice caps, glaciers, icebergs, bogs, ponds, lakes, rivers and streams, and has a low concentration of dissolved solids. For the purposes of reporting water accounting data to CDP, this surface water source includes water of a quality generally acceptable for, or requiring minimal treatment to be acceptable for, domestic, municipal or agricultural uses (at least <10,000 mg/l TDS, though a range of additional quality properties may also be considered). ‘High quality’ fresh water sources considered acceptable for potable use are typically characterized as having concentrations of dissolved solids less than 1,000 mg/l. • Groundwater (non-renewable): Water which is being held in, and can be recovered from, an underground formation. Non-renewable groundwater has a negligible rate of natural recharge on the human time-scale (more than 50 years), and is generally located at deeper depths than renewable groundwater. This is sometimes referred to as “fossil” water. • Groundwater (renewable): Water which is being held in, and can be recovered from, an underground formation. Renewable groundwater sources can be replenished within 50 years and are usually located at shallow depths. • Latitude and longitude: geographic coordinates that specify, respectively, the north-south and east-west position, of a point on the Earth's surface. These coordinates are expressed as angular measures and thus, latitude can vary from 0 to +/-90 and longitude from 0 to +/-180. • Produced water (Oil & gas sector only): water that is brought to the surface during the production of hydrocarbons including formation water, flow-back water and condensation water (IPIECA “Oil and gas industry guidance on voluntary sustainability reporting”, 4th edition, 2020). • Produced water: Water which enters the organization’s boundary as a result of the extraction, processing, or use of any raw material, so that it must be managed by the organization. When reporting to CDP, this water should not be counted as recycled water when put to use within a single cycle of a business process. Examples of produced water include moisture derived from vegetation such as in sugar cane crushing and the water content in crude oil. (Note that companies with oil and gas activities should refer to CDP’s sector specific guidance for this water aspect). • Third party destinations: This includes municipal wastewater plants, public or private utilities, and other organizations involved in the transport, treatment, disposal or further use of wastewater. Note that to qualify as a third-party destination, “other organizations” using your wastewater must be outside your reporting boundary given in question 1.5. Any of your wastewater that has been treated on your own site should",
    "new_id": 241
  },
  {
    "id": 17478,
    "question": "Which metric framework implicitly requires both a quantitative monitoring mechanism and a commitment to public disclosure of progress, as outlined in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 8-13?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Performance of owned or managed processing facilities",
      "A": "Engagement with smallholders",
      "C": "Third-party certification",
      "D": "Traceability",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "53",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 8-13.pdf",
    "source_text": "52 Select from: • New • Underway • Achieved • Achieved and maintained • Expired • Revised • Replaced • Retired Numerical field [enter a number using a maximum of 4 decimal places] Select all that apply: • Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework • Paris Agreement • Sustainable Development Goals • Planetary Boundaries • None, alignment not assessed • None, no alignment after assessment • Other, please specify Text field [maximum 2,500 characters] Text field [maximum 2,500 characters] Text field [maximum 2,500 characters] Text field [maximum 2,500 characters] [Fixed row, add row] Category of target & Quantitative metric (column 6) Traceability • % of volume traceable to traceability point • Other traceability target metric, please specify Third-party certification • % of volume third-party certified • Other third-party certification target metric, please specify Engagement with smallholders • % of smallholders engaged • Investment in programs to support smallholders • Number of smallholders engaged • Volume sourced from smallholders supported to enter responsible value chains • Other smallholders engagement target metric, please specify Engagement with Tier 1 suppliers • % of procurement spend from Tier 1 suppliers compliant with your no-deforestation or no-conversion target Performance of owned or managed processing facilities • % of processing facilities with deforestation/conversion monitoring systems in place • % of processing facilities with DCF/NDPE commitments • % of processing facilities compliant with DCF/NDPE commitments • % of processing facilities with public time-bound action plans in place • Other owned or managed processing facilities performance target metric, please specify Performance of processing facilities in value chain • % of processing facilities with public time-bound action plans in place • % of processing facilities in value chain with DCF/NDPE commitments • % of processing facilities in value chain compliant with DCF/NDPE commitments • % of processing facilities in value chain with deforestation or conversion monitoring systems in place • Other processing facilities in value chain performance target metric, please specify Engagement in landscapes/jurisdictions • Hectares of land area invested in under jurisdictional/landscape approach • Investment in landscapes and jurisdictions",
    "new_id": 242
  },
  {
    "id": 17490,
    "question": "Which scenario best illustrates a situation where an organization's claim about its landscape engagement would be considered invalid based on the provided guidelines in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 8-13?",
    "options": {
      "C": "An organization selects 'Other, please specify' for the type of claim made but does not provide a label or description for this category.",
      "A": "An organization reports progress using a shared external framework but fails to specify any verification or validation status of their approach.",
      "B": "An organization describes achievements in stakeholder engagement and governance without referencing the timeframe or scale of their approach.",
      "D": "An organization claims outcomes identical to achievements stated in column 17 but provides no contextual information or location where the claim was made.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "128",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 8-13.pdf",
    "source_text": "127 State the achievements of your engagement so far and how progress is monitored (column 17) • This column only appears if \" Yes, progress is collectively monitored using a shared external framework, please specify\" is selected in column 16 “Collective monitoring framework used to measure progress towards landscape goals and actions”. • Explain how your organization’s actions or support contributes to the landscape or jurisdictional initiative, providing an indication of progress made and how this has benefited relevant stakeholders. You may state the verification or validation status of the approach here. • Describe the achievements/outcomes of your engagement within the landscape/jurisdiction. This may relate to achievements with (but is not limited to) stakeholder engagement, governance, financing, policy influence, progress on commitments, and monitoring systems. • Indicate how the progress of your approach is monitored (e.g., performance relative to the timeframe and scale of the approach). Claims made (column 18) • Select the option that best reflects if you are making a claim about the investment, actions or outcomes in the named landscape. Type of claim made (column 19) • This column is only presented if “Yes, we are making a claim” is selected in column 18 “Claims made”. • Select the option that best reflects the type of claim you have made. Refer to the explanation of terms section for further detail on the types of claims. • If you select “Other, please specify”, provide a label for the type of claim you have made. Provide further details on your claim (column 20) • This column is only presented if “Yes, we are making a claim” is selected in column 18 “Claims made”. • Provide further details on the claims that you have made including contextual information. • You may, for example, state the claim that you have made and detail where this claim has been made (e.g., organization website, organization policy document, initiative website). • If the claim made is the same as the achievement stated in column 17 “State the achievements of your engagement so far and how progress is monitored”, detail this here. • If you selected “Other, please specify” in column 19 “Type of claim made”, provide a brief description of what this category of claim refers to. Explanation of terms • Landscape: defined geographic area with common and interacting ecological and socioeconomic characteristics. They may be delineated based on river basins, seascapes, ecosystems, jurisdictional boundaries, or in other ways. • Landscape and Jurisdictional Approach: A muti-stakeholder collaborative strategy to advance shared sustainability goals and build resilience at landscape scale. A jurisdictional approach is a landscape approach defined by administrative boundaries and with high level of government involvement. • Landscape and jurisdictional initiatives: the on-the-ground collaborative program to set common goals, take collective action while reconciling different interests, and monitor progress towards improving social, environmental, and economic outcomes at a landscape/jurisdictional scale. • Agroforestry: a land management approach that combines the production of trees with other crops and/or livestock. Trees have high adaptive capacity because they are deep rooted and have large reserves of water and nutrients, and are less susceptible than annual crops to inter-annual variability or short-lived extreme events like droughts or floods.",
    "new_id": 243
  },
  {
    "id": 17492,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why an organization might report 'Unknown' as the primary reason for a forecasted change in water withdrawals, based on the provided response options and context in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 8-13?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The organization lacks sufficient data to determine whether its operations are in water-stressed areas.",
      "A": "The organization has not yet implemented any water-smart technology or processes.",
      "B": "The organization is unable to predict future business activity levels or efficiency changes with certainty.",
      "C": "The organization's accounting methodology does not align with current reporting standards.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "176-177",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 8-13.pdf",
    "source_text": "175 Water stress is a driver of business risk and, as stress is likely to worsen, transparency is critical. Understanding elevated business risk due to operations in water stressed areas is important for the investor community, and this question allows data users to review the trend in dependency on water from stressed basins. Knowledge of water-related hot spots helps your organization identify where water stress may be affecting its operations, now or in the future, as well as to prioritize your sustainable water management practices. Response options Please complete the following table: 1 2 3 4 5 Withdrawals are from areas with water stress Volume withdrawn from areas with water stress (megaliters) Comparison with previous reporting year Primary reason for comparison with previous reporting year Five-year forecast Select from: • Yes • No • Unknown Numerical field [enter a number from 0-999,999,999,999 using a maximum of two decimal places] Select from: • Much lower • Lower • About the same • Higher • Much higher • This is our first year of measurement Select from: • Change in accounting methodology • Divestment from water intensive technology/process • Facility closure • Facility expansion • Increase/decrease in business activity • Increase/decrease in efficiency • Investment in water-smart technology/process • Maximum potential volume reduction already achieved • Mergers and acquisitions • Unknown • Other, please specify Select from: • Much lower • Lower • About the same • Higher • Much higher • Unknown\n\n[Page 177]\n176 [Fixed row] 6 7 8 9 Primary reason for forecast % of total withdrawals that are withdrawn from areas with water stress Identification tool Please explain Select from: • Change in accounting methodology • Divestment from water intensive technology/process • Facility closure • Facility expansion • Increase/decrease in business activity • Increase/decrease in efficiency • Investment in water-smart technology/process • Maximum potential volume reduction already achieved • Mergers and acquisitions • Unknown • Other, please specify [Auto-calculated] Select all that apply: • WRI Aqueduct • WWF Water Risk Filter • Other, please specify Text field [maximum 5,000 characters] Requested content General • Refer to CDP’s water accounting definitions and the Explanation of terms for this question before completing the table. • Organizations should report which approach/tool they use to assess whether their withdrawals are from a “stressed area”. They should explain the approach taken and which data sets were used to assess “water stress”. • As good practice, a water-stressed area should be measured, at the catchment level as a minimum. • Credible, publicly available tools for assessing levels of water stress include WRI Aqueduct Water Risk Atlas, WWF Water Risk Filter, (see Additional information for more details about these tools). • Commonly accepted global risk indicators to assess areas as water stressed in terms of quantity and their thresholds for reporting to CDP include: o Water availability - greater than ‘High risk’: 3.4 (WWF Water Risk Filter). WWF recommends that users also take into consideration ‘Medium risk’: >2.6. § The WWF Water Risk Filter’s risk category ‘Water Availability’ integrates the State of Nature layer for Water Availability recommended for the Science-based Targets for Nature (SBTN) Step 1: Assess and Step 2: Interpret & Prioritize. The SBTN’s State of Nature layer for Water Availability is calculated based on a multi-model approach which integrates the best available global water scarcity risk indicators: Water depletion, Baseline water stress, and Blue water scarcity. In addition, WWF has incorporated an indicator",
    "new_id": 244
  },
  {
    "id": 17514,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why a packaging material could be classified as 'technically recyclable' but fail to meet the criteria for being 'recyclable in practice and at scale', as outlined in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 8-13?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The material is collected for recycling and has market value, yet its actual recycling occurs only in isolated regions without broader geographical representation.",
      "B": "The material meets a 30% recycling rate in one large region but lacks sufficient third-party verification of its data.",
      "C": "The material achieves high circularity potential but requires advanced processing that is not economically feasible across multiple regions.",
      "D": "The material is designed for reuse rather than recycling, making it ineligible for assessment under the recyclability criteria.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "287",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 8-13.pdf",
    "source_text": "286 • If relevant, explain how you have assessed the recyclability ‘in practice and at scale’ of your packaging - whether you used the Ellen MacArthur Foundation’s Recyclability Assessment Tool or another tool. • You may provide any further details useful to CDP data users, including: o How the percentages were determined, e.g., weighted average of all plastics produced/used or estimated amounts. o Any third party verification of the data reported. • If applicable, explain why data is not collected and any plans for future data collection. Explanation of terms • Circular economy: An economic system which eliminates waste and pollution, circulates products and materials, and regenerates nature (adapted from EMF’s Circular Economy Glossary). • Circularity potential: the potential for products and materials to be reused, recycled, composted or otherwise circulated in the economy and natural systems (adapted from EMF’s Circular Economy Introduction). • Recyclable ‘in practice and at scale’: successful post-consumer collection, sorting, and recycling, which is proven to work in practice and at scale. The test and threshold for assessment is a 30% recycling rate in multiple regions, collectively representing at least 400 million people. A possible alternative, especially relevant for more local players, is to check if a 30% post-consumer recycling rate is achieved in all the markets where a packaging is sold. o ‘At scale’ means that the proof needs to be more than a lab test, a pilot, or a single small region. It means that recycling of a certain product needs to be proven to work in practice in multiple regions, collectively representing a significant geographical area in terms of population size, ideally across different country and city archetypes. o ‘In practice’ means that within each of these regions, the recycling system (end-to-end system from consumer to recycled material) effectively recycles a significant share of all products of that type put on the market. (adapted from EMF’s Global Commitment definitions and reporting guidelines) • Reusable packaging and reusable plastic products: packaging or a plastic product which has been designed to and proves its ability to accomplish multiple trips or rotations in a system for reuse after minimal processing (adapted from EMF’s Global Commitment definitions and reporting guidelines). • Technically recyclable: Technical recyclability considers the technical potential to recycle a packaging, but does not take into account if the collection, sorting, and recycling of the packaging happens in practice, at scale, and with reasonable economics. Technically recyclable plastics must be made of plastic that is collected for recycling, has a market value, and/or is supported by a legislatively mandated program. (Note that some organizations refer to this as “packaging designed for recycling”.) (adapted from EMF’s Global Commitment definitions and reporting guidelines and Plastics Recyclers Europe)",
    "new_id": 245
  },
  {
    "id": 17543,
    "question": "Which of the following accurately reflects a necessary condition for reporting a product or service under the given framework in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 8-13?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Only financial products and services are considered, and non-financial low-carbon activities must be reported separately under sections 7.74 and 7.74.1.",
      "A": "Products or services enabling clients to mitigate climate change must also align with Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (SFDR) classifications.",
      "C": "All asset classes must explicitly fall under either the SFDR or another fund transparency regulation for inclusion in this reporting structure.",
      "D": "Products classified as 'Not applicable' in column 5 automatically qualify for exemption from principal adverse impact considerations.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "412-413",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 8-13.pdf",
    "source_text": "411 Link Loans Principles • Externally classified using other taxonomy or methodology, please specify • Internally classified [F and W only] • Low-emission transport [CC only] • Nature-based solutions • Paperless/ digital service [CC only] • Reforestation [F only] • Regenerative production • Renewable energy [CC only] • Risk transfer mechanisms for under-insured or uninsured [CC only] • Sustainable forest management [F only] • WASH services [W only] • Wastewater treatment infrastructure [W only] • Water resources and ecosystem protection [W only] • Water supply and sewer networks infrastructure [W only] • Water treatment infrastructure [W only]\n\n[Page 413]\n412 • Other, please specify • Not applicable 8 9 10 11 12 Description of product/service % of portfolio aligned with a taxonomy or methodology in relation to total portfolio value % of asset value aligned with a taxonomy or methodology Product considers principal adverse impacts on environmental factors Details on how the principal adverse impacts on environmental factors are considered in this product Text field [maximum 2,500 characters] Percentage field [enter a percentage from 0 100, using up to 3 decimal places] Percentage field [enter a percentage from 0-100, using up to 3 decimal places] Select from: • Yes • No Text field [maximum 2,500 characters] [Add row] Requested content General • Consider only financial products and services. If your organization has activities in more than one sector, you may also be presented with 7.74 and 7.74.1. All other low-carbon products and services (i.e. non-financial) should be reported in 7.74 and 7.74.1. Product/service enables clients to mitigate and/or adapt to climate change (column 2) • This column only appears if “Climate change” is selected in column 1 “Environmental issue”. • This is only applicable to products and/or services which are related to climate change. Asset class (column 4) • Select from the dropdown list the asset classes that the products/services fall under. Type of product classification (column 5) • This column is applicable to financial companies reporting on their product classification under the Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (SFDR) or other fund labels or fund transparency regulations in other jurisdictions. • The Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (SFDR) applies to financial market participants and advisers either located in the EU or located outside the EU for their financial products they market and/or manage for the EU market. • If this column is not applicable to your financial product, select “Not applicable”. • If your product is not classified by the Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (SFDR) or other product classification systems, select the dropdown “Not applicable”. • If “Not applicable” is selected, you will not be able to select any of the other dropdowns.",
    "new_id": 246
  },
  {
    "id": 17545,
    "question": "Which scenario would most likely require third-party verification to ensure compliance with the definitions provided for recycled content as described in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 8-13?",
    "options": {
      "C": "A firm uses a weighted average method to determine the recycled content percentages, validated by an independent entity that does not provide other services to the company.",
      "A": "A company calculates the percentage of post-consumer recycled content using internal estimates without external review.",
      "B": "An organization reports only pre-consumer recycled content based on its own manufacturing waste audits, without involving external parties.",
      "D": "A business provides detailed explanations about raw material sourcing but excludes any mention of how recycled content percentages are verified.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "281",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 8-13.pdf",
    "source_text": "280 • Select the types of content in your plastic durable goods and durable components for which you’re able to report the percentage they comprise of your total plastic durable goods/components. • Selections in this column determine the presentation of columns 3, 4, 5 and 6. Please explain (column 7) • Explain any exclusions to the data reported. • If you are reporting recycled content percentages, include the method your organization uses to calculate these. • You may provide any further details useful to CDP data users, including: o How the percentages were determined, e.g., by estimation or by calculating the weighted average of all plastic durable goods and durable components sold and/or used. o Any third-party verification of the data reported. o Whether any of the percentages are expected to change, and why. • If applicable, explain why data is not collected and any plans for future data collection. Explanation of terms • Commercialization: placing goods/products/services into the market for financial gain. • Durable goods: this generally refers to goods whose expected usage period is greater than three years. • Durable plastic component: a constituent plastic part of a durable goods, for example, plastic electronic components for tech products or textiles for clothing products. • Recycled content: proportion, by mass of recycled material in a product. Only pre-consumer and post-consumer materials shall be considered as recycled content (adapted from ISO 14021:2016). o Pre-consumer recycled content: content that has been recycled from materials diverted from the waste stream during a manufacturing process (adapted from EMF’s Global Commitment definitions and reporting guidelines). • Post-consumer recycled content: content that has been recycled from materials generated by households or by commercial, industrial and institutional facilities in their role as end users of the product which can no longer be used for its intended purpose (adapted from EMF’s Global Commitment definitions and reporting guidelines and ISO 14021:2016). • Raw material content: the plastic materials that make up a plastic product. (EMF refer to this as ‘material sourcing’). • Third-party verification: Verification conducted by an independent entity that does not provide other services to the company (AFi, 2024). • Usage of durable goods/components: a durable good or component that is involved in the production of a final product or the provision of a service. These durable goods/components are not themselves commercialized. For example, industrial equipment used in manufacturing or IT equipment used in offices. • Virgin materials: materials that have not been previously used or subjected to processing other than for their original production. In the context of plastic, virgin materials are materials not produced from post-industrial or post-consumer recycled material (adapted from EMF’s Circular Economy Glossary).",
    "new_id": 247
  },
  {
    "id": 17567,
    "question": "Which certification framework explicitly allows for both 'Mass Balance' and 'Segregated' approaches across multiple commodities including Coffee, Cocoa, and Palm oil, but does not include Timber products in its scope as described in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 8-13?",
    "options": {
      "D": "ProTerra certification",
      "A": "RSPO supply chain certification",
      "B": "ISCC PLUS",
      "C": "Preferred by Nature Sustainability Framework",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "55-56",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 8-13.pdf",
    "source_text": "54 • ISCC Japan FIT [Palm oil] • ISCC PLUS • Naturland [Cattle products, Soy, Coffee, Cocoa] • PEFC Sustainable Forest Management certification [Timber products, Rubber] • Preferred by Nature Sustainability Framework • ProTerra certification [Soy, Coffee, Cocoa, Cattle products, Palm oil] • RA Sustainable Agriculture standard: Farm certificate [Coffee, Cocoa] • RSB Global Advanced Products • RSB Global Fuels • RSB ICAO CORSIA • RSB Japan FIT Biomass [Palm oil] • RSPO producer/grower certification [Palm oil] • RTRS standard for Responsible Soy Production [Soy] • SFI Forest Management standard [Timber products] • Soil Association Organic Farming & Growing (GB and Northern Ireland) [Cattle products, Soy] • SURE [Timber products, Palm oil, Soy] • Sustainable Biomass Program [Timber products] • Other forest management/producer certification, please specify • ISCC EU – Identity preserved [Palm oil, Cattle products, Soy, Timber products, Coffee, Cocoa] • ISCC EU - Mass Balance [Palm oil, Cattle products, Soy, Timber products, Coffee, Cocoa] • ISCC EU – Segregated [Palm oil, Cattle products, Soy, Timber products, Coffee, Cocoa] • ISCC Japan FIT – Identity preserved [Palm oil] • ISCC Japan FIT – Segregated [Palm oil] • ISCC PLUS - Controlled blending • ISCC PLUS – Identity preserved • ISCC PLUS - Mass Balance • ISCC PLUS – Segregated • PEFC Chain-of-Custody (any type) [Timber products, Rubber] • PEFC Recycled certification [Timber products, Rubber] • Preferred by Nature Sustainability Framework Chain-of-Custody – Mass Balance • Preferred by Nature Sustainability Framework Chain-of-Custody – Segregated • ProTerra certification – Identity preserved [Soy, Coffee, Cocoa, Cattle products, Palm oil] • ProTerra certification – Mass balance [Soy, Coffee, Cocoa, Cattle products, Palm oil] • ProTerra certification – Segregated [Soy, Coffee, Cocoa, Cattle products, Palm oil] • RA Sustainable Agriculture standard: Supply chain certificate – Identity preserved [Coffee, Cocoa] • RA Sustainable Agriculture standard: Supply chain certificate – Mass balance [Coffee, Cocoa] • RA Sustainable Agriculture standard: Supply chain certificate – Segregated [Coffee, Cocoa] • RSB EU RED Fuel - Mass balance • RSB Global Advanced Products - Controlled Blending • RSB Global Advanced Products – Identity preserved • RSB Global Advanced Products - Mass Balance • RSB Global Advanced Products – Segregated • RSB Global Fuels - Controlled Blending • RSB Global Fuels – Identity preserved • RSB Global Fuels - Mass Balance • RSB Global Fuels – Segregated • RSB ICAO CORSIA – Identity preserved • RSB ICAO CORSIA - Mass Balance • RSB ICAO CORSIA – Segregated • RSB Japan FIT Biomass – Identity Preserved [Palm oil] • RSB Japan FIT Biomass – Segregated [Palm oil] • RSPO supply chain certification – Identity Preserved [Palm oil] • RSPO supply chain certification - Mass Balance [Palm oil] • RSPO supply chain certification – Segregated [Palm oil] • RTRS chain-of custody standard – Mass balance [Soy] • RTRS chain-of custody standard – Segregated [Soy]\n\n[Page 56]\n55 • SFI Chain-of-Custody – Percentage [Timber products] • SFI Chain-of-Custody – Physical separation [Timber products] • SURE – Mass balance [Timber products, Palm oil, Soy] • Sustainable Biomass Program Chain-of-Custody – Separation method [Timber products] • Other chain-of-custody certification, please specify",
    "new_id": 248
  },
  {
    "id": 17598,
    "question": "Which certification scheme listed in the text would be LEAST likely to apply to a producer managing both soy and rubber, based on the specific product associations provided, as described in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 8-13?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Donau Soja",
      "B": "ISCC EU",
      "C": "FSC Controlled Wood certification",
      "D": "RTRS standard for Responsible Soy Production",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "26",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 8-13.pdf",
    "source_text": "25 • Cattle products • Soy • Rubber • Cocoa • Coffee 7 8 9 10 11 12 Area (hectares) Indicate if you can provide the volume produced on land you own, manage and/or control Volume produced on land you own, manage and/or control (metric tons) % area third-party certified Third-party certification scheme Attach a list of production facility names and locations (optional) Numerical field [enter a number from 0-999,999,999 using a maximum of 2 decimal places] Select from: • Yes • No, data is not available • No, data is confidential • No, other reason, please specify Numerical field [enter a number from 0-999,999,999,999 using a maximum of 2 decimal places] Numerical field [enter a number from 0-100 using a maximum of 2 decimal places] Select all that apply from the drop-down list below [Attachment functionality] [Fixed row, add row] Third-party certification scheme (column 11) • Biosuisse organic [Palm oil, Cattle products, Soy, Coffee, Cocoa] • Donau Soja [Soy] • Europe Soja [Soy] • FSC Controlled Wood certification [Timber Rubber]] • FSC Forest Management certification [Timber products, Rubber] • ISCC CORSIA • ISCC EU [Palm oil, Cattle products, Soy, Timber products, Coffee, Cocoa] • ISCC Japan FIT [Palm oil] • ISCC PLUS • Naturland [Cattle products, Soy, Coffee, Cocoa] • PEFC Sustainable Forest Management certification [Timber products, Rubber] • Preferred by Nature Sustainability Framework • ProTerra certification [Soy, Coffee, Cocoa, Cattle products, Palm oil] • RA Sustainable Agriculture standard: Farm certificate [Coffee, Cocoa] • RSB Certificate for Smallholder Groups • RSB Global Advanced Products • RSB Global Fuels • RSB ICAO CORSIA • RSB Japan FIT Biomass [Palm oil] • RSPO producer/grower certification [Palm oil] • RTRS standard for Responsible Soy Production [Soy] • SFI Forest Management standard [Timber products] • Soil Association Organic Farming & Growing (GB and Northern Ireland) [Cattle products, Soy] • SURE [Timber products, Palm oil, Soy] • Sustainable Biomass Program [Timber products] Other • No certified area in this country/area, state or equivalent jurisdiction • Other forest management/producer certification, please specify",
    "new_id": 249
  },
  {
    "id": 17601,
    "question": "Which certification scheme explicitly applies to both timber products and rubber, but excludes palm oil based on the information provided in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 8-13?",
    "options": {
      "B": "FSC Forest Management certification",
      "A": "ISCC EU – Identity preserved",
      "C": "ISCC PLUS Chain-of-Custody certification",
      "D": "FSC Controlled Wood certification",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "105-106",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 8-13.pdf",
    "source_text": "104 • Provide details on the primary reason you have specified in column 5 “Primary reason that third-party certification has not been adopted”. If applicable, include the products affected, regions and facilities. • If you have plans to adopt certification in the next two years, provide details on the type of certification, the products, and regions to be covered. Explanation of terms • Certification: the action or process of providing a product with an official document attesting to a status or level of achievement against a certain standard. • Third-party certification: when a certification process is carried out by an independent organization. Tags Authority type Supply chain Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level F only Questionnaire sector Question level All (except FS) (8.12.1) Provide details of the certified volumes sold to each requesting CDP Supply Chain member. Question details Question dependencies This question only appears if you select “Yes” in response to column 2 “Certification details are available for the volumes sold to any requesting CDP Supply Chain members” in 8.12. Change from last year No change Rationale This question gathers details on the percentage of the total commodity volume bought from your organization that is certified by a third party, the certification schemes used and forms of commodities that are certified. Response options 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Requesting member Commodity Form of commodity Total volume of commodity sold to requesting member Metric Third-party certification scheme % of the total volume of commodity sold to requesting member that is certified Comment (optional) Select from: • Member drop down list Select from: • Timber products • Palm oil • Cattle products • Soy • Rubber • Cocoa Select all that apply from response drop-down options below Numerical field [enter a number from 0-999,999,999,999 using a maximum of 2 decimal places] Select from: • Metric tons • Spend • Liters • Gallons • Round wood equivalent (RWE) Grouped option (single-select group; single-select option) from dropdown list below: Numerical field [enter a number from 0-100 using a maximum of 2 decimal places] Text field [maximum 1,000 characters]\n\n[Page 106]\n105 • Coffee • Wood raw material equivalent (WRME) • Cubic meters • Square meters • Other, please specify [Add Row] Form of commodity (column 3) Timber products: • Boards, plywood, engineered wood • Cellulose-based textile fiber • Goods not for resale (GNFR) • Hardwood logs • Paper • Primary packaging • Pulp • Sawn timber, veneer, chips • Secondary packaging • Softwood logs • Tertiary packaging • Unprocessed wood fiber • Wood-based bioenergy • Other form of timber products, please specify Palm oil: • Crude palm kernel oil (CPKO) • Crude palm oil (CPO) • Fresh fruit bunches (FFB) • Palm biodiesel • Palm kernel meal (PKM) • Palm kernel oil derivatives • Palm oil derivatives • Refined palm oil • Other form of palm oil, please specify Cattle products: • Beef • By-products (e.g. glycerin, gelatin) • Cattle • Hides/ leather • Tallow • Tallow biodiesel • Other form of cattle products, please specify Soy: • Embedded soy • Soybean meal • Soybean oil • Soy biodiesel • Soy derivatives • Whole soybeans • Other form of soy, please specify Other, please specify Third-party certification scheme (column 6) Forest management unit/Producer certification • Biosuisse organic [Palm oil, Cattle products, Soy, Coffee, Cocoa] • Donau Soja [Soy] • Europe Soja [Soy] • FSC Controlled Wood certification [Timber] • FSC Forest Management certification [Timber products, Rubber] • ISCC CORSIA • ISCC EU [Palm oil, Cattle products, Soy, Timber products, Coffee, Cocoa] • ISCC Japan FIT [Palm oil] • ISCC PLUS Chain-of-custody certification • Donau Soja – Segregated [Soy] • Europe Soja – Segregated [Soy] • FSC Chain-of-Custody certification (any type) [Timber products, Rubber] • FSC Recycled certification [Timber products] • ISCC CORSIA – Identity preserved • ISCC CORSIA - Mass Balance • ISCC CORSIA – Segregated • ISCC EU – Identity preserved [Palm oil, Cattle products, Soy, Timber products, Coffee, Cocoa] • ISCC EU - Mass Balance [Palm oil, Cattle products, Soy, Timber products, Coffee, Cocoa]",
    "new_id": 250
  },
  {
    "id": 17626,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why the calculation method for 'Revenue' in water withdrawal efficiency deviates from the SDG Indicator 6.4.1 guidance according to CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 8-13?",
    "options": {
      "C": "To maintain consistency with CDP’s questionnaire framework based on the International Financial Reporting Standard.",
      "A": "To align with international standards that prioritize gross income over net value added.",
      "B": "Because gross income is considered a more accurate reflection of an organization's water dependency than net value added.",
      "D": "Due to the inability to reliably calculate net value added across all sectors reporting to the CDP.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "227-228",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 8-13.pdf",
    "source_text": "226 Water efficiency and water intensity (CH, EU, FB, AC, MM, CO, OG only) (9.5) Provide a figure for your organization’s total water withdrawal efficiency. Question details Change from last year No change Rationale A water withdrawal efficiency metric enables organizations to track the water-dependency of their revenue, as well as bench mark their water use. Awareness of water efficiency can drive cost savings, increased brand value, and product or service innovation. This metric helps data users track an organization’s transition towards a water secure future. Response options Please complete the following table: 1 2 3 Revenue (currency) Total water withdrawal efficiency Anticipated forward trend Numerical field [enter a number from 0-999,999,999,999,999 using a maximum of two decimal places] [Auto-calculated] Text field [maximum 500 characters] [Fixed row] Requested content General: • This metric is informed by SDG Indicator 6.4.1 – Water use efficiency. Revenue (column 1) • This figure should be in the same currency that you selected for all financial information disclosed throughout your response in 1.2. • Enter a numerical value for the revenue generated by your organization during the reporting period disclosed in 1.4. • This figure should align with the total revenue reported in your questionnaire set-up, but it should be converted to the currency you selected in 1.2 if this was not USD. Total water withdrawal efficiency (column 2) • This column will be auto-calculated. • The total withdrawal efficiency will be calculated using the revenue figure (column 1) and the volume of total withdrawals figure given in 9.2.2 (column 1, row 1). Ensure you have entered data into these columns. RevenueVolume of total withdrawals\n\n[Page 228]\n227 Anticipated forward trend (column 4) • Indicate the anticipated future trend of this figure, if known. Note that future trends should be at least one year after the end of the reporting year provided in 1.4. Explanation of terms • Revenue: gross income arising from the operations of an organization over a period of time. • Water withdrawal: The sum of all water drawn into the boundaries of the organization from all sources for any use over the course of the reporting period. • Water withdrawal efficiency: A measure of economic value produced from water withdrawals. For CDP disclosure, this is calculated as revenue per total water withdrawal volume in the reporting period (informed by SDG indicator 6.4.1) Additional information ‘Revenue’ in this calculation for water withdrawal efficiency refers to income arising in the course of an entity's ordinary activities (less discounts, allowances and returns) - before deducting costs for the goods/services sold and operating expenses to arrive at profit. This marks a departure from SDG 6.4.1 and the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development’s guidance for corporate reporting against the SDG efficiency indicator, which asks for Net Value Added – or revenue after deducting costs. This difference is to align with the definition of revenue across CDP’s questionnaires, based on the International Financial Reporting Standard. Tags Authority Type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level W only Questionnaire Sector Question level All (except FS) (9.6) Do you calculate water intensity for your activities in the chemical sector? Question details Question dependencies Your response to 9.6 will determine whether 9.6.1 is presented. If your response to 9.6 is amended, data in 9.6.1 may be erased. In this case, be sure to re-enter data 9.6.1. Change from last year No change Rationale This metric encourages organizations with activities in the chemical sector to monitor water intensity data and improve efficiency. In addition to total water volumes, water intensity metrics provide a complementary indicator to help identify efficiencies and opportunities for the reduction in water withdrawals or consumption. Data users seek improved transparency around the calculation of such metrics to enable performance monitoring and high-level benchmarking. This question aligns with public policy goals related to water at all levels, such as the Sustainable Development Goal 6.4.1. Response options Select one of the following options: • Yes • No, but we intend to do so within the next two years • No, and we have no plans to do so in the next two years",
    "new_id": 251
  },
  {
    "id": 17633,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why a company might report 'Not relevant' for the highest level of treatment within direct operations, based on the implicit reasoning in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 8-13?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The company has outsourced all its wastewater management to third parties, and internal treatment is unnecessary.",
      "A": "The company exclusively discharges water that requires no treatment due to naturally low contamination levels.",
      "B": "The discharge volume is negligible, making any level of treatment redundant according to regulatory standards.",
      "C": "The company's business activities do not generate hazardous waste requiring specific treatment protocols.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "199",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 8-13.pdf",
    "source_text": "198 Please explain (column 6) • Explain why this level of treatment has been applied to your discharge. Refer to specific business activities and associated hazardous waste types, and any regulatory or voluntary standards that apply. • Indicate the anticipated future trends for these volumes, if known (note that the future trends would be at least one year after the end of the reporting year provided in 1.4) • Describe the thresholds for what is ‘much higher’ and ‘much lower’ for the change in volumes compared to the previous reporting year. • To assist CDP data users to understand a company’s water use, you should explain your selections for ‘Relevance’ (column 1) and ‘Primary reason for comparison with previous reporting year’ (column 4), including any company-specific contextual information. • If you indicated that a level of treatment is “Not relevant” or “Relevant but volume unknown” provide the reason here. • If you indicated that volumes are discharged to third party destinations, state the highest level of treatment the third party applies, or state unknown if that is the case. Explanation of terms • Primary treatment: Primary treatment involves the physical removal of suspended solids and floating material, typically by sedimentation. A preliminary treatment may often be applied involving the physical removal of large debris, large particles, oils, and grease, typically through screens and grit chambers. • Secondary treatment: Secondary treatment involves the degradation of organic matter and reduction of solids through biological treatment. The removal of nutrients (nitrogen and/or phosphorus) can also be achieved at this level of treatment using a combination of chemical and biological treatments. Secondary treatment follows primary treatment. • Tertiary treatment: Tertiary treatment involves the additional treatment needed to remove suspended, colloidal and dissolved constituents (nutrients, heavy metals, inorganic and other contaminants) remaining after secondary treatment through a number of processes including granular media filtration, biological nitrification-denitrification, biological phosphorus removal, chlorination, etc.. Tertiary treatment follows secondary treatment. Example response (See table below) Note that the responses for each row reflect examples from different companies to demonstrate the relevance of different treatment levels to several business types. 0 1 2 3 4 Highest level of treatment within direct operations Relevance of treatment level to discharge Volume (megaliters/year) Comparison of treated volume with previous reporting year Primary reason for comparison with previous reporting year Tertiary treatment Relevant 29500.0 About the same Increase/decrease in efficiency Secondary treatment Relevant 11151.0 About the same Increase/decrease in business activity Primary treatment only Relevant 32175.0 About the same Facility closure Discharge to the natural environment without treatment Not relevant Question not applicable Question not applicable Question not applicable",
    "new_id": 252
  },
  {
    "id": 17637,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between an organization's traceability system for embedded soy and its ability to assess deforestation- and conversion-free (DF/DCF) status, as described in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 8-13?",
    "options": {
      "A": "An organization may assess the DF/DCF status of embedded soy even if it plans to establish a traceability system within two years.",
      "B": "An organization without a traceability system cannot determine the DF/DCF status of any portion of its embedded soy disclosure volume.",
      "C": "Having a traceability system guarantees that all embedded soy is assessed for DF/DCF status in the reporting year.",
      "D": "The absence of a traceability system prevents organizations from engaging with suppliers to promote forest-positive production.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "20",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 8-13.pdf",
    "source_text": "19 Ambition • The organization includes embedded soy within its disclosure volume with actions to: o Improve understanding of their value chain and define a policy scope using materiality assessment across the breadth of product sourcing. o Progress towards better visibility of embedded soy origin and reduce associated risk of deforestation and conversion. o Engage with suppliers and landscape initiatives to promote forest-positive production of embedded soy. Response options 0 1 2 3 4 5 Commodity Disclosure of embedded soy Description of embedded soy use and soy tiers Volume calculation methodology Embedded soy disclosure volume (metric tons) % of sourced volume that is embedded soy Soy Select from: • Some or all of our embedded soy volume is included in our “Sourced volume” as reported in column 4 of 8.2 • All of our embedded soy volume is excluded from our disclosure as reported in 8.1.1 Text field [maximum 2,500 characters] Text field [maximum 3,000 characters] Numerical field [enter a number from 0-999,999,999 using a maximum of 2 decimal places] Numerical field [enter a number from 0-100 using a maximum of 2 decimal places] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Traceability system Description of traceability system % of embedded soy disclosure volume traceable to country/area of soy production % of embedded soy disclosure volume for which the soy production origin is unknown DF/DCF status assessed for embedded soy % of embedded soy disclosure volume determined as DF/DCF in the reporting year Methodology used to determine DF/DCF status Select from: • Yes, we have a traceability system for our embedded soy • No, but we plan to establish one within the next two years Text field [maximum 3,000 characters] Numerical field [enter a number from 0-100 using a maximum of 2 decimal places] Numerical field [enter a number from 0-100 using a maximum of 2 decimal places] Select from: • Yes, deforestation- and conversion-free (DCF) status assessed • Yes, deforestation-free (DF) status assessed • No, but we plan to do so within the next two years Numerical field [enter a number from 0-100 using a maximum of 2 decimal places] Text field [maximum 2,500 characters]",
    "new_id": 253
  },
  {
    "id": 17655,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes why an organization might avoid making DF/DCF claims despite sourcing from an area with negligible deforestation risk, as outlined in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 8-13??",
    "options": {
      "B": "Recent ecosystem conversion in the sourcing area, regardless of its direct link to the commodity, triggers the need for further due diligence.",
      "A": "The sourcing area lacks a clearly defined cutoff date for deforestation activities.",
      "C": "Monitoring tools used by the organization only assess risks at the country level, not the sourcing area level.",
      "D": "The organization has failed to disclose the specific methodologies and data used for risk evaluation.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "90",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 8-13.pdf",
    "source_text": "89 • Third party maximum of 2 decimal places] [Fixed row] Requested content General • Volumes can be determined to be DF/DCF when there is no or negligible risk of deforestation and/or conversion at the level of the sourcing area, with ongoing monitoring in place to ensure the risk level is up to date. • The sourcing area is an area or region from which materials in a value chain originate. This is more specific than the country/area level, and could include a sourcing radius or a supply-shed around a first point of collection or processing facility (e.g., a radius from a palm oil mill); a defined set of production units supplying a particular aggregator or buyer (e.g. the area covered by a smallholder cooperative); or a landscape or subnational jurisdiction (e.g. municipality) from which materials are sourced (adapted from AFi, 2024). • Where the organization can trace materials to a sourcing area in which no or negligible deforestation and/or conversion has occurred since an appropriate cutoff date, they may generally consider all volumes sourced from that area to be DF/DCF. If using this approach, organizations must continue to monitor such sourcing areas to identify any change in the occurrence or risk of deforestation or conversion. Monitoring at this scale should include all deforestation/conversion, not only land use change directly linked to the commodity of interest. If there is recent ecosystem conversion linked to agriculture or forestry in a sourcing area, regardless of the direct driver or current land use, DF/DCF claims should not be made without further due diligence, monitoring, and assurance. This may necessitate monitoring at a finer scale and/or using data related to expansion of the commodity of interest or other publicly available information. Organizations using this approach should disclose the methodology and data used (Adapted from AFi 2022). • This risk level monitoring must be robust and evidence based. It should be specific and consider all relevant aspects of the risks related to the commodities, locations, and suppliers under assessment. Risk assessments should use clear and well-defined metrics to objectively evaluate the risks. The methods used should be credible, current, and provide all the data necessary to effectively characterize the risk (Adapted from AFi, 2020). % of disclosure volume determined as DF/DCF through monitoring of deforestation and conversion within the sourcing area (column 1) • This column is auto-calculated from the percentage disclosed in column 5 “% of disclosure volume determined as DF/DCF through monitoring of sourcing area” of 8.9. The rest of the information disclosed in this question should relate to this proportion of the disclosure volume. Monitoring approach used for determining that sourcing areas have no or negligible risk of deforestation or conversion (column 2) • Select the types of methodological approaches and/or tools you have in place to determine whether your volumes are DF/DCF. • If none of the available options are suitable, select “Other, please specify” and a text box will appear for you to complete. Description of approach, including frequency of assessment (column 3) • Provide details on the approach, scope, methods, and tools used to classify levels of risk, and how they are adapted to the specific geographies and other attributes of the relevant sourcing areas.",
    "new_id": 254
  },
  {
    "id": 17685,
    "question": "When calculating the proportion of asset class emissions covered in the reporting year, which condition must be satisfied to ensure the value aligns with the instructions provided according to CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 8-13?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The proportion must be derived from the total value of assets within the specific asset class, irrespective of industry breakdowns.",
      "A": "The calculation must include both drawn and undrawn loan commitments as a unified total.",
      "B": "The percentage should reflect only the emissions associated with funded amounts, excluding any loss allowances.",
      "D": "Undrawn loan commitments must be excluded entirely to avoid inflating the calculated percentage.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "382-383",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 8-13.pdf",
    "source_text": "381 • Emissions intensity (tCO2e/MWh) • Emissions intensity (tCO2e/m2) • Emissions intensity (tCO2e/tonne steel produced) • Other, please specify 7 8 9 10 11 12 Value of assets covered in the calculation Financed emissions or alternative metric Are you able to provide the gross exposure for your undrawn loan commitment separately from the drawn loan commitment? Value of assets covered in the calculation based on outstanding loan amounts Value of assets covered in the calculation including undrawn loan commitments Please explain the details, assumptions and exclusions in your calculation Numerical field [enter a range of 0-999,999,999,999,999 using a maximum of 2 decimal places and no commas] Numerical field [enter a range of 0-999,999,999,999 using a maximum of 3 decimal places and no commas] Select from: • Yes • No • Not applicable Numerical field [enter a range of 0-999,999,999,999,999 using a maximum of 2 decimal places and no commas] Numerical field [enter a range of 0-999,999,999,999,999 using a maximum of 2 decimal places and no commas] Text field [maximum 3,000 characters] [Add row] Requested content General • Add a row for each portfolio for which you are able to provide a breakdown of your organization's portfolio impact. • If you are able to provide a breakdown of multiple scopes for a single portfolio, industry or asset class, add a separate row for each scope. Portfolio metric (column 2) • Disclose the quantitative emissions associated with the respective scope, industry and/or asset class. • For details on methodologies to calculate portfolio metrics please consult the CDP Technical Note on Portfolio Impact Metrics for Financial Services Sector Companies. • If you are reporting absolute emissions or emissions intensity, use gross, not net figures. For funded amounts, gross exposure shall be calculated as the funded carrying amounts (before\n\n[Page 383]\n382 subtracting the loss allowance, when applicable), whether prepared in accordance with IFRS Accounting Standards or other GAAP. Industry (column 3) • Select from the drop-down list the industry for which you are able to disclose a figure for, adding one row for each industry. Asset class (column 4) • Select from the drop-down list the asset classes that you are able to disclose a figure for. • Add a row for each asset class for which you can disclose a figure by using the \"Add Row\" button at the bottom of the table. • If there are other asset classes for which you are able to disclose a figure for but are not listed in the drop-down list, select “Other, please specify” and disclose the asset class. • If you are disclosing emissions for each industry by asset class, make sure to indicate the industry for which you are reporting in column 2 “Industry”. % of asset class emissions calculated in the reporting year based on total value of assets (column 6) • This column is only presented if you are providing a breakdown of your emissions on asset class level. • Provide the proportion of the asset class covered by the emissions calculation based on the total value of this asset class. Value of assets covered in the calculation (column 7) • Provide the value of the assets covered by the emissions calculation. • All values should be reported in the currency selected in 1.2. Value of assets covered in the calculation based on outstanding loan amounts (column 10) • Disclose the full amount of the commitment separately from the drawn portion of loan commitments included in the emissions calculation. • All values should be reported in the currency selected in 1.2. Value of assets covered in the calculation including undrawn loan commitments (column 11) • Disclose the full amount of the commitment separately from the drawn portion of loan commitments included in the emissions calculation. • For undrawn loan commitments, calculate the percentage by dividing the full amount of undrawn loan commitments to carbon related industries by the full amount of undrawn loan commitments to all industries. • All values should be reported in the currency selected in 1.2. Please explain the details, assumptions and exclusions in your calculation (column 12) • If you are not providing the emissions value for all of the scopes (Scope 1, Scope 2, Scope 3), explain why you are not able to. • If you are not able to provide the emissions value for each of your asset classes, explain why you are not able to.",
    "new_id": 255
  },
  {
    "id": 17686,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between principal adverse impacts and the conditions under which details on their consideration must be provided according to CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 8-13?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Details on how climate and other environmental principal adverse impacts are considered must be disclosed whenever column 11 is marked as 'Yes,' regardless of the product type in column 5.",
      "A": "Principal adverse impacts on environmental factors are only relevant if a product does not promote environmental or social characteristics.",
      "B": "Products that do not aim for sustainable investment as their core objective are exempt from considering principal adverse impacts on environmental factors.",
      "C": "The disclosure of principal adverse impacts is optional for all products unless they fall under the Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "415",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 8-13.pdf",
    "source_text": "414 Product considers principal adverse impacts on environmental factors (column 11) • This column only appears if “Products that promote environmental and/or social characteristics” or “Products that have sustainable investment as their core objective” are selected in column 5 “Type of product classification”. • This column is applicable for products being reported under the Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation. • For the purpose of this column, focus on the environmental principal adverse impacts on sustainability factors. • Principal adverse impacts refer to the negative effects on sustainability factors that arise from investment decisions and advice. Details on how the principal adverse impacts on environmental factors are considered in this product (column 12) • This column only appears if “Yes” is selected in column 11 “Product considers principal adverse impacts on environmental factors”. • This column is applicable for products being reported under the Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation. • For the purpose of this column, focus on the climate and other environmental principal adverse impacts on sustainability factors. For details on the principal adverse impacts indicators, please refer to the Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (See Annex I, Table 1 and 2). • Provide details on how the climate and other environmental principal adverse impacts are considered in this financial product. Explanation of terms • Adaptation: adjustment to climate change current or expected effects so the consequences to the business and environment are alleviated and beneficial opportunities are realized. • Carbon removals: solutions which remove CO2 from the atmosphere and permanently store it. • Ecosystem protection: activities aimed at protecting the integrity of existing ecosystems. • Ecosystem restoration: the process of assisting the recovery of an ecosystem that has been degraded, damaged, or destroyed. • Emerging climate technology (ECT): a commercially promising technology that addresses climate mitigation challenges but needs to attract enough investment to deploy the technology and develop business models and markets for the product or services it produces. Eventually it may become a successful innovation deployed at scale, generating new markets or profoundly disrupting established (fossil-based) ones (Auerswald et al., 2005). For a more detailed definition and guidance, refer to the ECT initiative. • Energy efficiency measures: solutions which require less energy, e.g. energy efficient measures in buildings or the production process. Energy efficient solutions can help to mitigate against CO2 and is key in achieving net zero emissions by 2050. • Flood/drought resilience: solutions which can reduce the impact of a flood or drought. Resilience can be built in a variety of ways, such as improving urban drainage systems, securing multiple/diverse water sources, or building monitoring capabilities. • Fortified buildings: fortified buildings use retrofit techniques to strengthen new and existing homes, making them more resistant to storms and other severe weather events.",
    "new_id": 256
  },
  {
    "id": 17687,
    "question": "Which of the following accurately reflects the relationship between taxonomy-aligned and taxonomy-eligible activities in terms of their contribution to portfolio alignment, as described in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 8-13?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Taxonomy-eligible activities include all taxonomy-aligned activities, but also encompass others that do not fully meet the criteria for alignment yet still contribute to sustainability goals.",
      "B": "Taxonomy-aligned activities are a broader category than taxonomy-eligible activities, encompassing all eligible activities plus additional ones that meet stricter criteria.",
      "C": "Taxonomy-eligible activities represent a subset of taxonomy-aligned activities, indicating a higher threshold for alignment compared to eligibility.",
      "D": "Taxonomy-aligned and taxonomy-eligible activities are mutually exclusive categories, with no overlap in their definitions or contributions to portfolio alignment.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "402",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 8-13.pdf",
    "source_text": "401 Aligned assets based on turnover of investees in the reporting year (unit currency as selected in 1.2) (column 6) • This column is presented if “EU Taxonomy for Sustainable Activities” is selected in column 2 “Taxonomy under which portfolio alignment is being reported” for rows “Banking (Bank)”, “Investing (Asset Manager)” and “Investing (Asset Owner)”. • Enter the value of assets funding taxonomy-aligned activities contributing to turnover of portfolio company in the reporting year. Share of aligned assets based on turnover of investees out of total asset in the reporting year (column 7) • This column is presented if “EU Taxonomy for Sustainable Activities” is selected in column 2 “Taxonomy under which portfolio alignment is being reported” for rows “Banking (Bank)”, “Investing (Asset Manager)” and “Investing (Asset Owner)”. • Enter the ratio of assets funding taxonomy-aligned activities as a percentage of total funded assets contributing to turnover of portfolio companies in the reporting year. Eligible assets based on turnover of investees in the reporting year (column 8) • This column is presented if “EU Taxonomy for Sustainable Activities” is selected in column 2 “Taxonomy under which portfolio alignment is being reported” for rows “Banking (Bank)”, “Investing (Asset Manager)” and “Investing (Asset Owner)”. • Enter the value of assets funding taxonomy-eligible activities contributing to turnover of portfolio company in the reporting year. Share of eligible assets based on turnover of investees in the reporting year out of total assets in the reporting year (column 9) • This column is presented if “EU Taxonomy for Sustainable Activities” is selected in column 2 “Taxonomy under which portfolio alignment is being reported” for rows “Banking (Bank)”, “Investing (Asset Manager)” and “Investing (Asset Owner)”. • Enter the ratio of assets funding taxonomy-eligible activities relative to total funded assets contributing to turnover of portfolio company in the reporting year. Aligned assets based on CAPEX of investees in the reporting year (unit currency as selected in 1.2) (column 10) • This column is presented if “EU Taxonomy for Sustainable Activities” is selected in column 2 “Taxonomy under which portfolio alignment is being reported” for rows “Banking (Bank)”, “Investing (Asset Manager)” and “Investing (Asset Owner)”. • Enter the value of assets funding taxonomy-aligned activities based on CAPEX of portfolio company in the reporting year. Share of aligned assets based on CAPEX of investees out of total asset in the reporting year (column 11) • This column is presented if “EU Taxonomy for Sustainable Activities” is selected in column 2 “Taxonomy under which portfolio alignment is being reported” for rows “Banking (Bank)”, “Investing (Asset Manager)” and “Investing (Asset Owner)”. • Enter the ratio of assets funding taxonomy-aligned activities as a percentage of total funded assets of CAPEX of portfolio companies in the reporting year. Eligible assets based on CAPEX of investees in the reporting year (column 12)",
    "new_id": 257
  },
  {
    "id": 17688,
    "question": "What is the relationship between CDP's sharing of public response data and the inclusion of projects on the Water Action Hub as outlined in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 8-13?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Shared responses are reviewed as potential water stewardship projects, and only selected ones may be uploaded to the Water Action Hub.",
      "A": "CDP directly uploads all shared responses to the Water Action Hub without prior review.",
      "C": "All shared responses are considered final water stewardship projects available on the Water Action Hub immediately.",
      "D": "The Pacific Institute independently sources projects for the Water Action Hub without using CDP’s shared data.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "435",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 8-13.pdf",
    "source_text": "434 Water Action Hub (13.4) Please indicate your consent for CDP to share contact details with the Pacific Institute to support content for its Water Action Hub website Question details Question dependencies None Change from last year No change Rationale The CEO Water Mandate Water Action Hub is an online platform that catalogues water stewardship projects around the world and enables interested parties to connect and work together to solve local and regional water challenges. CDP will share public response data from 3.1.1 with the Pacific Institute to be reviewed as potential water stewardship projects for upload to the Water Action Hub website. Only responses to the following datapoints will be considered for upload: For the Water environmental issue: Country/Area where the risk occurs; River basin where the risk occurs; Primary response to risk; Description of response. CDP’s Privacy Policy can be found here. Response options Select from: • Yes, CDP may share our Disclosure Submission Lead contact details with the Pacific Institute • No Requested content General • If you select “Yes, CDP may share our Disclosure Submission Lead contact details with the Pacific Institute”, CDP will provide your public response data from one question to the CEO Water Mandate’s Water Action Hub. Only your response to 3.1.1 will be shared and reviewed as potential water stewardship projects for upload to the Water Action Hub website. • This will also allow the Pacific Institute to contact your organization if your response data includes a project with potential for inclusion on the Water Action Hub. Your contact information will be kept confidential. Tags Authority type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) W only Questionnaire sector All",
    "new_id": 258
  },
  {
    "id": 17689,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why an organization might exclude certain upstream value chain activities from its reporting, while still adhering to the principles of relevance and transparency, as described in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 8-13?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Due to limited data availability or reporting feasibility, provided that all exclusions are disclosed transparently with clear justification and aligned with the needs of data users.",
      "A": "Because the excluded activities are deemed irrelevant to internal decision-making processes, even if they contribute significantly to deforestation risks.",
      "B": "To simplify the reporting process by omitting smaller facilities where tracking commodity usage is unnecessary for understanding overall environmental impact.",
      "D": "If the excluded activities occur in regions where no legal requirements for environmental reporting exist, ensuring full compliance with local regulations.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "13",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 8-13.pdf",
    "source_text": "12 • If you selected 'No' in column 1 ‘'Is your reporting boundary for your CDP disclosure the same as that used in your financial statements?’ of 1.5 and there are entities included in your consolidated accounting group that are not included in your reporting boundary, select 'Yes' and provide details on the exclusion of these entities in 8.1.1. • Organizations should report on all exclusions. • Elements of your business or upstream value chain may be excluded for a number of reasons: o A geographical location may be excluded if there is no commodity usage or a current lack of visibility over management practices which makes reporting unfeasible for operations in that country, area or region until systems have been put in place; o An activity (e.g. type of business process, or type of supplier) may be excluded due to limited data or reporting feasibility; o Facilities may be excluded due to recent mergers, acquisitions and divestitures (which have taken place during the reporting year), outsourcing and in-sourcing of activities (smaller facilities for which it is not currently possible to track deforestation and/or conversion may also be considered); and o A specific product line may be excluded due to limited data or reporting feasibility. • Note that retailers are only expected to report on their own-branded products, excluding products owned and branded by third parties. • In all cases, the following principles of relevance and transparency must apply to all disclosures (adapted from GHG Protocol, 2004): o Relevance: Ensure the disclosure appropriately reflects the forests-related use of the company and serves the decision-making needs of users – both internal and external to the company. o Transparency: Address all relevant issues in a factual and coherent manner, based on a clear audit trail. Disclose any relevant assumptions and make appropriate references to the accounting and calculation methodologies and data sources used. Explanation of terms • Direct operations (also referred to as ‘own operations’): all activities and sites (e.g., buildings, farms, mines, retail stores) over which the reporting organization has operational or financial control. This covers any internal value chains between the organization’s business units (adapted from TNFD, 2023; SBTN, 2023). • Facilities: may be used throughout this questionnaire as a broad term and not restricted to a particular site or grouping of fixed buildings and factories. For example, if your organization is in the extractive industries, you might normally collate business information for assets or business units, and so you may wish to define ‘facility’ information in this way. • Total commodity volume: the total volume of a commodity produced and/or sourced (including used, purchased, and consumed) by your organization regardless of whether this volume is included or excluded from your disclosure. • Upstream value chain (also referred to as ‘supply chain’): the activities, sites, resources, relationships, and stakeholders that provide products and/or services to your organization. This typically involves activities early in the value chain, such as production or development. The upstream value chain varies depending on the nature of the business but may include raw material, component, or equipment suppliers (adapted from ESRS, 2023). Additional information The GHG Protocol states that an acknowledgement of all exclusions should be made each year to enhance transparency despite disclosure of the same exclusion in previous years. This ensures all data users are always aware of what data has been included in your response.",
    "new_id": 259
  },
  {
    "id": 17690,
    "question": "Which certification scheme is explicitly associated with both a specific form of timber products and a non-timber commodity, requiring differentiation based on the scope of its application, as outlined in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 8-13?",
    "options": {
      "D": "FSC Forest Management certification applicable to Rubber and Hardwood logs.",
      "A": "FSC Chain-of-Custody certification (any type) linked to Sawn timber, veneer, chips and Soy derivatives.",
      "B": "ISCC EU – Identity preserved applied to Palm oil and Paper.",
      "C": "ISCC PLUS Chain-of-custody certification covering Cellulose-based textile fiber and Crude palm oil.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "105-106",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 8-13.pdf",
    "source_text": "104 • Provide details on the primary reason you have specified in column 5 “Primary reason that third-party certification has not been adopted”. If applicable, include the products affected, regions and facilities. • If you have plans to adopt certification in the next two years, provide details on the type of certification, the products, and regions to be covered. Explanation of terms • Certification: the action or process of providing a product with an official document attesting to a status or level of achievement against a certain standard. • Third-party certification: when a certification process is carried out by an independent organization. Tags Authority type Supply chain Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level F only Questionnaire sector Question level All (except FS) (8.12.1) Provide details of the certified volumes sold to each requesting CDP Supply Chain member. Question details Question dependencies This question only appears if you select “Yes” in response to column 2 “Certification details are available for the volumes sold to any requesting CDP Supply Chain members” in 8.12. Change from last year No change Rationale This question gathers details on the percentage of the total commodity volume bought from your organization that is certified by a third party, the certification schemes used and forms of commodities that are certified. Response options 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Requesting member Commodity Form of commodity Total volume of commodity sold to requesting member Metric Third-party certification scheme % of the total volume of commodity sold to requesting member that is certified Comment (optional) Select from: • Member drop down list Select from: • Timber products • Palm oil • Cattle products • Soy • Rubber • Cocoa Select all that apply from response drop-down options below Numerical field [enter a number from 0-999,999,999,999 using a maximum of 2 decimal places] Select from: • Metric tons • Spend • Liters • Gallons • Round wood equivalent (RWE) Grouped option (single-select group; single-select option) from dropdown list below: Numerical field [enter a number from 0-100 using a maximum of 2 decimal places] Text field [maximum 1,000 characters]\n\n[Page 106]\n105 • Coffee • Wood raw material equivalent (WRME) • Cubic meters • Square meters • Other, please specify [Add Row] Form of commodity (column 3) Timber products: • Boards, plywood, engineered wood • Cellulose-based textile fiber • Goods not for resale (GNFR) • Hardwood logs • Paper • Primary packaging • Pulp • Sawn timber, veneer, chips • Secondary packaging • Softwood logs • Tertiary packaging • Unprocessed wood fiber • Wood-based bioenergy • Other form of timber products, please specify Palm oil: • Crude palm kernel oil (CPKO) • Crude palm oil (CPO) • Fresh fruit bunches (FFB) • Palm biodiesel • Palm kernel meal (PKM) • Palm kernel oil derivatives • Palm oil derivatives • Refined palm oil • Other form of palm oil, please specify Cattle products: • Beef • By-products (e.g. glycerin, gelatin) • Cattle • Hides/ leather • Tallow • Tallow biodiesel • Other form of cattle products, please specify Soy: • Embedded soy • Soybean meal • Soybean oil • Soy biodiesel • Soy derivatives • Whole soybeans • Other form of soy, please specify Other, please specify Third-party certification scheme (column 6) Forest management unit/Producer certification • Biosuisse organic [Palm oil, Cattle products, Soy, Coffee, Cocoa] • Donau Soja [Soy] • Europe Soja [Soy] • FSC Controlled Wood certification [Timber] • FSC Forest Management certification [Timber products, Rubber] • ISCC CORSIA • ISCC EU [Palm oil, Cattle products, Soy, Timber products, Coffee, Cocoa] • ISCC Japan FIT [Palm oil] • ISCC PLUS Chain-of-custody certification • Donau Soja – Segregated [Soy] • Europe Soja – Segregated [Soy] • FSC Chain-of-Custody certification (any type) [Timber products, Rubber] • FSC Recycled certification [Timber products] • ISCC CORSIA – Identity preserved • ISCC CORSIA - Mass Balance • ISCC CORSIA – Segregated • ISCC EU – Identity preserved [Palm oil, Cattle products, Soy, Timber products, Coffee, Cocoa] • ISCC EU - Mass Balance [Palm oil, Cattle products, Soy, Timber products, Coffee, Cocoa]",
    "new_id": 260
  },
  {
    "id": 17692,
    "question": "Which of the following statements accurately reflects a distinction between water recycled/reused as defined for the oil & gas sector and its broader definition, as described in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 8-13?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The broader definition encompasses grey water reuse from household processes, whereas the oil & gas sector limits reuse to industrial applications.",
      "B": "Water recycled/reused in the oil & gas sector excludes untreated wastewater, whereas the broader definition includes it.",
      "C": "The oil & gas sector's definition focuses exclusively on reducing water withdrawals, while the broader definition emphasizes both reducing withdrawals and enabling discharge flexibility.",
      "D": "The broader definition applies only to water treated prior to reuse, whereas the oil & gas sector permits untreated water recycling.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "157",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 8-13.pdf",
    "source_text": "156 • Water discharges – volumes by destination: This refers to the proportion of your discharges that are tracked to different types of discharge destinations; e.g. freshwater, brackish surface water/seawater, groundwater, or third parties. • Water discharges – volumes by treatment method: This refers to the proportion of your discharge that you track according to treatment method applied before being returned to the environment - primary, secondary, or tertiary treatment types etc. Different industries will have different requirements to meet compliance standards, or a company may have an internal standard they adhere to. • Water diversions (Metals & mining and coal sectors only): According to the Water Accounting Framework from the Mineral Council of Australia water diversions are flows from an input to an output without being utilized by the operational facility. The flow is not stored with the intention of being used in a task or treated. • Water recycled/reused (Oil & gas sector only): Water and wastewater (treated or untreated) that has been used more than once, in order to reduce water withdrawals. (Aligned with IPIECA’s Oil & gas industry guidance on voluntary sustainability reporting 3rd ed. (2016).) • Water recycled/reused: Water and wastewater (treated or untreated) used more than once before being discharged from the organization’s boundary, so that water demand is reduced. This may be in the same process (recycled), or in a different process within the same facility or another of the organization’s facilities (reused). It can include wastewater re-used from household processes such as washing dishes, laundry, and bathing (grey water). • Water withdrawals – total volume: The sum of all water drawn into the boundaries of the organization (or facility) from all sources for any use over the course of the reporting period. (Source: adapted from GRI Standards Glossary 2016). • Water withdrawals – volumes by source: This refers to the proportion of withdrawals that your organization can trace to different types of water withdrawal source e.g. freshwater, brackish surface water/ seawater, produced water and third party sources, and a breakdown of groundwater by renewable and non-renewable sources. • Water withdrawals quality: This refers to the quality of raw water that your company draws into its boundary (from sources, such as rivers, lakes, groundwater and coastal zones). Example response Example response 0 1 2 3 4 Water aspect % of sites/facilities /operations Frequency of measurement* Method of measurement* Please explain Water withdrawals – total volume 100% Continuously We measure water withdrawals in real-time, using \"in-place\" flow meters. Total water withdrawal volume is one of our environmental key performance indicators and is used to track improvements in water efficiency. We report this information at an internal global level quarterly, and report data externally on an annual basis. Our responses in this question refer to our sites, and for our company, ‘sites’ refer to where our mining, processing, and R&D operations take",
    "new_id": 261
  },
  {
    "id": 17695,
    "question": "Which scenario best aligns with the implied relationships between 'durable goods,' 'usage of durable goods/components,' and 'commercialization' as described in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 8-13?",
    "options": {
      "B": "An industrial machine made of plastic components is used within a factory to produce other products but is not itself sold, reflecting the concept of usage without commercialization.",
      "A": "A plastic electronic component is sold directly to consumers for integration into their personal devices, qualifying it as both a durable good and part of its usage.",
      "C": "A household appliance containing recycled plastic is marketed to end users, thus representing an example of post-consumer recycled content being excluded from commercialization.",
      "D": "A textile product made entirely of virgin materials is leased rather than sold, demonstrating that durable goods cannot be considered commercialized unless ownership transfers.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "281",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 8-13.pdf",
    "source_text": "280 • Select the types of content in your plastic durable goods and durable components for which you’re able to report the percentage they comprise of your total plastic durable goods/components. • Selections in this column determine the presentation of columns 3, 4, 5 and 6. Please explain (column 7) • Explain any exclusions to the data reported. • If you are reporting recycled content percentages, include the method your organization uses to calculate these. • You may provide any further details useful to CDP data users, including: o How the percentages were determined, e.g., by estimation or by calculating the weighted average of all plastic durable goods and durable components sold and/or used. o Any third-party verification of the data reported. o Whether any of the percentages are expected to change, and why. • If applicable, explain why data is not collected and any plans for future data collection. Explanation of terms • Commercialization: placing goods/products/services into the market for financial gain. • Durable goods: this generally refers to goods whose expected usage period is greater than three years. • Durable plastic component: a constituent plastic part of a durable goods, for example, plastic electronic components for tech products or textiles for clothing products. • Recycled content: proportion, by mass of recycled material in a product. Only pre-consumer and post-consumer materials shall be considered as recycled content (adapted from ISO 14021:2016). o Pre-consumer recycled content: content that has been recycled from materials diverted from the waste stream during a manufacturing process (adapted from EMF’s Global Commitment definitions and reporting guidelines). • Post-consumer recycled content: content that has been recycled from materials generated by households or by commercial, industrial and institutional facilities in their role as end users of the product which can no longer be used for its intended purpose (adapted from EMF’s Global Commitment definitions and reporting guidelines and ISO 14021:2016). • Raw material content: the plastic materials that make up a plastic product. (EMF refer to this as ‘material sourcing’). • Third-party verification: Verification conducted by an independent entity that does not provide other services to the company (AFi, 2024). • Usage of durable goods/components: a durable good or component that is involved in the production of a final product or the provision of a service. These durable goods/components are not themselves commercialized. For example, industrial equipment used in manufacturing or IT equipment used in offices. • Virgin materials: materials that have not been previously used or subjected to processing other than for their original production. In the context of plastic, virgin materials are materials not produced from post-industrial or post-consumer recycled material (adapted from EMF’s Circular Economy Glossary).",
    "new_id": 262
  },
  {
    "id": 17696,
    "question": "According to CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 8-13, when reporting water intensity metrics for products, which of the following best captures the reasoning behind CDP's recommendation to define company-specific thresholds for 'much higher' or 'much lower' values?",
    "options": {
      "C": "To allow consistent year-over-year comparisons tailored to the company’s unique operational context and data variability.",
      "A": "To ensure universal applicability across all industries regardless of variations in water use.",
      "B": "To align with regulatory standards that mandate specific thresholds for water intensity reporting.",
      "D": "To simplify the reporting process by adopting industry-wide benchmarks for water intensity trends.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "244",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 8-13.pdf",
    "source_text": "243 [Add Row] Requested content General • Provide details of your water intensity metric(s) for up to 5 products. The question does not ask for water intensity data. If reporting 5 products is not possible, an explanation should be provided in column 5 (Please explain). Product name (column 1) • Please add up to five rows to provide up to 5 products in terms of revenue for which you calculate a water intensity metric. • The description provided should allow data users to identify the product it refers to, e.g., gold or platinum group metals. Comparison with previous reporting year (column 4) • CDP does not define the threshold for considering a value as ‘much higher’ rather than simply ‘higher’ (or ‘much lower’/’lower’). CDP requests this information from many different industries with huge variations in water use, and it would therefore be difficult to provide a universal threshold that is meaningful (as proportions will equate to different absolute values and impacts). • CDP recommends that you define your own threshold for what is ‘much higher’ (and ‘much lower’) and apply it consistently so that each year the reported data for this question is comparable and data users can track your water accounts more effectively. A company-specific explanation for these thresholds should be provided in column 5 (Please explain). • If the data was not previously reported, but was collected, you may choose to indicate a comparison with the previous year or select \"This is our first year of measurement\". In either case, use the “Please explain” column to provide details about the information reported. Please explain (column 5) • Provide any clarification needed for data users to understand your response including indication of any factors affecting your water intensity and the trend you reported, for example arising from local context or geological factors, like ore grade variations. • Please explain: o Your choice of numerator for this product. If you excluded any water source (e.g. rainwater) include this consideration and explain your rationale for doing so; o Your choice of denominator for this product; o The trend reported in column 4 and give a company-specific explanation of the thresholds used to provide the trend. • Indicate the anticipated future trends, if known (note that future trends should be at least one year after the end of the reporting year provided in 1.4). • If the intensity metric is restricted to a specific area/boundary, e.g. company-wide, value chain, joint ventures, country/area, etc. please include this boundary and the explanation for it. • Explain how the metric is used within your organization, for example to set specific targets relating to water efficiency, to guide water strategy, to set remuneration incentives etc.",
    "new_id": 263
  },
  {
    "id": 17697,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes a scenario where an organization would need to specify 'Other, please specify' for the category of target in relation to its no-deforestation or no-conversion goals, as outlined in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 8-13?",
    "options": {
      "D": "When the target pertains specifically to product-level initiatives that are not covered by predefined categories such as business division or site/facility.",
      "A": "When the target applies exclusively to business activities outside the scope of direct operations and suppliers.",
      "B": "When the target involves a combination of business divisions and country/area/region without focusing on a single category.",
      "C": "When the target is defined solely by quantitative metrics unrelated to coverage or specific operational boundaries.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "50-51",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 8-13.pdf",
    "source_text": "49 Ambition The organization sets timebound and quantifiable commodity specific targets to contribute towards overall no-deforestation or no-conversion targets and/or to improve sustainable commodity production and sourcing. Response options\n\n[Page 51]\n50 1 2 3 4 5 6 Commodity Target reference number Target contributes to no-deforestation or no-conversion target reported in 8.7 Target coverage Commodity volume covered by target (metric tons) Category of target & Quantitative metric Timber products Select from: • Target 1-25 Select from: • Yes, this target contributes to our no-deforestation target • Yes, this target contributes to our no-conversion target • No, this target is separate from our no-deforestation or no-conversion target Select from: • Business activity • Business division • Organization-wide (direct operations only) • Organization-wide (including suppliers) • Country/area/region • Product level • Site/facility • Suppliers • Other, please specify Select from: • Disclosure volume • Total commodity volume • Total commodity volume associated with operations or locations covered by target • Other volume, please specify Grouped option (single-select group; single-select option) from dropdown list below: Palm oil Cattle products Soy Rubber Cocoa Coffee Select from: • Timber products • Palm oil • Cattle products",
    "new_id": 264
  },
  {
    "id": 17698,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes why mitigation measures such as 'scheduling' or 'operational controls' might be insufficient to address biodiversity impacts if implemented in isolation, as described in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 8-13?",
    "options": {
      "A": "They fail to account for both direct site-related impacts and broader indirect consequences associated with operational activities.",
      "B": "They primarily target direct physical impacts rather than addressing indirect effects like emissions and effluents.",
      "C": "They are only applicable when activities occur within protected areas recognized for high biodiversity value.",
      "D": "They rely exclusively on changes to infrastructure design, which cannot mitigate behavioral disturbances caused by human actions.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "304",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 8-13.pdf",
    "source_text": "303 • Include details of how the proximity selected in column 6 was determined. Indicate whether any of your organization’s activities located in or near to the selected area could negatively affect biodiversity (column 9) • Activities negatively affecting areas important for biodiversity refers to activities: o Leading to the deterioration of natural habitats and the habitats of species, and to disturbance of the species for which the protected area has been designated; and o Where mitigation measures have not been implemented accordingly. • When assessing whether your activities could negatively affect biodiversity, you should consider both: o The direct impacts of physical sites, power transmission corridors, pipelines, disposal areas, and associated facilities that would not have been constructed in the absence of the sites/operations; and o The indirect impacts of any other activities associated with the sites/operations and of emissions/effluents released by the sites/operations. Mitigation measures implemented within the selected area (column 10) • This column is presented only if “Yes, but mitigation measures have been implemented” is selected in column 9 “Indicate whether any of your organization’s…”. • The drop-down options are based on the mitigation hierarchy referred to in the guide prepared by The Biodiversity Consultancy to the Cross-Sector Biodiversity Initiative (CSBI, 2015): o Site selection – relocation of the site or site components away from an area recognized for its high biodiversity and ecosystem services value. o Project design – selection of the type of infrastructure, and its placing and mode of operation on the site. o Scheduling – changes in the timing of operational activities. o Physical controls – adaptation of the physical design of the infrastructure to reduce potential impacts, such as installing culverts on roads, or bird flight diverters on transmission lines. o Operational controls – management and regulation of the actions of people associated with the site/operations — including staff, contractors or (where feasible) project affected people and migrants. o Abatement controls – reduction of the levels of pollutants (e.g. emissions of dust, light, noise, gases, or",
    "new_id": 265
  },
  {
    "id": 17699,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the nuanced distinction between 'deforestation-free' and 'conversion-free' as outlined in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 8-13?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Conversion-free implies no gross conversion of any natural ecosystems, whereas deforestation-free is limited to preventing gross loss specifically of natural forests.",
      "A": "Deforestation-free exclusively refers to avoiding damage to natural forests, while conversion-free includes all ecosystems but allows minimal deforestation.",
      "C": "Deforestation-free and conversion-free are interchangeable terms since both ultimately aim to prevent ecosystem degradation.",
      "D": "Conversion-free permits low levels of deforestation if it facilitates optimal conservation outcomes, unlike deforestation-free.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "63",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 8-13.pdf",
    "source_text": "62 the site level in the interest of facilitating optimal conservation and production outcomes (see AFi’s definition for minimal level [of deforestation or conversion], 2024) (adapted from AFi, 2024). • Deforestation- and conversion-free (also referred to as \"no-conversion\"): commodity production, sourcing, or financial investments that do not cause or contribute to deforestation and the conversion of natural ecosystems. o Conversion-free refers to no gross conversion of natural ecosystems, which the Accountability Framework specifies as the appropriate policy and goal on this topic for companies and supply chains. o Deforestation-free refers to no gross deforestation of natural forests, which the Accountability Framework specifies as the appropriate policy and goal on this topic for companies and supply chains. o In the context of the Accountability Framework, deforestation refers to the loss of natural forest (see definition of deforestation). o The terms “no-conversion”, and “deforestation- and conversion-free” are used in favor of “zero-conversion” because “zero” can imply an absolutist approach that may be at odds with the need to sometimes accommodate minimal levels of conversion at the site level in the interest of facilitating optimal conservation and production outcomes (see AFi’s definition for minimal level [of deforestation or conversion], 2024) (adapted from AFi, 2024). • Landscape and jurisdictional approach: a muti-stakeholder collaborative strategy to advance shared sustainability goals and build resilience at landscape scale. A jurisdictional approach is a landscape approach defined by administrative boundaries and with high level of government involvement. • Landscape and jurisdictional initiatives: the on-the-ground collaborative program to set common goals, take collective action while reconciling different interest, and monitor progress towards improving social, environmental, and economic outcomes at landscape/jurisdictional scale. • Reforestation: re-establishment of forest through planting and/or deliberate seeding on land classified as forest (FAO, 2015). • Restoration: the process of assisting the recovery of an ecosystem, and its associated conservation values, that has been degraded, damaged, or destroyed (adapted from SER, 2004). • Smallholder: small-scale agricultural or forest products producers that are distinct from larger-scale producers found in similar contexts by virtue of many or all of the following characteristics: o high degree of dependence on family labor. o profits accrue primarily to the farm/forest owner and their family. o the farm/forest provides a primary source of income livelihood for the smallholder. o production units have a relatively small land footprint (relative to the range of production unit sizes for the given commodity and region). o household resources are allocated to both food crops and cash crops. o relatively low use of agricultural inputs and generally low productivity and yields. o significant economic constraints, such as lack of capital assets and low access to finance. o significant information constraints, including lack of technical knowledge and low access to market information (adapted from AFi, 2024). • Third-party certification: when a certification process is carried out by an independent organization. • Tier 1 supplier (also referred to as ‘direct supplier’): a supplier that provides or sells products directly to the reporting organization (GHG Protocol, 2013).",
    "new_id": 266
  },
  {
    "id": 17701,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why a financial institution's financed emissions are considered part of its Scope 3 inventory, and how this classification impacts the assessment of their portfolio's environmental influence, as described in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 8-13?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Financed emissions fall under Scope 3 as they result from the activities of companies financed by the institution, making them indirect emissions that must be included to fully capture the institution’s environmental impact.",
      "A": "Financed emissions are classified under Scope 3 because they represent direct emissions from sources owned by the institution, thus providing an accurate measure of its total carbon footprint.",
      "B": "Scope 3 includes financed emissions since these are controlled directly by the financial institution, allowing for precise tracking of biodiversity impacts through standardized metrics like weighted average carbon intensity.",
      "D": "The classification of financed emissions in Scope 3 is based on their contribution to the institution’s revenue streams, ensuring alignment with exposure metrics such as portfolio carbon footprint.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "362",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 8-13.pdf",
    "source_text": "361 • Ensure your explanation is specific to the organization and provides details as to why you do not conduct analysis to understand how your portfolio impacts biodiversity. • You should also include details on whether you are exploring ways to measure your portfolio impact in the future and what metrics you are looking at using. Explanation of terms • Financed emissions: the absolute greenhouse gas emissions associated with a portfolio, expressed in tons CO2e. For financial institutions, the indirect emissions caused by their financing activities are relevant and their emissions inventory would be incomplete without accounting for them. The GHG Protocol classifies these emissions in Scope 3 Category 15 Investments. They are also known as portfolio emissions or financed emissions. Put simply, they are emissions that occur at sources owned or controlled by other companies, but which are made possible because those companies are financed by the investment and lending of financial institutions; and therefore are indirect to the financial institution and should be included in the financial institution’s Scope 3 inventory. • Other carbon footprinting and/or exposure metrics: Metrics organizations in the financial sector can use to understand how their financial portfolio impacts the climate, as identified by the TCFD and to be used alongside portfolio emission metrics: o Carbon intensity: Volume of carbon emissions per million dollars of revenue (carbon efficiency of a portfolio), expressed in tons CO2e/Million revenue (in unit currency). o Weighted average carbon intensity: Portfolio’s exposure to carbon-intensive companies, expressed in tons CO2e/Million revenue. This is the metric recommended by the TCFD. o Portfolio carbon footprint: Total carbon emissions for a portfolio normalized by the market value of the portfolio, expressed in tons CO2e/Million invested. • Portfolio: in the context of this questionnaire your portfolio is your entire collection of the core financing activities and insurance policies that you offer. For banking, this is the entire collection of products, securities and loans held on your balance sheet for which you own the receivable stream. For asset managers, this is the entire collection of your products and investments that you hold and/or manage on behalf of your clients. For asset owners, this is the entire collection of products, funds and investments owned and controlled by your company. For investment portfolios, asset managers should consider discretionary investments, those where the company has discretion over investment decision. For insurance underwriting, this is the entire collection of products and insurance policies you provide to your clients. • Portfolio impact: impact of financial activities, namely lending, investment and insurance underwriting, on the environment. Tags Authority type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level CC,F,W,B Sector Question level FS Only",
    "new_id": 267
  },
  {
    "id": 17702,
    "question": "Which scenario would most likely result in the highest percentage being reported under column 5, '% of sourced volume from unknown origin', while still adhering to the reporting guidelines, as outlined in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 8-13?",
    "options": {
      "D": "A company has traced its embedded soy volumes to animal feed suppliers but cannot determine the country or region where the soy was originally grown.",
      "A": "A company traces all its sourced soy volumes to specific farms but lacks data on whether those farms are within the same sourcing area.",
      "B": "A company reports all its sourced soy volumes as traceable to the country of origin, without identifying specific regions or production units within that country.",
      "C": "A company can only trace its sourced soy volumes to processing facilities located outside the country of origin, with no further information available.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "68",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 8-13.pdf",
    "source_text": "67 columns 1 “% […] traceable to production unit” to 5 “% […] from unknown origin” should account for 100% of the sourced volume you reported in 8.2, for each commodity. • If you have included embedded soy in your sourced volume, as reported in 8.2 and 8.2.1, you should include your embedded soy volume in your response to this question. • Note: when disclosing the traceability of embedded soy, report the level of traceability back to the soy production origin. If you can only trace to the origin of the animal that was fed the soy or to the soy feed supplier origin, report this in column “% of sourced volume traceable to other point…”. If you have not traced your embedded soy at all, disclose this in column “% of sourced volume from unknown origin”. % of sourced volume traceable to production unit (column 1) • If you have traced your sourced volumes to the specific production unit of origin (e.g. farm, breeding farm, plantation, ranch, or forest management unit), report the related percentage here. % of sourced volume traceable to sourcing area and not to production unit (column 2) • If you have traced your sourced volumes to an area or region where the material was produced or extracted (e.g., a radius or supply shed around a mill, processing facility or a first point of collection), but the specific production unit of origin is not known, report the related percentage here. % of sourced volume traceable to country/area of origin and not to sourcing area or production unit (column 3) • If you have not traced your sourced volume to the production unit or sourcing area where the material was produced and have only traced to the level of the country/area of origin, report the related percentage here. For further guidance on country/area lists, refer to the CDP technical note: Countries, Areas and Regions. % of sourced volume traceable to other point (i.e., processing facility/first importer) not in the country/area of origin (column 4) • If you can trace the commodity to a processing or storage facility/first importer in a different country to the country/area of origin, report the related percentage here. % of sourced volume reported [auto calculated] (column 6) • This column will be auto-calculated. The percentage of sourced volume reported will be calculated as the sum of column 1 “% […] traceable to production unit”, column 2 “% […] traceable to sourcing area and not to production unit, column 3 “% […] traceable to country/area of origin and not to sourcing area or production unit”, column 4 “% […] traceable to other point (i.e., processing facility/first importer) not in the country/area of origin” and column 5 “% […] from unknown origin”. Ensure that you have entered data into all these columns. If none of your volumes are traceable to a particular point, enter 0 (zero). These columns should be completed for all commodity rows. • Please ensure that this column adds up to 100%. Explanation of terms • Production unit: a plantation, farm, ranch, or forest management unit. This includes all plots used for agriculture or forestry that are under one management, located in the same general area, and share the same means of production. It also includes natural ecosystems, infrastructure, and other land within or associated with the plantation, farm, ranch, or forest management unit.",
    "new_id": 268
  },
  {
    "id": 17703,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the implicit rationale for requiring organizations to disclose land not currently used for production, considering its potential future implications, according to CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 8-13?",
    "options": {
      "A": "To enable investors and stakeholders to assess both current land stewardship practices and risks/opportunities associated with possible future expansion or conversion of unused land.",
      "B": "To exclusively monitor the conservation efforts of natural ecosystems without regard for future production plans.",
      "C": "To provide a comprehensive inventory of all land types under organizational control, regardless of their potential utility or ecological status.",
      "D": "To prioritize reporting on degraded or abandoned areas as these are deemed most critical for immediate commodity production.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "30-31",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 8-13.pdf",
    "source_text": "29 land holdings is critical for understanding current and future risks and opportunities related to deforestation and conversion of other natural ecosystems. Ambition The organization discloses on the sites that they own, manage and/or control. Response options Select one of the following options: • All the land we own, manage and/or control is used for production • Some of the land we own, manage and/or control is not used for production Tags Authority type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level F only Questionnaire sector Question level All (except FS) (8.4.1) Provide details on the land you own, manage and/or control that was not used to produce your disclosed commodities in the reporting year. Question details Question dependencies This question only appears if you select “Some of the land we own, manage and/or control is not used for production” in response to 8.4 Change from last year No change Rationale Organizations should be able to identify the land it owns, manages and/or controls which is not currently used to produce commodities, but may or may not be in the future. By disclosing this data, you provide investors and other data users insights on land stewardship in addition to potential challenges your organization may face in expanding production areas. Ambition The organization discloses on the sites that they own, manage and/or control. Response options 1 2 3 4 5 6 Country/area Type of control Land type Area (hectares) % covered by natural forests and other natural ecosystems Please explain Select from: [List of countries/areas] Select from: • Own land Select from: • Area for infrastructure Numerical field [enter a number from 0-Numerical field [enter a number from 0-100 using Text field [maximum\n\n[Page 31]\n30 • Concessions/lease • Publicly owned land • Other type of control, please specify • Unplanted land (designated for future planting) • Set-aside land for conservation • Natural ecosystems with potential to be legally converted for commodity production • Degraded/abandoned area with potential for commodity production • Land managed by company-affiliated smallholders • Land protected by certifications • Land leased for natural resource exploration and/or extraction • Other land type, please specify 999,999,999 using a maximum of 2 decimal places] a maximum of 2 decimal places] 2,500 characters] [Add row] Requested content General • This question requests information on the land you own, manage and/ or control that was not used to produce a commodity. This includes land that is used for infrastructure such as offices and roads, or natural ecosystems. • This land may be designated for future cultivation or rearing of the commodities, or the land may be set-aside for conservation. Country/area (column 1) • If you own, manage and/or control land which was not used for production that is located in more than one country/area, add a row for each relevant country/area per land type. Type of control (column 2) • Select the option that best represents your organization’s control over the land in a specific country/area. • If you have more than one type of control (e.g., own land and leasehold), add a row for each type of control. Land type (column 3) • Provide information on each type of land owned, managed and/or controlled by your organization within each country/area. • See the definitions of the land type options in the “Explanation of terms”. • Select “Other land type, please specify” to add another land type and a text box will appear for you to complete. Area (hectares) (column 4) • State the area that you own, manage and/or control that was not used for production.",
    "new_id": 269
  },
  {
    "id": 17704,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the implicit relationship between an organization's role as a 'Convener' and its ability to claim progress toward landscape goals, as described in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 8-13?",
    "options": {
      "B": "While an organization in the Convener role may contribute to designing shared goals, claiming progress still depends on participation in a collective monitoring framework or equivalent oversight.",
      "A": "An organization acting as a Convener is prohibited from making any claims about progress unless it also serves as a Funder.",
      "C": "The Convener role inherently requires the organization to monitor progress using only externally defined collective frameworks, disallowing individual claims.",
      "D": "The Convener’s leadership guarantees the organization’s authority to make both individual and collective claims without additional verification mechanisms.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "122-123",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 8-13.pdf",
    "source_text": "121 (8.15.2) Provide details of your engagement with landscape/jurisdictional initiatives to sustainable land use during the reporting year. Question details Question dependencies This question only appears if you select “Yes, we engage in landscape/jurisdictional initiatives” in response to column “Engagement in landscape/jurisdictional initiatives” of 8.15. Change from last year No change Rationale This question allows data users to understand: the landscape/jurisdictional initiatives you engage with, the nature of the engagement, the sustainability goals supported by your organization’s activities, the investment, and how progress is monitored. Working collaboratively with multiple actors at a landscape and jurisdictional scale is increasingly accepted as a best practice approach to driving conservation and restoration results at scale, transitioning towards deforestation and conversion free production and achieving sustainability goals, especially where there are systemic challenges in production landscapes. Responses will provide valuable insights into good practice for corporate involvement in landscape and jurisdictional initiatives. Ambition The organization engages collaboratively to drive shared goals that contribute to positive outcomes in landscapes and jurisdictions. Response options 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Landscape/ jurisdiction ID Name of initiative Country/area Name of landscape or jurisdiction area Attach public information about the initiative (optional) Indicate if you can provide the size of the area covered by the initiative Area covered by the initiative (ha) Type of engagement Select from: LJ1 – LJ25 Text field [maximum 500 characters] Select from: • List of Forests-countries/areas • Other, please specify Text field [maximum 500 characters] [Attachment functionality] Select from: • Yes • No, area is unknown • No, other reason, please specify Numerical field [enter a number from 0-999,999,999,999 using a maximum of 4 decimal places] Select all that apply: • Convener: Leads or facilitates the design, set-up, and high-level management of the initiative • Partner: Shares responsibility with other stakeholders to manage and implement actions. • Implementer: Executes actions\n\n[Page 123]\n122 based on the collective goals • Funder: Provides full or partial financial resources • Other, please specify 9 10 11 12 13 14 Engagement start year Engagement end year Estimated investment over the project period Landscape goals supported by engagement Organization actions supporting initiative Type of partners engaged in the initiative design and implementation Numerical field [enter a number between 1900 – 2050] Select from: • Please specify • Not defined Numerical field [enter a number from 0- 999,999,999,999 using a maximum of 2 decimal places and no commas] Grouped option (multi-select group; multi-select option) from dropdown list below: Grouped option (multi-select group; multi-select option) from dropdown list below: Select all that apply: • Financial institution • National government • Sub-national government • Indigenous peoples • Local communities • NGO and/or civil society • Producers • Private sector • Other, please specify 15 16 17 18 19 20 Description of engagement Collective monitoring framework used to measure progress towards landscape goals and actions State the achievements of your engagement so far and how progress is monitored Claims made Type of claim made Provide further details on your claim Text field [maximum 2,500 characters] Select from: • Yes, progress is collectively monitored using a shared external framework, please specify • Yes, progress is monitored using an internally defined framework • No, but we are planning to monitor progress in the next two years Text field [maximum 2,500 characters] Select from: • Yes, we are making a claim • No, we are not making any claims, but we plan to in the next two years • No, we are not making any claims, and we do not plan to within the next two years Select from: • Individual claim • Collective claim • Both individual and collective • Other, please specify Text field [maximum 2,500 characters]",
    "new_id": 270
  },
  {
    "id": 17705,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the rationale behind financial institutions disclosing their financing and insurance of fossil fuel assets, according to CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 8-13?",
    "options": {
      "C": "To provide data users with insights into the climate-related risks and opportunities linked to their portfolios.",
      "A": "To comply with mandatory global regulations on carbon emissions reporting.",
      "B": "To exclusively track and reduce their internal operational greenhouse gas emissions.",
      "D": "To prioritize investments in renewable energy as part of their sustainability commitments.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "384-385",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 8-13.pdf",
    "source_text": "383 • If you are not able to provide the emissions for each of the industries in which you operate, explain why. • For your scope 2 financed emissions, explain if market-based and/or location-based method has been used. Explanation of terms • Gross emissions: GHGs emitted into the atmosphere before accounting for offsets or credits that have reduced or compensated for emissions. • Scope 1, Scope 2, and Scope 3 emissions: should be defined and calculated according to the methodology contained in The Greenhouse Gas Protocol: A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard (GHG Protocol), Revised Edition, March 2004, published by the World Resources Institute and the World Business Council on Sustainable Development (WRI/WBCSD) Tags Authority type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level CC only Sector Question level FS only Portfolio Values (12.3) State the values of your financing and insurance of fossil fuel assets in the reporting year. Question details Question dependencies This question appears for organizations in the Financial Services sector who report in 1.10 that they undertake banking, investing and “General(non-life)” insurance underwriting activities. The question does not appear for organizations who report that they only insure “Life and/or Health”. Rows are presented according to the reported organizational activities. Change from last year Modified guidance Rationale The majority of financial institutions’ emissions are driven by the activities they finance in the wider economy, also known as ‘financed emissions’. The exposure of financial institutions to climate-related risks and opportunities are determined by their portfolios via lending, investment and insurance underwriting activities. Therefore, data users wish to understand the concentrations of fossil fuel assets in financial institutions’ portfolios. Ambition Financial institutions measure and disclose their financing and insurance of fossil fuel assets to understand, and help data users understand, their impact on the climate. Response options\n\n[Page 385]\n384 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Portfolio Reporting values of the financing and/or insurance of fossil fuel assets Value of the fossil fuel assets in your portfolio (unit currency - as specified in 1.2) New loans advanced in reporting year (unit currency – as specified 1.2) Total premium written in reporting year (unit currency - as specified in 1.2) % of portfolio value comprised of fossil fuel assets to total portfolio value in reporting year Details of calculation Primary reason for not providing values of the financing and/or insurance to fossil fuel assets Please explain why you are not providing values of the financing and/or insurance to fossil fuel assets Lending to all fossil fuel assets Select from: Yes No, but we plan to report our portfolio's exposure to fossil fuel in the next two years No, and we do not plan to report our portfolio's exposure to fossil fuel in the next two years Numeric field [enter a number from 0-999,999,999,999,999 using a maximum of 2 decimal places and no commas] Numeric field [enter a number from 0-999,999,999,999,999 using a maximum of 2 decimal places and no commas] N/A Percentage field [enter a percentage from 0-100 using a maximum of one decimal place] Text field [maximum 2,500 characters] Select from: Lack of internal resources, capabilities, or expertise (e.g., due to organization size) No standardized procedure Not an immediate strategic priority Judged to be unimportant or not relevant Other, please specify Text field [maximum 2,500 characters] Lending to thermal coal N/A",
    "new_id": 271
  },
  {
    "id": 17706,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between the financed emissions calculation and the data obtained from clients or investees as described in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 8-13?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Data obtained from clients or investees may optionally contribute to financed emissions calculations, but such contributions are not required to match the percentage of portfolio coverage reported in column 3.",
      "A": "The percentage of financed emissions calculated using client-provided data is mandatory and must always align with the total portfolio value reported in column 4.",
      "B": "Primary activity data or emissions data obtained from clients or investees can be used optionally to calculate financed emissions, but only if it represents less than 50% of the portfolio’s total value.",
      "C": "Financed emissions derived exclusively from client-provided data must constitute 100% of the reported figures in column 2 to ensure compliance with gross reporting standards.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "365",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 8-13.pdf",
    "source_text": "364 • Other, please specify [Fixed Row] Requested content General • Metrics other than absolute emissions (in tCO2e) should not be reported in this question, and should be reported in 12.1.3. • For example, weighted average carbon intensities (WACI) should be reported in 12.1.3. Portfolio (column 0) • The options which appear are driven by the activities you selected in 1.10. • You are requested to complete all rows in this table. Financed emissions (metric unit tons CO2e) in the reporting year (column 2) • Use gross figures for reporting absolute emissions, not net figures. For funded amounts, gross exposure shall be calculated as the funded carrying amounts (before subtracting the loss allowance, when applicable), whether prepared in accordance with IFRS Accounting Standards or other GAAP. • Enter the emissions in metric unit tons CO2e, entering numbers only up to 99,999,999,999 without commas and up to three decimal places. • Negative numbers are not allowed as reporting needs to be gross, not net figures. Emission figures should be for the reporting year only. • Entering 0 implies that you have measured and calculated emissions from this source and they are equal to zero. % of portfolio covered in relation to total portfolio value (column 3) • Enter the percentage of portfolio value that has been covered by the financed emissions calculation to the portfolio value based on the assets value reported in 1.10. Total value of assets included in the financed emissions calculation (column 4) • The value will be auto calculated based on the percentage provided in column 2 “Financed emissions (metric unit tons CO2e) in the reporting year” and the portfolio value based on assets value reported for the corresponding portfolio in question 1.10. % of financed emissions calculated using data obtained from clients/investees (optional) (column 5) • Such data obtained from value chain partners (clients or investees) may take the form of primary activity data or emissions data calculated by value chain partners. More information on this can be found in Chapter 7, Collecting Data, of the GHG Protocol’s Corporate Value Chain (Scope 3) Accounting and Reporting Standard.",
    "new_id": 272
  },
  {
    "id": 17707,
    "question": "Which scenario would require reporting the weight of a plastic component in durable goods while excluding its non-plastic parts, based on the definitions and instructions provided, according to CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 8-13?",
    "options": {
      "A": "A company sells a mixed-material electronic device where the plastic portion constitutes 40% of the total weight.",
      "B": "A manufacturer uses an industrial machine with replaceable plastic gears that make up 60% of the machine's weight.",
      "C": "A business commercializes a consumer appliance weighing 5 kilograms, of which 3 kilograms are plastic components.",
      "D": "An organization utilizes office equipment containing a durable plastic casing that represents 55% of the item’s total weight.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "280-281",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 8-13.pdf",
    "source_text": "279 • % post-consumer recycled content • None Durable goods and durable components used* 6 7 % post-consumer recycled content Please explain Percentage field [enter a number from 0-100 using a maximum of 2 decimal places] Text field [maximum 1,000 characters] [Fixed row] Requested content General • The rows “Durable goods and durable components sold” and “Durable goods and durable components used” are presented based on selections in 10.2. o If you select “Yes” to the row “Production/commercialization of durable plastic goods and/or components (including mixed materials)” in 10.2, you will be presented with Row 1 “Durable goods and durable components sold”. o If you select “Yes” to the row “Usage of durable plastic goods and/or components (including mixed materials)” in 10.2, you will be presented with Row 2 “Durable goods and durable components used”. • For durable goods/components made from mixed materials, only report those which are primarily plastic (corresponding to 50% of weight). Total weight during the reporting year (Metric tons) (column 1) • The value entered must be in metric tons (1 metric ton = 1,000 kg). • For mixed materials, only report the total weight of the plastic element of the durable goods and durable components. For example, if a durable good weighs 200g and contains half plastic by weight, only include the 100g of plastic in your reported figure. • CDP recognizes that this figure may be estimated rather than exact. Raw material content percentages available to report (column 2)\n\n[Page 281]\n280 • Select the types of content in your plastic durable goods and durable components for which you’re able to report the percentage they comprise of your total plastic durable goods/components. • Selections in this column determine the presentation of columns 3, 4, 5 and 6. Please explain (column 7) • Explain any exclusions to the data reported. • If you are reporting recycled content percentages, include the method your organization uses to calculate these. • You may provide any further details useful to CDP data users, including: o How the percentages were determined, e.g., by estimation or by calculating the weighted average of all plastic durable goods and durable components sold and/or used. o Any third-party verification of the data reported. o Whether any of the percentages are expected to change, and why. • If applicable, explain why data is not collected and any plans for future data collection. Explanation of terms • Commercialization: placing goods/products/services into the market for financial gain. • Durable goods: this generally refers to goods whose expected usage period is greater than three years. • Durable plastic component: a constituent plastic part of a durable goods, for example, plastic electronic components for tech products or textiles for clothing products. • Recycled content: proportion, by mass of recycled material in a product. Only pre-consumer and post-consumer materials shall be considered as recycled content (adapted from ISO 14021:2016). o Pre-consumer recycled content: content that has been recycled from materials diverted from the waste stream during a manufacturing process (adapted from EMF’s Global Commitment definitions and reporting guidelines). • Post-consumer recycled content: content that has been recycled from materials generated by households or by commercial, industrial and institutional facilities in their role as end users of the product which can no longer be used for its intended purpose (adapted from EMF’s Global Commitment definitions and reporting guidelines and ISO 14021:2016). • Raw material content: the plastic materials that make up a plastic product. (EMF refer to this as ‘material sourcing’). • Third-party verification: Verification conducted by an independent entity that does not provide other services to the company (AFi, 2024). • Usage of durable goods/components: a durable good or component that is involved in the production of a final product or the provision of a service. These durable goods/components are not themselves commercialized. For example, industrial equipment used in manufacturing or IT equipment used in offices. • Virgin materials: materials that have not been previously used or subjected to processing other than for their original production. In the context of plastic, virgin materials are materials not produced from post-industrial or post-consumer recycled material (adapted from EMF’s Circular Economy Glossary).",
    "new_id": 273
  },
  {
    "id": 17709,
    "question": "When reporting exclusions in the context of biodiversity-related data, which condition must be met to ensure compliance with the principles outlined for relevance and transparency, according to CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 8-13?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Companies are required to disclose all assumptions but can omit details about small projects if they have no potential for biodiversity-related risks.",
      "A": "Exclusions must always be evaluated for biodiversity-related risks, regardless of their perceived impact or size.",
      "C": "Transparency is achieved by disclosing exclusions only when they involve significant business units or large geographical areas.",
      "D": "Relevance is ensured by including all entities within the organizational boundary, even if data is difficult to gather for minor operations.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "293-294",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 8-13.pdf",
    "source_text": "292 Exclusions (11.1) Within your reporting boundary, are there any geographical areas, business units or mining projects excluded from your disclosure? Question details Change from last year No change Rationale CDP seeks to share comprehensive and representative biodiversity-related data. If companies need to exclude areas of their business from their disclosure, data users must be informed of the exclusions as this may affect their analysis. Ambition The organization reports on all exclusions from the reporting boundary and does not have any significant exclusions from their disclosure. Response options Select one of the following options: • Yes • No Requested content General • You may exclude particular geographies, business activities, and/or small projects for which it is difficult to gather data when biodiversity impacts are sufficiently small. • Any groups, companies, businesses or organizations falling within your organizational boundary but not included in your disclosure should be reported in 11.1.1. • In all cases, the following principles of relevance and transparency must apply to all disclosures (adapted from the GHG Protocol): o Relevance: ensure the disclosure appropriately reflects the biodiversity impacts of the organization and serves the decision-making needs of users – both internal and external to the organization. o Transparency: address all relevant issues in a factual and coherent manner, based on a clear audit trail. Disclose any relevant assumptions and make appropriate references to the accounting and calculation methodologies and data sources used. • References throughout the questionnaire to “your organization” include all the entities within your reporting boundary for which you are providing information. Please apply this logic consistently when responding to questions. Tags Authority type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level B Questionnaire sector Question level M-B only (11.1.1) Please report your exclusions and describe their potential for biodiversity-related risk.\n\n[Page 294]\n293 Question details Question dependencies This question only appears if you select “Yes” in response to 11.1. Change from last year No change Rationale CDP seeks to share comprehensive and representative biodiversity-related data. Data users need to be informed of exclusions that may affect their analysis. Response options Please complete the following table. You are able to add rows by using the “Add Row” button at the bottom of the table. 1 2 3 4 Exclusion Description of exclusion Potential for biodiversity-related risk Please explain Select from: ● Country/area ● Business units ● Mining projects ● Other, please specify Text field [maximum 2,400 characters] Select from: ● No potential ● Potential for biodiversity-related risks but not evaluated ● Potential for biodiversity-related risks evaluated, but not disclosing to CDP ● Don’t know Text field [maximum 2,400 characters] [Add row] Requested content General • Any exclusions of your business can be highlighted here and duly explained. Exclusion (column 1) • Select the category that best describes the part of your business that is being excluded from your disclosure. Description of exclusion (column 2) • Clearly outline these exclusions, including details such as the exact geographical location, activity, and/or name of the business unit, mining project, or facility. Potential for biodiversity-related risk (column 3) Potential for biodiversity-related risk refers to any operation that may directly or indirectly impact biodiversity. Please indicate whether you have evaluated whether there is potential for such a risk for the excluded location, activity, project, etc. and whether there is potential risk present or not.",
    "new_id": 274
  },
  {
    "id": 17711,
    "question": "Which implication can be drawn regarding the necessity of reporting facility-level water data for organizations operating in regions with restricted water sources, according to CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 8-13?",
    "options": {
      "C": "It is critical for enabling geographic analysis of water-related risks and demonstrating accountability to local stakeholders.",
      "A": "It is optional but recommended to improve transparency about water consumption patterns affecting stakeholder relationships.",
      "B": "It primarily serves to ensure regulatory compliance without providing additional strategic value.",
      "D": "It is only necessary when withdrawing from overdrawn freshwater aquifers rather than alternative sources like seawater.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "208-209",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 8-13.pdf",
    "source_text": "207 (9.3.1) For each facility referenced in 9.3, provide coordinates, water accounting data, and a comparison with the previous reporting year. Question text Question dependencies This question only appears if you have selected “Yes, we have assessed this value chain stage and identified facilities with substantive water-related dependencies, impacts, risks, and/or opportunities” in column “Identification of facilities in this value chain stage” in one or both rows of 9.3. Change from last year Minor change Rationale Reporting information on facilities where you have identified substantive water-related dependencies, impacts, risks, and/or opportunities helps data users have confidence that your organization is monitoring local water aspects. It provides insight to dependency on different sources and potential impacts associated with water withdrawals and discharges. For example, withdrawing from an overdrawn freshwater aquifer rather than from seawater will have significantly different consequences for local areas with water stress and an organization's water security. In regions where water sources are highly restricted, the organization's water consumption patterns can influence relations with other stakeholders. Providing facility-level information is useful for demonstrating regulatory compliance (e.g., discharges to the local environment), for risk assessments and for providing insight to risk responses (e.g., tracking water efficiency improvements). Geo-location coordinates for your facilities with substantive water-related dependencies, impacts, risks, and/or opportunities enables data users to analyze geographically linked dependencies, impacts, risks, and opportunities and to do so across multiple companies. This also facilitates the integration of CDP’s water data with other geographically linked data. Response options Please complete the following table. You are able to add rows using the “Add Row” button at the bottom of the table.\n\n[Page 209]\n208 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Facility reference number Facility name (optional) Value chain stage Dependencies, impacts, risks, and/or opportunities identified at this facility Withdrawals or discharges in the reporting year Reason for no withdrawals and/or discharges Country/Area & River basin Latitude Longitude Located in area with water stress Select from: • Facility reference numbers: Facility 1-100 Text field [maximum 500 characters] Select from: • Direct operations • Upstream value chain Select all that apply: • Dependencies • Impacts • Risks • Opportunities Select from: • Yes, withdrawals and discharges • Yes, withdrawals only • Yes, discharges only • No Text field [maximum 1,000 characters] Grouped option (single-select group; single-select option) from Country/area River basin list Numerical field [enter a number from 0 to +/-90.000000 using a maximum of six decimal places] Numerical field enter a number from 0 to +/-180.000000 using a maximum of six decimal places] Select from: • Yes • No • Unknown 11 12 13 Primary power generation source for your electricity generation at this facility Oil & gas sector business division Total water withdrawals at this facility (megaliters) Select from: • Coal – Hard • Lignite • Oil • Gas • Sustainable biomass • Other biomass • Waste (non-biomass) • Nuclear Select all that apply: • Chemicals • Upstream • Midstream • Downstream • Other, please specify • Not applicable Numerical field [enter a number from 0-999,999,999,999 using a maximum of two decimal places]",
    "new_id": 275
  },
  {
    "id": 17712,
    "question": "Which scenario would most likely require an organization to select 'No' in response to whether they are implementing or supporting ACAs, while still aligning with the text's guidance on explanations, as outlined in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 8-13?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The organization is actively involved in protecting threatened species within the area of influence of a mining project but considers this action directly tied to compensating for residual impacts.",
      "A": "The organization has implemented a forest restoration project outside the area of influence of any mining project but has not documented its primary motivation.",
      "B": "The organization lacks corporate-level data on conservation actions and provides an explanation emphasizing this gap in data collection practices.",
      "C": "The organization supports community development initiatives motivated by lender requirements but does not associate these actions with measurable biodiversity gains.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "339-340",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 8-13.pdf",
    "source_text": "338 Response options Please complete the following table 1 2 Implementing or supporting additional conservation actions? Comment Select from: • Yes • No • Data not available Text field [maximum 2,400 characters] Requested content General • This question is about actions that bring benefit to biodiversity but cannot be directly associated with the compensation of residual impacts caused by your projects. ACAs may or may not be linked to a mining project. Implementing or supporting additional conservation actions? (column 1) • Select “Yes” if you are able to provide relevant examples of ACAs implemented or supported by your organization. You will be able to provide details in the following question 11.15.1. • Select “No” if your organization is not implementing or supporting ACAs. In this case, use column 2 “Comment” to provide an explanation. • Select “Data not available” if data on ACAs is not collected by your organization at the corporate level. In this case, use column 2 “Comment” to provide an explanation. Explanation of terms Additional Conservation Action (ACA): an intervention intended to be positive for biodiversity and ecosystem services, but not providing measurable gains that can be set against residual impacts. ACAs may or may not target the biodiversity and ecosystem services features significantly impacted by a project (CSBI, 2015). Tags Authority type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level B Questionnaire sector Question level M-B only\n\n[Page 340]\n339 (11.15.1) Provide details on the main ACAs you are implementing or supporting. Question details Question dependencies This question only appears if you select “Yes” in response to 11.15. Change from last year No change Rationale This question asks for evidence that your organization is supporting or implementing ACAs. Response options Please complete the following table. You can add rows by using the “Add Row” button at the bottom of the table. 1 2 3 4 5 Project title Project theme Country/Area Location Primary motivation Text field [maximum 500 characters] Select from: • Forest conservation • Protected areas • Threatened species • Restoration (forests) • Restoration (other) • Community development • Other, please specify Select from: [List of countries/areas] Select from: • In the area of influence of mining project • Outside the area of influence of mining project Select from: • Voluntary • Lender requirements • Legal requirements • Other, please specify 6 7 8 9 10 Timeframe Start year End year Description of project Description of outcome to date Select from: • Defined • Undefined Numerical field [enter a number between 1900 and 2100 with no decimal places] Numerical field [enter a number between 1900 and 2100 with no decimal places] Text field [maximum 500 characters] Text field [maximum 500 characters] [Add row]",
    "new_id": 276
  },
  {
    "id": 17713,
    "question": "Which of the following scenarios would most likely require a combination of both physical and operational controls as mitigation measures, according to the hierarchy outlined in CDP Full Corporate Questionnaire April 2025 – Module 8-13?",
    "options": {
      "A": "A construction site near a protected wetland where noise levels are disrupting local bird species, necessitating changes in equipment and staff behavior.",
      "B": "An industrial facility emitting pollutants into a river, addressed solely by installing advanced filtration systems on discharge pipes.",
      "C": "A pipeline rerouted away from a high-biodiversity forest, with no further action taken after relocation.",
      "D": "A power transmission corridor located in a remote desert area with negligible biodiversity impact.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "304",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 8-13.pdf",
    "source_text": "303 • Include details of how the proximity selected in column 6 was determined. Indicate whether any of your organization’s activities located in or near to the selected area could negatively affect biodiversity (column 9) • Activities negatively affecting areas important for biodiversity refers to activities: o Leading to the deterioration of natural habitats and the habitats of species, and to disturbance of the species for which the protected area has been designated; and o Where mitigation measures have not been implemented accordingly. • When assessing whether your activities could negatively affect biodiversity, you should consider both: o The direct impacts of physical sites, power transmission corridors, pipelines, disposal areas, and associated facilities that would not have been constructed in the absence of the sites/operations; and o The indirect impacts of any other activities associated with the sites/operations and of emissions/effluents released by the sites/operations. Mitigation measures implemented within the selected area (column 10) • This column is presented only if “Yes, but mitigation measures have been implemented” is selected in column 9 “Indicate whether any of your organization’s…”. • The drop-down options are based on the mitigation hierarchy referred to in the guide prepared by The Biodiversity Consultancy to the Cross-Sector Biodiversity Initiative (CSBI, 2015): o Site selection – relocation of the site or site components away from an area recognized for its high biodiversity and ecosystem services value. o Project design – selection of the type of infrastructure, and its placing and mode of operation on the site. o Scheduling – changes in the timing of operational activities. o Physical controls – adaptation of the physical design of the infrastructure to reduce potential impacts, such as installing culverts on roads, or bird flight diverters on transmission lines. o Operational controls – management and regulation of the actions of people associated with the site/operations — including staff, contractors or (where feasible) project affected people and migrants. o Abatement controls – reduction of the levels of pollutants (e.g. emissions of dust, light, noise, gases, or",
    "new_id": 277
  },
  {
    "id": 18243,
    "question": "Which condition would NOT necessarily classify reserves as being located in an area of protected conservation status, according to the Oil & Gas – Exploration & Production – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "The reserves are within five kilometers of a UNESCO World Heritage Site.",
      "A": "The reserves are situated within a Ramsar Wetland of International Importance.",
      "C": "The reserves are inside an area listed in the World Database of Protected Areas (WDPA) and mapped on Protected Planet.",
      "D": "The reserves are in a region that meets the IUCN's definition of a protected area but lacks legal recognition or effective management.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "25-26",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Oil & Gas – Exploration & Production.pdf",
    "source_text": "EM-EP-160a.3. Percentage of (1) proved and (2) probable reserves in or near sites with protected conservation status or endangered species habitat 1The entity shall disclose (1) the percentage of its proved reserves, by volume, located in sites with protected conservation status or in endangered species habitat. 1.1 The percentage of proved reserves shall be calculated as the quantity (volume) of proved reserves located in areas with protected conservation status or endangered species habitat, divided by the total amount of proved reserves. 2The entity shall disclose (2) the percentage of net probable reserves, by volume, located in sites either with protected conservation status or in endangered species habitat. 2.1 The percentage of probable reserves shall be calculated as the quantity (volume) of probable reserves located in areas with protected conservation status or endangered species habitat, divided by the total quantity of probable reserves. 3 Reserves are considered to be in areas of protected conservation status if they are located within: 3.1 International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Protected Areas (categories I –VI); 3.2 Ramsar Wetlands of International Importance; 3.3 United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) World Heritage Sites; 3.4 Biosphere Reserves recognised within the framework of UNESCO ’s Man and the Biosphere (MAB) Programme; 3.5 Natura 2000 sites; or 3.6 sites that meet the IUCN ’s definition of a protected area: ‘A protected area is a clearly defined geographical space, recognised, dedicated and managed, through legal or other effective means, to achieve the long- term conservation of nature with associated ecosystem services and cultural values ’.2 3.6.1 These sites may be listed in the World Database of Protected Areas (WDPA) and mapped on Protected Planet. 4Reserves are considered to be in endangered species habitat if they are in or near areas where species on the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species that are classified Critically Endangered (CR) or Endangered (EN) are extant. 4.1 A species is considered extant in an area if it is a resident, present during breeding or non-breeding season, or if it makes use of the area for passage. 4.1.1 For the purposes of disclosure, ‘passage ’ is defined as all areas of land or water that a migratory species inhabits, stays in temporarily, crosses or overflies at any time on its normal migration route. 2IUCN, Guidelines for Applying Protected Areas Management Categories , 2008, pp.8 –9. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |OIL & GAS – EXPLORATION & PRODUCTION |25\n\n[Page 26]\n5For the purposes of this disclosure, ‘near’ is defined as within five kilometres (km) of the boundary of an area of protected conservation status or an endangered species habitat and the location of the entity ’s proved and probable reserves. 6The entity shall follow guidance published in the Society of Petroleum Engineers ’ (SPE) Petroleum Resources Management System (PRMS) or jurisdictional equivalent for the classifying of reserves as proved or probable. 7The entity may separately identify reserves in areas with additional ecological, biodiversity or conservation designations such as those listed by the Biodiversity A –Z resource prepared by the United Nations Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC). 8The entity may discuss reserves located in protected areas or endangered species habitats, but that present low risks to biodiversity or ecosystem services. The entity may provide similar discussion for reserves located in areas with no official designation of high biodiversity value, but that present high risks to biodiversity or ecosystem services. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |OIL & GAS – EXPLORATION & PRODUCTION |26",
    "new_id": 278
  },
  {
    "id": 18276,
    "question": "Which scenario would most likely be classified as a recordable incident under the definitions provided in the Oil & Gas – Exploration & Production – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "A worker faints on-site after being diagnosed with dehydration by an onsite medical professional, requiring no further treatment.",
      "A": "A worker experiences a minor cut that is treated with a bandage and antiseptic at the worksite.",
      "B": "A worker suffers from chronic back pain due to years of heavy lifting but continues to perform their duties without time off.",
      "D": "A worker reports feeling unwell but receives only verbal reassurance from a colleague trained in basic first aid.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "34",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Oil & Gas – Exploration & Production.pdf",
    "source_text": "Workforce Health & Safety Topic Summary Workers involved in Exploration & Production (E&P) activities face significant health and safety risks because of the harsh working environments and the hazards of handling oil and gas. In addition to acute harms resulting from accidents, workers may develop chronic health conditions, including those caused by silica or dust inhalation, as well as mental health problems. A significant proportion of the workforce at oil and gas drilling sites consists of temporary workers and employees of oil and gas service entities. An entity ’s ability to protect employee health and safety, and to create a culture of safety and well-being among all employees, may prevent accidents, mitigate costs, reduce operational downtime and enhance workforce productivity. Additional health and safety protocols may be needed to protect groups such as women and minorities in regions where they continue to face discrimination. Metrics EM-EP-320a.1. (1) Total recordable incident rate (TRIR), (2) fatality rate, (3) near miss frequency rate (NMFR), and (4) average hours of health, safety, and emergency response training for (a) direct employees and (b) contract employees 1The entity shall disclose (1) its total recordable incident rate (TRIR) for work-related injuries and illnesses. 1.1 An injury or illness is considered a recordable incident if it results in death, days away from work, restricted work or transfer to another job, medical treatment beyond first aid, or loss of consciousness. Additionally, a significant injury or illness diagnosed by a physician or other licensed health care professional is considered a recordable incident, even if it does not result in death, days away from work, restricted work or job transfer, medical treatment beyond first aid or loss of consciousness. 1.1.1 First aid is defined as emergency care or treatment for an ill or injured person before regular medical aid can be provided. 1.1.2 The entity may use applicable jurisdictional criteria for definitions of a recordable incident and a non-recordable incident such as first aid. The entity shall disclose the legal, regulatory or industry framework used as the source for these criteria and definitions. 2The entity shall disclose (2) its fatality rate for work-related fatalities. 3 The entity shall disclose (3) its near miss frequency rate (NMFR) for work-related near misses. 3.1 A near miss is defined as an unplanned or uncontrolled event or chain of events that has not resulted in a recordable injury, illness, physical damage or environmental damage, but had the potential to do so in other circumstances. 3.2 The entity may disclose its process for classifying, identifying and reporting near misses. 4All disclosed rates shall be calculated as: (statistic count × 200,000) / total number of hours worked by all employees in the year reported. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |OIL & GAS – EXPLORATION & PRODUCTION |34",
    "new_id": 279
  },
  {
    "id": 18277,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between process emissions, vented emissions, and fugitive emissions, as described in the Oil & Gas – Exploration & Production – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Vented emissions include both routine operational releases and non-routine events like pressure relief valve activations, but exclude any emissions classified as process emissions.",
      "A": "Process emissions encompass all intentional releases during normal operations, including those from maintenance activities and chemical transformations.",
      "B": "Fugitive emissions are defined as unavoidable releases from equipment such as valves and flanges, which cannot be individually identified or repaired to reduce their impact.",
      "C": "Process emissions and vented emissions overlap in scope, as both categories account for releases resulting from chemical transformations and depressurization procedures.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "13",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Oil & Gas – Exploration & Production.pdf",
    "source_text": "1.4 Process emissions shall include those emissions that are not combusted and are intentional or designed into the process or technology to occur during normal operations and are a result of some form of chemical transformation or processing step. Such emissions may include emissions from hydrogen plants, amine units, glycol dehydrators, fluid catalytic cracking unit and reformer generation, and flexi-coker coke burn. 1.5 Vented emissions shall include those emissions that are not combusted and are intentional or designed into the process or technology to occur during normal operations, and which include: 1.5.1 Venting from crude oil, condensate or natural gas product storage tanks, gas-driven pneumatic devices, gas samplers, chemical injection pumps, exploratory drilling, loading/ballasting/transit and loading racks 1.5.2 Venting resulting from maintenance/turn-arounds, which may include decoking of furnace tubes, well unloading, vessel and gas compressor depressurising, compressor starts, gas sampling, and pipeline blowdowns 1.5.3 Venting from non-routine activities, which may include pressure relief valves, pressure control valves, fuel supply unloading valves and emergency shut-down devices 1.6 Vented emissions shall exclude those emissions disclosed as process emissions. 1.7 Fugitive emissions shall include those emissions that can be individually found and fixed to reduce emissions rates to near zero and which may include emissions from valves, flanges, connectors, pumps, compressor seal leaks, Cata-Dyne® heaters, and wastewater treatment and surface impoundments. EM-EP-110a.3. Discussion of long- and short-term strategy or plan to manage Scope 1 emissions, emissions reduction targets, and an analysis of performance against those targets 1The entity shall discuss its long- and short-term strategy or plan to manage its Scope 1 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. 1.1 Scope 1 emissions are defined and shall be calculated according to the methodology contained in The Greenhouse Gas Protocol: A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard (GHG Protocol), Revised Edition, March 2004, published by the World Resources Institute and the World Business Council on Sustainable Development (WRI/WBCSD). 1.2 The scope of GHG emissions includes the seven GHGs covered under the Kyoto Protocol —carbon dioxide (CO 2), methane (CH 4), nitrous oxide (N 2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), sulphur hexafluoride (SF 6), and nitrogen trifluoride (NF 3). 2The entity shall discuss its emission reduction target(s) and analyse its performance against the target(s), including, if relevant: 2.1 The scope of the emission reduction target (for example, the percentage of total emissions to which the target is applicable); SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |OIL & GAS – EXPLORATION & PRODUCTION |13",
    "new_id": 280
  },
  {
    "id": 18278,
    "question": "Which of the following most accurately reflects the relationship between the entity's sensitivity analysis disclosures and its consideration of alternative scenarios, as discussed in the Oil & Gas – Exploration & Production – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The entity may extend its sensitivity analysis to include additional scenarios beyond those explicitly mentioned, provided these reflect varying regulatory environments or other factors relevant to reserve levels.",
      "B": "The entity is required to use only standardized futures prices when disclosing reserve sensitivities, with no allowance for management forecasts.",
      "C": "The entity must disclose carbon dioxide emissions embedded in probable reserves but not in proved reserves as part of its sensitivity analysis.",
      "D": "The entity’s disclosure of price and cost schedules is optional unless the reserves are tied to hydrocarbon products used exclusively in sustainable development projects.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "38",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Oil & Gas – Exploration & Production.pdf",
    "source_text": "3.2 Conducting a reserves sensitivity analysis and disclosing, in the aggregate, an estimate of reserves for each product type based on various price and cost criteria, such as a range of prices and costs that may reasonably be achieved, including standardised futures prices or management ’s own forecasts 3.2.1 The entity shall disclose the price and cost schedules and assumptions on which disclosed values are based 3.3 Determining current (or base) case of reserve levels 4The entity may use the following table format to summarise its findings: Table 3. Sensitivity of reserves to prices by principal product type and price scenario PRICE CASE PROVED RESERVES PROBABLE RESERVES (Scenario)Oil (MMbbls)Gas (MMscf)Product:A (measure)Oil (MMbbls)Gas (MMscf)Product:A (measure) Current Policies Scenario (base) New Policies Scenario Sustainable Develop- ment Scenario 5The entity may disclose the sensitivity of its reserve levels in other price and demand scenarios in addition to those described above, particularly if these scenarios vary depending on the type of hydrocarbon reserves, regulatory environment in the countries or regions where exploration occurs, end-use of the entity ’s products, or other factors. 6For additional sensitivity analyses, the entity should consider disclosing the following, per the Task Force on Climate- Related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) Recommendations Report Figure 8 as well as the Implementing the Recommendations of the TCFD Report, Section E: 6.1 The alternative scenarios used, including other 2°C or lower scenarios 6.2 Critical input parameters, assumptions and analytical choices for the climate-related scenarios used, particularly as they relate to key areas such as policy assumptions, energy deployment pathways, technology pathways and related timing assumptions 6.3 Time frames used for scenarios, including short-, medium- and long-term milestones (for example, how organisations consider timing of potential future implications under the scenarios used) EM-EP-420a.2. Estimated carbon dioxide emissions embedded in proved hydrocarbon reserves 1The entity shall calculate and disclose an estimate of the carbon dioxide emissions embedded in its proved hydrocarbon reserves. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |OIL & GAS – EXPLORATION & PRODUCTION |38",
    "new_id": 281
  },
  {
    "id": 18279,
    "question": "Which of the following most accurately reflects a necessary condition for an entity’s due diligence practices to align with both human rights frameworks and operational requirements in areas of conflict, as described in the Oil & Gas – Exploration & Production – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "An entity must apply its human rights due diligence processes to business partners unless specific factors prevent such application, which must then be disclosed.",
      "A": "Adhering strictly to ILO Convention 169 is sufficient to ensure compliance with all human rights due diligence obligations.",
      "C": "Establishing formal community agreements eliminates the need for grievance mechanisms under ILO and UN guidelines.",
      "D": "Operating in a country adjacent to an active conflict zone requires adherence only to the Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "29-30",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Oil & Gas – Exploration & Production.pdf",
    "source_text": "EM-EP-210a.3. Discussion of engagement processes and due diligence practices with respect to human rights, indigenous rights, and operation in areas of conflict 1The entity shall describe its due diligence practices and procedures with respect to indigenous rights of communities in which it operates or intends to operate, which may include: 1.1 upholding International Labour Organization (ILO) Convention 169; 1.2 use of free, prior and informed consent (or consultation) processes; 1.3 the establishment of project grievance mechanisms; and 1.4 the establishment of formal community agreements. 2The entity shall describe its due diligence practices and procedures with respect to upholding the principles covered in human rights frameworks, such as the: 2.1 International Labour Organisation (ILO) Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work and the fundamental ILO conventions on freedom of association (No. 87), collective bargaining (No. 98), forced labour (No. 29 and No. 105), child labour (No. 138 and No. 182), fair wages (No. 100), and discrimination (No. 111); 2.2 United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights , specifically Human Rights Due Diligence (Principle 17a-c); and 2.3 Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights. 3The entity shall discuss its practices and procedures while operating in areas of conflict, such as: 3.1 describing its approach with reference to the approaches listed in Ipieca ’s Guide to operating in areas of conflict for the oil and gas industry : ‘do no harm ’, ‘do something ’, and ‘do something ++ ’. 4An entity is considered to be operating in an area of conflict if it is conducting operations in the same country as an active conflict, or adjacent to an active conflict, if the conflict can reasonably be expected to affect the entity ’s operations. 5Active conflict is defined according to the Uppsala Conflict Data Program (UCDP) definition: 5.1‘A conflict, both state-based and non-state, is deemed to be active if there are at least 25 battle-related deaths per calendar year in one of the conflict’s dyads.’ 6The discussion shall include due diligence processes employed during all stages of project development (prior, during and post). 7The discussion may include how local or regional factors are considered in the entity ’s engagement processes and due diligence practices with respect to human rights (and specifically indigenous rights, if applicable) as well as operations in areas of conflict. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |OIL & GAS – EXPLORATION & PRODUCTION |29\n\n[Page 30]\n8The discussion may include governance mechanisms the entity puts in place to ensure that all levels of the organisation adhere to its policies and practices. 9The discussion shall include how practices apply to business partners, such as contractors, subcontractors, suppliers and joint arrangement partners. 9.1 If practices do not apply to business partners, the entity may discuss factors that prevent the application of such practices. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |OIL & GAS – EXPLORATION & PRODUCTION |30",
    "new_id": 282
  },
  {
    "id": 18280,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the implicit relationship between the entity's management system for corruption prevention and its alignment with external frameworks or standards, as described in the Oil & Gas – Exploration & Production – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "While the entity may adopt external guidelines like the OECD or EITI, these serve as optional enhancements to its core management system focused on internal controls.",
      "A": "The entity’s management system is entirely defined by adherence to OECD anti-corruption guidelines, with no need for additional internal mechanisms.",
      "B": "Implementation of the Extractive Industry Transparency Initiative (EITI) Standard is mandatory for all entities to address corruption risks in their value chain.",
      "D": "Anti-corruption policies are exclusively derived from laws and regulations related to payments transparency, rendering voluntary frameworks irrelevant.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "42",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Oil & Gas – Exploration & Production.pdf",
    "source_text": "6The entity shall follow guidance published in the Society of Petroleum Engineers ’ (SPE) Petroleum Resources Management System (PRMS) or the applicable jurisdictional equivalent for the classifying of reserves as proved or probable. EM-EP-510a.2. Description of the management system for prevention of corruption and bribery throughout the value chain 1The entity shall describe its management system and due diligence procedures for assessing and managing corruption and bribery risks within the scope of its own operations and those associated with business partners in its value chain. 1.1 Business partners may include customers, suppliers, contractors, subcontractors and joint arrangement partners. 1.2 Relevant aspects of a management system include, if relevant: 1.2.1 employee awareness programmes; 1.2.2 internal mechanisms for reporting and following up on suspected violations; 1.2.3 anti-corruption policies; and 1.2.4 application of the Extractive Industry Transparency Initiative (EITI) Standard, which may include provisions related to beneficial ownership and politically exposed persons, licences and contracts, social expenditures, project-level payments, subnational payments, data accessibility and multi- stakeholder engagement. 2The entity may discuss its implementation of the following organisational guidelines: 2.1 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) anti-corruption guidelines; 2.2 International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) Rules of Conduct and Recommendations to Combat Extortion and Bribery ; 2.3 Transparency International Business Principles for Countering Bribery ; 2.4 United Nations Global Compact 10th Principle; and 2.5 World Economic Forum (WEF) Partnering Against Corruption Initiative (PACI). 3 The entity may discuss laws or regulations related to payments transparency to which it is subject. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |OIL & GAS – EXPLORATION & PRODUCTION |42",
    "new_id": 283
  },
  {
    "id": 19207,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between emissions-limiting regulations and reporting-based regulations, as described in the Waste Management – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The calculation of emissions coverage under limiting regulations excludes any emissions also governed by voluntary trading schemes.",
      "A": "Emissions subject to multiple limiting regulations can be double-counted if they overlap under reporting-based frameworks.",
      "B": "Voluntary emissions-limiting programs are considered part of the scope for calculating regulated Scope 1 GHG emissions percentages.",
      "C": "Reporting-based regulations exclude emissions covered under mandatory cap-and-trade systems or carbon tax mechanisms.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "9",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Waste Management.pdf",
    "source_text": "2.1.1 GHG Reporting Guidance for the Aerospace Industry published by the International Aerospace Environmental Group (IAEG) 2.1.2 Greenhouse Gas Inventory Guidance: Direct Emissions from Stationary Combustion Sources published by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 2.1.3 India GHG Inventory Program 2.1.4 ISO 14064-1 2.1.5 Petroleum Industry Guidelines for reporting GHG emissions , 2nd edition, 2011, published by Ipieca 2.1.6 Protocol for the quantification of greenhouse gas emissions from waste management activities published by Entreprises pour l ’Environnement (EpE) 2.2 GHG emissions data shall be consolidated and disclosed according to the approach with which the entity consolidates its financial reporting data, which generally is aligned with the ‘financial control’ approach defined by the GHG Protocol , and the approach published by the Climate Disclosure Standards Board (CDSB) that is described in REQ-07, ‘Organisational boundary ’, of the CDSB Framework for reporting environmental and social information . 3The entity shall disclose (2) the percentage of its gross global Scope 1 GHG emissions covered under an emissions-limiting regulation or programme intended to limit or reduce emissions directly, such as cap-and-trade schemes, carbon tax/fee systems, and other emissions control (for example, command-and-control approach) and permit-based mechanisms. 3.1 Examples of emissions-limiting regulations include: 3.1.1 California Cap-and-Trade (California Global Warming Solutions Act) 3.1.2 European Union Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS) 3.1.3 Quebec Cap-and-Trade (Quebec Environment Quality Act) 3.2 The percentage shall be calculated as the total amount of gross global Scope 1 GHG emissions (CO 2-e) covered under emissions-limiting regulations divided by the total amount of gross global Scope 1 GHG emissions (CO 2-e). 3.2.1 For emissions subject to more than one emissions-limiting regulation, the entity shall not account for those emissions more than once. 3.3 The scope of emissions-limiting regulations excludes emissions covered under voluntary emissions-limiting regulations (for example, voluntary trading systems), as well as reporting-based regulations. 4The entity shall disclose (3) the percentage of its gross global Scope 1 GHG emissions covered under emissions reporting-based regulations. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |WASTE MANAGEMENT |9",
    "new_id": 284
  },
  {
    "id": 19247,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between air quality management and financial consequences, as described in terms of regulatory exposure in the Waste Management – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Active management of air pollutants may reduce future compliance costs by mitigating regulatory exposure, even as regulations become more stringent.",
      "B": "Entities that fail to manage air pollutants risk increased compliance costs due solely to the direct health impacts on nearby communities.",
      "C": "The financial consequences of air emissions are uniform across all operational locations, regardless of prevailing regulations or community proximity.",
      "D": "Technological improvements in air quality management primarily benefit entities by eliminating the need for permits rather than reducing compliance costs.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "15",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Waste Management.pdf",
    "source_text": "Air Quality Topic Summary Air pollution is the presence of air contaminants in such quantities and duration that they may be injurious to humans, animals, plants or property. It also includes contaminants that interfere with enjoyment of life or property. Therefore, odours and toxic gases, such as those emitted from landfills, landfill fires, waste incinerators and waste treatment plants, are considered air pollution. The financial consequences from excessive air emissions vary depending on the specific location of operations and the prevailing air emissions regulations, but they may include capital expenditures, increased operating costs, fines, and lawsuits from affected communities. Human health impacts and financial consequences of poor air quality management may be exacerbated by the proximity of waste management facilities to communities. Active management of air pollutants and odours —through technological and process improvements — therefore may mitigate regulatory exposure and associated future compliance costs from increasingly stringent air quality regulations, help entities secure and maintain permits, and protect their licence to operate. Metrics IF-WM-120a.1. Air emissions of the following pollutants: (1) NO x (excluding N 2O), (2) SO x, (3) volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and (4) hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) 1The entity shall disclose its emissions of air pollutants, in metric tonnes per pollutant, released into the atmosphere. 1.1 The scope of the disclosure includes air pollutants associated with the entity ’s direct air emissions resulting from all the entity ’s activities and sources of emissions, which may include stationary or mobile sources, production facilities, office buildings and transportation fleets. 2 The entity shall disclose its emissions of (1) oxides of nitrogen (NO X), reported as NO X. 2.1 The scope of NO X includes NO and NO 2 but excludes N 2O. 3 The entity shall disclose its emissions of (2) oxides of sulphur (SO X), reported as SO X. 3.1 The scope of SO X includes SO 2 and SO 3. 4 The entity shall disclose its emissions of (3) non-methane volatile organic compounds (VOCs). 4.1 VOCs are defined as any compound of carbon, excluding carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, carbonic acid, metallic carbides or carbonates, ammonium carbonate and methane, that participates in atmospheric photochemical reactions, except those designated under applicable jurisdictional laws or regulations as having negligible photochemical reactivity. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |WASTE MANAGEMENT |15",
    "new_id": 285
  },
  {
    "id": 19248,
    "question": "Which scenario would be classified as both an accident and a recordable incident under the definitions provided in the Waste Management – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "A commercial vehicle sustains disabling damage requiring towing after colliding with another vehicle during business use, resulting in an injury that requires medical treatment beyond first aid.",
      "A": "A licensed vehicle experiences minor damage while loading cargo, causing an employee to lose consciousness due to unrelated health issues at the scene.",
      "C": "An individual boarding a stationary commercial vehicle slips but does not require any medical attention beyond first aid.",
      "D": "A licensed vehicle is involved in an occurrence where only cargo unloading leads to property damage without injuries or disabling vehicle damage.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "25",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Waste Management.pdf",
    "source_text": "1.2 Contract employees are defined as individuals who are not on the entity ’s payroll, but who the entity supervises or manages on a regular basis, including independent contractors and those employed by third parties (for example, temp agencies and labour brokers). 1.3 An accident is defined as an occurrence involving a commercial vehicle operating on a road and engaging in commercial activities that results in one or more of vehicles incurring disabling damage because of the accident, requiring the vehicle(s) to be transported away from the scene by a tow truck or another vehicle or to be abandoned. 1.4 An accident does not include: 1.4.1 an occurrence involving only boarding and alighting from a stationary vehicle; or 1.4.2 an occurrence involving only the loading or unloading of cargo. 1.5 An incident is defined as any event involving a licensed vehicle while on business use resulting in a recordable incident, vehicle damage or other property damage. 1.5.1 An injury or illness is considered a recordable incident if it results in death, days away from work, restricted work or transfer to another job, medical treatment beyond first aid, or loss of consciousness. Additionally, a significant injury or illness diagnosed by a physician or other licensed health care professional is considered a recordable incident, even if it does not result in death, days away from work, restricted work or job transfer, medical treatment beyond first aid, or loss of consciousness. 1.5.2 First aid is defined as emergency care or treatment for an ill or injured person before regular medical aid can be provided. 1.5.3 The entity may use applicable jurisdictional criteria for definitions of recordable incident and first aid. 2The minimum scope of the disclosure includes accidents and incidents reported to an applicable jurisdictional authority. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |WASTE MANAGEMENT |25",
    "new_id": 286
  },
  {
    "id": 19249,
    "question": "Which scenario would most likely be excluded from the calculation of 'total days idle' under the definition provided in the Waste Management – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "A strike by 950 workers lasting five full shifts, causing partial disruption to waste collection services.",
      "A": "A lockout involving 1,200 workers lasting three full shifts, during which all operations were halted.",
      "B": "A strike involving 1,500 workers lasting two full shifts, but occurring during a scheduled facility-wide maintenance shutdown.",
      "D": "A lockout affecting 2,000 workers for one full shift, resulting in the temporary suspension of hazardous material processing.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "22-23",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Waste Management.pdf",
    "source_text": "IF-WM-310a.2. (1) Number of work stoppages and (2) total days idle 1The entity shall disclose (1) the number of work stoppages involving 1,000 or more workers lasting one full shift or longer. 1.1 The scope of work stoppages includes strikes and lockouts. 1.1.1 A strike is defined as a temporary stoppage of work by a group of employees (not necessarily union members) to express a grievance or enforce a demand. 1.1.2 A lockout is defined as a temporary withholding or denial of employment during a labour dispute to enforce terms of employment upon a group of employees. 2 The entity shall disclose (2) the total days idle because of work stoppages. 2.1‘Days idle ’ is defined as the aggregate number of workdays lost because of work stoppages. 2.2 Total days idle shall be calculated as the sum of the products of the number of workers involved in each work stoppage and the number of days each respective work stoppage was in effect. Note to IF-WM-310a.2 1The entity shall describe the reason for each work stoppage (as stated by labour), the effect on operations and any corrective actions taken as a result. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |WASTE MANAGEMENT |22\n\n[Page 23]\nWorkforce Health & Safety Topic Summary The industry ’s hazardous working conditions make safety a critical issue for waste management operations, and accidents can have a significant impact on workers. The Waste Management industry has higher fatality rates than most industries. Fatalities and other injuries are caused primarily by transportation incidents, contact with hazardous objects and equipment, and exposure to harmful substances. Additionally, temporary workers may be at increased risk because of a lack of training or industry experience. Poor health and safety records may result in fines and penalties, increased regulatory compliance costs and more stringent oversight. Waste management entities must ensure facilities and vehicles are operated with the highest safety standards and that the number of injuries and accidents is minimised through a strong safety culture. Entities that develop proactive safety management plans and training requirements for employees and contractors, including conducting regular audits, may improve workforce safety and minimise the chance of safety-related financial repercussions. Metrics IF-WM-320a.1. (1) Total recordable incident rate (TRIR), (2) fatality rate, and (3) near miss frequency rate (NMFR) for (a) direct employees and (b) contract employees 1The entity shall disclose (1) its total recordable incident rate (TRIR) for work-related injuries and illnesses. 1.1 An injury or illness is considered a recordable incident if it results in death, days away from work, restricted work or transfer to another job, medical treatment beyond first aid, or loss of consciousness. Additionally, a significant injury or illness diagnosed by a physician or other licensed health care professional is considered a recordable incident, even if it does not result in death, days away from work, restricted work or job transfer, medical treatment beyond first aid, or loss of consciousness. 1.1.1 First aid is defined as emergency care or treatment for an ill or injured person before regular medical aid can be provided. 1.1.2 The entity may use applicable jurisdictional criteria for definitions of a recordable incident and a non-recordable incident such as first aid. The entity shall disclose the legal, regulatory or industry framework used as the source for these criteria and definitions. 2 The entity shall disclose (2) its fatality rate for work-related fatalities. 3 The entity shall disclose (3) its near miss frequency rate (NMFR) for work-related near misses. 3.1 Employees that operate entity vehicles as their primary job function are excluded from the scope of the NMFR. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |WASTE MANAGEMENT |23",
    "new_id": 287
  },
  {
    "id": 19250,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between the responsibilities of waste management entities and the SASB Standards as described in the Waste Management – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Entities must independently determine which disclosure topics and metrics are relevant, even if they operate in multiple industries.",
      "A": "Waste management entities are required to adopt all metrics from their primary industry's SASB Standard, regardless of materiality.",
      "B": "The SASB Standards mandate specific emissions reduction targets for waste management companies based on their greenhouse gas emissions.",
      "C": "Companies with operations across several SICS® industries should only adhere to the standards corresponding to their largest revenue-generating sector.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "5-6",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Waste Management.pdf",
    "source_text": "Use of the Standards SASB Standards are intended to aid entities in disclosing information about sustainability-related risks and opportunities that could reasonably be expected to affect the entity ’s cash flows, its access to finance or cost of capital over the short, medium or long term. An entity determines which Industry Standard(s) and which disclosure topics are relevant to its business, and which associated metrics to report. In general, an entity should use the SASB Standard specific to its primary industry as identified in SICS® . However, companies with substantial business in multiple SICS® industries should refer to and consider the applicability of the disclosure topics and associated metrics in additional SASB Standards. The disclosure topics and associated metrics contained in this Standard have been identified as those that are likely to be useful to investors. However, the responsibility for making materiality judgements and determinations rests with the reporting entity. Industry Description Waste Management industry entities collect, store, dispose of, recycle or treat various forms of waste from residential, commercial and industrial clients. Types of waste include municipal solid waste, hazardous waste, recyclable materials, and compostable or organic materials. Major entities commonly are integrated vertically, providing a range of services from waste collection to landfilling and recycling, while others provide specialised services such as treating medical and industrial waste. Waste-to-energy operations are a distinct industry segment. Some industry players also provide environmental engineering and consulting services, mostly to large industrial clients. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |WASTE MANAGEMENT |5\n\n[Page 6]\nSUSTAINABILITY DISCLOSURE TOPICS & METRICS Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORYUNIT OF MEASURECODE Greenhouse Gas Emissions(1) Gross global Scope 1 emissions, percentage covered under (2) emissions- limiting regulations and (3) emissions- reporting regulationsQuantitativeMetric tonnes (t) CO₂-e, Percentage (%)IF-WM-110a.1 (1) Total landfill gas generated, (2) percentage flared and (3) percentage used for energyQuantitativeMillion British Thermal Units (MMBtu), Percentage (%)IF-WM-110a.2 Discussion of long- and short-term strategy or plan to manage Scope 1 emissions, emissions reduction targets, and an analysis of performance against those targetsDiscussion and Analysisn/a IF-WM-110a.3 Fleet Fuel Management(1) Fleet fuel consumed, (2) percentage natural gas and (3) percentage renewableQuantitativeGigajoules (GJ), Percentage (%)IF-WM-110b.1 Percentage of alternative fuel vehicles in fleetQuantitativePercentage (%)IF-WM-110b.2 Air QualityAir emissions of the following pollutants: (1) NO x (excluding N 2O), (2) SO x, (3) volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and (4) hazardous air pollutants (HAPs)QuantitativeMetric tonnes (t)IF-WM-120a.1 Number of facilities in or near areas of dense populationQuantitative Number IF-WM-120a.2 Number of incidents of non-compliance associated with air quality permits, standards, and regulationsQuantitative Number IF-WM-120a.3 Management of Leachate & Hazardous Waste(1) Total Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) releases, (2) percentage released to waterQuantitativeMetric tonnes (t), Percentage (%)IF-WM-150a.1 Number of corrective actions implemented for landfill releasesQuantitative Number IF-WM-150a.2 Number of incidents of non-compliance associated with environmental impactsQuantitative Number IF-WM-150a.3 continued... SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |WASTE MANAGEMENT |6",
    "new_id": 288
  },
  {
    "id": 19539,
    "question": "Which of the following scenarios would be considered outside the scope of monetary losses as defined in the Engineering & Construction Services – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Legal fees incurred by the entity while defending itself against regulatory penalties.",
      "B": "A settlement payment made to resolve a civil lawsuit alleging negligence.",
      "C": "A fine imposed on the entity due to a criminal judgment related to environmental violations.",
      "D": "Restitution paid to affected parties as part of a deferred prosecution agreement.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "12-13",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Engineering & Construction Services.pdf",
    "source_text": "2The legal proceedings shall include any adjudicative proceeding involving the entity, whether before a court, a regulator, an arbitrator or otherwise. 3The losses shall include all monetary liabilities to the opposing party or to others (whether because of settlement or verdict after trial or otherwise), including fines and other monetary liabilities incurred during the reporting period as a result of civil actions (for example, civil judgments or settlements), regulatory proceedings (for example, penalties, disgorgement or restitution) and criminal actions (for example, criminal judgement, penalties or restitution) brought by any entity (for example, governmental, business or individual). 4The scope of monetary losses shall exclude legal and other fees and expenses incurred by the entity in its defence. Note to IF-EN-250a.2 1The entity shall briefly describe the nature (for example, judgement or order issued after trial, settlement, guilty plea, deferred prosecution agreement or non-prosecution agreement) and context (for example, negligence) of all monetary losses resulting from legal proceedings. 2The entity shall describe any corrective actions implemented in response to the legal proceedings. These corrective actions may include specific changes in operations, management, processes, products, business partners, training or technology. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |ENGINEERING & CONSTRUCTION SERVICES |12\n\n[Page 13]\nWorkforce Health & Safety Topic Summary Construction, maintenance and repair services and other on-site activities require substantial manual labour. Fatality and injury rates in the Engineering & Construction Services industry are high compared with those in other industries because of the workforce ’s exposure to powered haulage and heavy machinery accidents, fall accidents, exposure to hazardous chemicals, and other unique and potentially dangerous situations. Additionally, temporary workers may be at a higher risk because of a lack of training or industry experience. Failing to protect worker health and safety can result in fines and penalties; serious incidents may result in acute, one-time extraordinary expenses and contingent liabilities from legal or regulatory actions. In addition, health and safety incidents may result in project delays and downtime that increase project costs and decrease profitability. Entities that seek to train both permanent and temporary employees professionally and build a strong safety culture may reduce their risk profile while potentially gaining a competitive advantage in new project bids and proposals because of good workforce health and safety statistics. Metrics IF-EN-320a.1. (1) Total recordable incident rate (TRIR) and (2) fatality rate for (a) direct employees and (b) contract employees 1The entity shall disclose (1) its total recordable incident rate (TRIR) for work-related injuries and illnesses. 1.1 An injury or illness is considered a recordable incident if it results in death, days away from work, restricted work or transfer to another job, medical treatment beyond first aid, or loss of consciousness. Additionally, a significant injury or illness diagnosed by a physician or other licensed health care professional is considered a recordable incident, even if it does not result in death, days away from work, restricted work or job transfer, medical treatment beyond first aid, or loss of consciousness. 1.1.1 First aid is defined as emergency care or treatment for an ill or injured person before regular medical aid can be provided. 1.1.2 The entity may use applicable jurisdictional criteria for definitions of a recordable incident and a non-recordable incident such as first aid. The entity shall disclose the legal, regulatory or industry framework used as the source for these criteria and definitions. 2 The entity shall disclose (2) its fatality rate for work-related fatalities. 3All disclosed rates shall be calculated as: (statistic count × 200,000) / total number of hours worked by all employees in the year reported. 3.1 The 200,000 in the rate calculation represents the total number of hours 100 full-time workers working 40 hours per week for 50 weeks per year can provide annually. 4 The scope of the disclosure includes work-related incidents only. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |ENGINEERING & CONSTRUCTION SERVICES |13",
    "new_id": 289
  },
  {
    "id": 19552,
    "question": "Which of the following scenarios would require disclosure under the criteria for backlog cancellations associated with hydrocarbon-related projects, as outlined in the Engineering & Construction Services – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "A customer voluntarily cancels a contract for a coal transportation project due to financial constraints after failing to secure financing.",
      "A": "A project owner successfully re-plans a hydrocarbon extraction project, and the order backlog re-enters during the reporting period.",
      "C": "A renewable energy wind farm project is deferred indefinitely due to permitting delays but remains in the entity’s backlog.",
      "D": "A decommissioning project for an oil refinery is terminated due to environmental regulatory changes.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "19",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Engineering & Construction Services.pdf",
    "source_text": "3The entity may provide a description of the sustainability implications of hydrocarbon-related projects, which may include project descriptions, categorisations by resource type, expected sustainability impacts, and risks related to project completion or conversion to revenue. 4 The entity shall disclose the amount of its backlog associated with (2) renewable energy projects. 4.1 Renewable energy is defined as energy from sources that are replenished at a rate greater than or equal to their rate of depletion, such as geothermal, wind, solar, hydro and biomass. 5The entity shall exclude from its calculations and disclosures of backlog any amount of an order backlog cancellation that re-enters order backlog during the same reporting period because of a project owner ’s successful re-planning of the project. 6The scope of disclosure is limited to projects in which the entity provided engineering, architecture, design, construction, installation, planning, consulting, repair or maintenance services, or other similar services. IF-EN-410b.2. Amount of backlog cancellations associated with hydrocarbon- related projects 1The entity shall disclose the amount of its total backlog associated with hydrocarbon-related projects of any type cancelled during the reporting period for any reason. 1.1 Backlog is defined as the value of projects not completed as of the close of the reporting period (revenue contractually expected in the future but that has not been recognised), or is defined by the entity, consistent with its existing disclosure of backlog. Backlog also may be referenced as revenue backlog or unsatisfied performance obligations. 1.2 Backlog cancellations are defined as the amount of backlog cancelled, reduced, terminated or deferred such that it no longer meets the definition of backlog, or that which is removed from the backlog for any reason other than conversion to revenue or currency exchange rate fluctuations. 1.2.1 Backlog cancellations include cancellations that occur for any reason, which may include a customer ’s failure to obtain necessary project permitting or financing, a customer ’s voluntary project cancellation, and reduction in project scope because of financial constraints. 1.2.2 The scope of backlog cancellations excludes cancellations associated with decommissioning projects. 1.3 Hydrocarbon-related projects are defined as any type of project directly associated with the hydrocarbon value chain, which may include: hydrocarbon exploration, extraction, development, production or transportation; hydrocarbon infrastructure services and maintenance; hydrocarbon power generation; and hydrocarbon-related downstream services. 1.3.1 Examples of hydrocarbon-related projects include any project directly associated with oil, gas or coal production, transportation, refining, and fossil fuel-based electricity generation. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |ENGINEERING & CONSTRUCTION SERVICES |19",
    "new_id": 290
  },
  {
    "id": 19553,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes why entities in the Engineering & Construction Services industry might lose market share if they fail to integrate sustainability considerations into their services, as described in the Engineering & Construction Services – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Because the inability to meet evolving client demands and regulatory standards could result in a competitive disadvantage.",
      "A": "Because client demand for sustainable projects is decreasing while regulatory pressures remain constant.",
      "B": "Because certification schemes like BREEAM® and Green Globes® are becoming less relevant in the industry.",
      "D": "Because lifecycle impacts of buildings are no longer a concern for clients or regulators.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "14-15",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Engineering & Construction Services.pdf",
    "source_text": "4.1 Work-related incidents are injuries and illnesses resulting from events or exposures in the work environment. 4.2 The work environment is the establishment and other locations where one or more employees are working or are present as a condition of their employment. 4.3 The work environment includes not only physical locations, but also the equipment or materials used by the employee during the course of work. 4.4 Incidents that occur while an employee is travelling are work-related if, at the time of the injury or illness, the employee was engaged in work activities in the interest of the employer. 4.5 A work-related incident must be a new case, not a previously recorded injury or illness being updated. 5 The entity shall disclose the rates for each of these employee categories: 5.1 direct employees, defined as individuals on the entity ’s payroll, whether they are full-time, short service, part-time, executive, labour, salary, seasonal, migrant or hourly employees; and 5.2 contract employees, defined as individuals who are not on the entity ’s payroll, but whom the entity supervises or manages, including independent contractors and those employed by third parties (for example, temp agencies and labour brokers). 6The scope of the disclosure includes all employees regardless of employee location or type of employment. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |ENGINEERING & CONSTRUCTION SERVICES |14\n\n[Page 15]\nLifecycle Impacts of Buildings & Infrastructure Topic Summary Buildings and major infrastructure projects are among the largest users of natural resources in the economy; during construction, these materials include iron and steel products, cement, concrete, bricks, drywall, wallboards, glass, insulation, fixtures, doors, and cabinetry, among others. Once completed, and during their daily use, these projects often consume significant amounts of resources in the form of energy and water (for a discussion on direct environmental impacts from project construction see the Environmental Impacts of Project Development topic). Therefore, the sourcing of construction materials and the everyday use of buildings and infrastructure may contribute to direct and indirect greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, global or local resource constraints, water stress and negative human health outcomes. Client and regulatory pressures to develop a sustainable built environment are contributing to the growth of markets intended to reduce the lifecycle impacts of buildings and infrastructure projects. In response, various international sustainable building and infrastructure certification schemes assess, among other aspects, a project ’s use-phase energy and water efficiency, impacts on human health, and the use of sustainable construction and building materials. As a result, various opportunities are being created for industries in the value chain—from suppliers that can provide such materials, to entities in the Engineering & Construction Services industry that can provide sustainability-oriented project design, consulting and construction services. Such services can provide a competitive advantage and revenue growth opportunities as client demand for economically advantageous sustainable projects increases and related regulations evolve. Entities unable to effectively integrate such considerations into their services may lose market share in the long term. Metrics IF-EN-410a.1. Number of (1) commissioned projects certified to a third-party multi- attribute sustainability standard and (2) active projects seeking such certification 1The entity shall disclose (1) the number of projects commissioned during the reporting period certified to a third- party multi-attribute sustainability standard. 1.1 The scope of third-party multi-attribute sustainability standards is limited to standards or certifications that, at a minimum, address the following aspects of building or infrastructure design and construction: 1.1.1 Energy efficiency; 1.1.2 Water conservation; 1.1.3 Material and resource efficiency; and 1.1.4 Indoor environmental quality. 1.2 Examples of third-party multi-attribute sustainability standards include: 1.2.1 BREEAM® 1.2.2 Green Globes® SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |ENGINEERING & CONSTRUCTION SERVICES |15",
    "new_id": 291
  },
  {
    "id": 19554,
    "question": "Which of the following best reflects an implied relationship between compliance processes and financial implications for structural integrity in the context of environmental and safety standards, as discussed in the Engineering & Construction Services – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The discussion of processes to manage environmental risks implicitly supports minimizing defect-related monetary losses, though they are tracked separately.",
      "A": "Entities are required to report all defect-related rework costs as part of their discussion on managing environmental risks.",
      "B": "Legal proceedings associated with safety incidents directly mandate a revision of environmental risk assessment processes.",
      "C": "Non-compliance with environmental permits is explicitly linked to increases in safety-related rework costs.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "6",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Engineering & Construction Services.pdf",
    "source_text": "SUSTAINABILITY DISCLOSURE TOPICS & METRICS Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORYUNIT OF MEASURECODE Environmental Impacts of Project DevelopmentNumber of incidents of non-compliance with environmental permits, standards and regulationsQuantitative Number IF-EN-160a.1 Discussion of processes to assess and manage environmental risks associated with project design, siting and constructionDiscussion and Analysisn/a IF-EN-160a.2 Structural Integrity & SafetyAmount of defect- and safety-related rework costsQuantitativePresentation currencyIF-EN-250a.1 Total amount of monetary losses as a result of legal proceedings associated with defect- and safety-related incidents 1QuantitativePresentation currencyIF-EN-250a.2 Workforce Health & Safety(1) Total recordable incident rate (TRIR) and (2) fatality rate for (a) direct employees and (b) contract employeesQuantitative Rate IF-EN-320a.1 Lifecycle Impacts of Buildings & InfrastructureNumber of (1) commissioned projects certified to a third-party multi-attribute sustainability standard and (2) active projects seeking such certificationQuantitative Number IF-EN-410a.1 Discussion of process to incorporate operational-phase energy and water efficiency considerations into project planning and designDiscussion and Analysisn/a IF-EN-410a.2 Climate Impacts of Business MixAmount of backlog for (1) hydrocarbon- related projects and (2) renewable energy projectsQuantitativePresentation currencyIF-EN-410b.1 Amount of backlog cancellations associated with hydrocarbon-related projectsQuantitativePresentation currencyIF-EN-410b.2 Amount of backlog for non-energy projects associated with climate change mitigationQuantitativePresentation currencyIF-EN-410b.3 continued... 1Note to IF-EN-250a.2 – The entity shall briefly describe the nature, context, and any corrective actions taken as a result of the monetary losses. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |ENGINEERING & CONSTRUCTION SERVICES |6",
    "new_id": 292
  },
  {
    "id": 20584,
    "question": "Which scenario best illustrates a situation where an entity would be required to disclose the percentage of food products subject to recalls that were private-label, but not include market withdrawals in the calculation, according to the Food Retailers & Distributors – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "A retailer removes a product due to a minor labeling error that does not pose a food safety risk and is not enforced by regulatory authorities.",
      "B": "A manufacturer initiates a voluntary recall of a store-brand product after discovering contamination that could cause serious health effects.",
      "C": "A distributor corrects a packaging defect in a product unrelated to food safety, following standard stock rotation practices.",
      "D": "A retailer voluntarily recalls a private-label product because of a potential allergen mislabeling identified internally, without any regulatory intervention.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "23",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Food Retailers & Distributors.pdf",
    "source_text": "1.2 Involuntary recalls are those requested or mandated by applicable jurisdictional legal or regulatory authorities, and they are issued when a product does not comply with regulatory food safety standards, when a food safety-related defect in a product is identified or during instances of import refusal. 1.3 Voluntary recalls are those initiated by the entity to remove products from the market for food safety-related concerns. 2 The entity shall disclose (2) the total number of units of food products subject to food-safety-related recalls. 3The entity shall disclose (3) the percentage of food products, by units, subject to food-safety-related recalls that were private-label products. 3.1 A private-label product is defined as a store-brand product packaged for sale with a retailer ’s brand name, whether manufactured by the retailer or by another manufacturer. 3.2 The percentage shall be calculated as the number of units of private-label food products subject to food- safety-related recalls divided by the total number of units of food products subject to food-safety-related recalls. 4The scope of the disclosure excludes market withdrawals, which are defined as an entity ’s removal or correction of a distributed product that involves a minor violation not subject to legal action by applicable jurisdictional legal or regulatory authorities, or practices that do not involve violations (for example, normal stock rotation practices). 5The entity may separately disclose the percentage of recalls that were (a) voluntary and (b) involuntary. 6The entity may disclose the percentage of the total number of units recalled for which a reasonable probability exists that the use of, or exposure to, a violative product could cause serious adverse health effects or death. Note to FB-FR-250a.2 1The entity shall provide a discussion of notable recalls, such as those that affected a significant number of products or those related to potential or actual serious illnesses or fatalities. 1.1 A recall may be considered notable if it is mentioned in periodic jurisdictional recall reports. 1.2 For such recalls, the entity may provide: 1.2.1 description and cause of the recall issue; 1.2.2 the total quantity of food products recalled; 1.2.3 cost to remedy the issue; 1.2.4 whether the recall was voluntary or involuntary; 1.2.5 corrective actions; and 1.2.6 any other significant outcomes (for example, legal proceedings or fatalities). SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |FOOD RETAILERS & DISTRIBUTORS |23",
    "new_id": 293
  },
  {
    "id": 20590,
    "question": "Which scenario best aligns with the requirements for disclosing monetary losses from legal proceedings as outlined in the Food Retailers & Distributors – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "An entity describes a guilty plea related to misbranded labeling and outlines corrective actions, such as revising product packaging processes.",
      "A": "An entity reports legal defense fees as part of its monetary losses to provide a comprehensive view of financial impact.",
      "C": "An entity discloses a settlement payment made to a regulatory body but excludes fines arising from criminal actions during the reporting period.",
      "D": "An entity aggregates penalties from civil, regulatory, and criminal actions without distinguishing their nature or context in the disclosure.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "27",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Food Retailers & Distributors.pdf",
    "source_text": "2The legal proceedings shall include any adjudicative proceeding involving the entity, whether before a court, a regulator, an arbitrator or otherwise. 3The losses shall include all monetary liabilities to the opposing party or to others (whether as the result of settlement, verdict after trial or otherwise), including fines and other monetary liabilities incurred during the reporting period as a result of civil actions (for example, civil judgements or settlements), regulatory proceedings (for example, penalties, disgorgement or restitution) and criminal actions (for example, criminal judgements, penalties or restitution) brought by any entity (for example, governmental, business or individual). 4The scope of monetary losses shall exclude legal and other fees and expenses incurred by the entity in its defence. 5The scope of the disclosure shall include legal proceedings associated with the enforcement of applicable jurisdictional laws or regulations. Note to FB-FR-270a.2 1The entity shall briefly describe the nature (for example, judgement or order issued after trial, settlement, guilty plea, deferred prosecution agreement or non-prosecution agreement) and context (for example, nutrient content claims, health claims or misbranded labelling) of all monetary losses resulting from legal proceedings. 2The entity shall describe any corrective actions implemented in response to the legal proceedings. This may include specific changes in operations, management, processes, products, business partners, training or technology. FB-FR-270a.3. Revenue from products labelled as (1) containing genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and (2) non-GMO 1The entity shall disclose its revenue from products sold during the reporting period labelled as (1) containing genetically modified organisms (GMOs), and separately, (2) not containing GMOs (non-GMOs). 1.1 GMOs are defined as organisms, except for human beings, in which genetic material has been altered in a way that does not occur naturally by mating or natural recombination. 2The entity may disclose the revenue from its products labelled as (1) containing GMOs and (2) non-GMOs in jurisdictions subject to GMO labelling regulation. 3For the purposes of this disclosure, products that are third-party certified to standards for which non-GMO is inherent to the certification shall be considered to be labelled ‘non-GMO ’. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |FOOD RETAILERS & DISTRIBUTORS |27",
    "new_id": 294
  },
  {
    "id": 20591,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes why the disclosure for food waste management explicitly requires quantification methods while other metrics like fleet fuel or energy consumption do not, as stated in the Food Retailers & Distributors – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Food waste quantification is inherently more subjective and varies significantly across methodologies, necessitating transparency in calculation approaches.",
      "A": "The regulatory environment for food waste is stricter than for other sustainability metrics, mandating additional reporting requirements.",
      "B": "Food waste is the only metric tied directly to consumer behavior, making it critical to standardize how data is collected and reported.",
      "D": "Other metrics like fleet fuel and energy consumption are universally standardized, whereas food waste lacks any established measurement framework.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "6",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Food Retailers & Distributors.pdf",
    "source_text": "SUSTAINABILITY DISCLOSURE TOPICS & METRICS Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORYUNIT OF MEASURECODE Fleet Fuel ManagementFleet fuel consumed, percentage renewableQuantitativeGigajoules (GJ), Percentage (%)FB-FR-110a.1 Air Emissions from RefrigerationGross global Scope 1 emissions from refrigerantsQuantitativeMetric tonnes (t) CO₂-eFB-FR-110b.1 Percentage of refrigerants consumed with zero ozone-depleting potentialQuantitativePercentage (%) by weightFB-FR-110b.2 Average refrigerant emissions rate QuantitativePercentage (%)FB-FR-110b.3 Energy Management(1) Operational energy consumed, (2) percentage grid electricity and (3) percentage renewableQuantitativeGigajoules (GJ), Percentage (%)FB-FR-130a.1 Food Waste Management(1) Amount of food waste generated, (2) percentage diverted from the waste stream 1QuantitativeMetric tonnes (t), Percentage (%)FB-FR-150a.1 Data Security(1) Number of data breaches, (2) percentage that are personal data breaches, (3) number of customers affected 2QuantitativeNumber, Percentage (%)FB-FR-230a.1 Description of approach to identifying and addressing data security risksDiscussion and Analysisn/a FB-FR-230a.2 Food SafetyHigh-risk food safety violation rate Quantitative Rate FB-FR-250a.1 (1) Number of recalls, (2) number of units recalled, (3) percentage of units recalled that are private-label products 3QuantitativeNumber, Percentage (%)FB-FR-250a.2 Product Health & NutritionRevenue from products labelled or marketed to promote health and nutrition attributesQuantitativePresentation currencyFB-FR-260a.1 Discussion of the process to identify and manage products and ingredients related to nutritional and health concerns among consumersDiscussion and Analysisn/a FB-FR-260a.2 continued... 1Note to FB-FR-150a.1 – The disclosure shall include the quantification methods used to calculate the amount of food waste generated. 2Note to FB-FR-230a.1 – The disclosure shall include a description of corrective actions implemented in response to data breaches. 3Note to FB-FR-250a.2 – The disclosure shall include notable recalls such as those that affected a significant number of customers or those related to serious illnesses, injuries, or fatalities. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |FOOD RETAILERS & DISTRIBUTORS |6",
    "new_id": 295
  },
  {
    "id": 20592,
    "question": "Which of the following best reflects a necessary condition for an entity to achieve comprehensive risk mitigation in its supply chain, based on strategies and standards discussed in the Food Retailers & Distributors – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Integrating supplier engagement on labor and human rights issues alongside maintaining certifications that address both environmental management and animal welfare standards.",
      "A": "Implementing supplier screening exclusively for animal welfare standards while disregarding other environmental factors.",
      "B": "Focusing solely on diversification of suppliers without establishing any form of supplier training programs or contractual requirements related to labor rights.",
      "C": "Prioritizing fuel economy regulations as the primary strategy to mitigate risks associated with transportation costs, independent of other sustainability practices.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "33-34",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Food Retailers & Distributors.pdf",
    "source_text": "1.3.7 SA8000; 1.3.8 U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Organic; and 1.3.9 UTZ Certified. 2 The entity may additionally break down the disclosure by product category and certification type. 2.1 A product category is defined as a group of related products that offer a similar general functionality (for example, meat, produce, packaged goods). 2.2 Certification types may be grouped based on the topic or scope of the standard, and can include animal welfare, working conditions, organic, sustainable fishing or harvesting. FB-FR-430a.2. Percentage of revenue from (1) eggs that originated from a cage- free environment and (2) pork produced without the use of gestation crates 1The entity shall disclose (1) the percentage of revenue from eggs sold that originated from a cage-free environment. 1.1 Eggs that originated from a cage-free environment are defined as those produced by hens housed in a space that allows for unrestricted access to food and water and provides freedom to roam within the space during the laying cycle. 1.1.1 The scope also includes eggs that originated from a free-range environment. 1.2 The percentage shall be calculated as the revenue from eggs sold that originated from a cage-free environment divided by the total revenue from eggs sold. 2The entity shall disclose (2) the percentage of revenue from pork produced without the use of gestation crates. 2.1 A gestation crate is defined as an enclosure for housing an individual breeding sow, if the enclosure can enclose an unmoving sow, but is restrictive enough to prevent dynamic movements, such as turning around. Gestation crates are typically non-bedded, with concrete floors and metal stalls. 2.2 The percentage shall be calculated as the revenue from pork sold without using gestation crates divided by the total revenue from pork sold. FB-FR-430a.3. Discussion of strategy to manage environmental and social risks within the supply chain, including animal welfare 1The entity shall discuss its strategic approach to managing its environmental and social risks present within, or which may arise out of, its food and food products supply chain. 1.1 Environmental and social risks may include: SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |FOOD RETAILERS & DISTRIBUTORS |33\n\n[Page 34]\n1.1.1 Impacts on crop and livestock production because of climate change (for example, changing average temperatures and water stress) that may affect cost and availability of produce, meat, poultry, dairy and processed food products; 1.1.2 Animal feed price increases resulting from environmental and social factors or tightening environmental regulations that may have price impacts on meat, poultry and dairy; 1.1.3 Fuel economy regulations that affect transportation costs; 1.1.4 Labour rights and immigration reforms that affect food prices and availability; 1.1.5 International trade barriers or varying levels of food safety oversight in a global market; 1.1.6 Commercial catch limits that could affect the supply of seafood products; and 1.1.7 Animal welfare, human rights or related supply chain incidents that may result in reputational damage. 1.2 Relevant strategies to discuss may include supplier screening, diversification of suppliers, supplier training programmes on best environmental management practices, supplier engagement on labour and human rights issues, and maintenance of a supply chain code of conduct, supply chain audits and certifications. 2The entity shall identify which products or product lines present risks to its operations, the risks represented and the strategies the entity uses to mitigate such risks. 3The entity shall discuss its animal welfare standards applicable to its supply chain. 3.1 Animal welfare standards are defined as policies for beef, pork, poultry or dairy production conditions, including: 3.1.1 Animal treatment and handling; 3.1.2 Housing and transportation conditions; 3.1.3 Slaughter facilities and procedures; and 3.1.4 Use of antibiotics and hormones. 3.2 Discussion shall include, but is not limited to: 3.2.1 Any targets the entity has related to animal welfare standards and its progress towards those targets; 3.2.2 Any requirements for suppliers related to animal welfare standards; and 3.2.3 How, if in any way, animal welfare standards are addressed in supplier contracts. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |FOOD RETAILERS & DISTRIBUTORS |34",
    "new_id": 296
  },
  {
    "id": 20593,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the conditions under which an entity's refrigerant-related GHG emissions would fall outside the required disclosure scope, as outlined in the Food Retailers & Distributors – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Emissions from the combustion of fossil fuels used in refrigeration systems are excluded because they do not involve direct refrigerant use.",
      "B": "GHG emissions originating from third-party transportation fleets using the entity’s refrigerants are excluded as they pertain to indirect emissions.",
      "C": "Emissions associated with upgrading or replacing refrigeration equipment are excluded since they represent future, not current, emissions.",
      "D": "Direct emissions from mobile refrigerants in retail locations are excluded if they occur outside the entity’s operational boundaries.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "10-11",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Food Retailers & Distributors.pdf",
    "source_text": "2.3 The percentage shall be calculated as the amount of renewable fuel consumed by the entity ’s fleet vehicles (in GJ) divided by the total amount of fuel consumed by the entity ’s fleet vehicles (in GJ). 3 The scope of disclosure includes fuel consumed by vehicles owned or operated by the entity. 4 The scope of disclosure excludes fuel consumed in the transportation of the entity ’s products by third parties. 5In calculating energy consumption from fuels and biofuels, the entity shall use higher heating values (HHV), also known as gross calorific values (GCV), which are measured directly or taken from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 6The entity shall apply conversion factors consistently for all data reported under this disclosure, such as the use of HHVs for fuel usage (including biofuels). SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |FOOD RETAILERS & DISTRIBUTORS |10\n\n[Page 11]\nAir Emissions from Refrigeration Topic Summary Emissions of refrigeration chemicals from equipment used to store and display perishable foods pose unique regulatory risks for the Food Retailers & Distributors industry. International regulations on hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) aim to mitigate damage by HCFCs to the earth ’s ozone layer. Additionally, many common HCFCs and hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) are highly potent greenhouse gases (GHGs), which increases the industry ’s exposure to climate change-related regulations. Regulators can assess penalties on entities that violate emissions standards. Entities may be required to upgrade or replace equipment, making capital expenditures to reduce emissions or replace existing refrigerants with potentially costlier but less environmentally-damaging alternatives. Metrics FB-FR-110b.1. Gross global Scope 1 emissions from refrigerants 1The entity shall disclose its gross global Scope 1 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to the atmosphere of the seven GHGs covered under the Kyoto Protocol —carbon dioxide (CO 2), methane (CH 4), nitrous oxide (N 2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), sulphur hexafluoride (SF 6), and nitrogen trifluoride (NF 3)— that originated from the use of refrigerants. 1.1 Emissions of all GHGs shall be consolidated and disclosed in metric tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalents (CO 2-e) and calculated in accordance with published 100-year time horizon global warming potential (GWP) values. To date, the preferred source for GWP values is the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fifth Assessment Report (2014). 1.2 Gross emissions are GHGs emitted into the atmosphere before accounting for offsets, credits or other similar mechanisms that have reduced or compensated for emissions. 1.3 Refrigerants are defined as substances or mixtures used in a heat pump or refrigeration cycle for the purpose of absorbing and releasing heat. 2Scope 1 emissions are defined and shall be calculated according to the methodology contained in The Greenhouse Gas Protocol: A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard (GHG Protocol), Revised Edition, March 2004, published by the World Resources Institute and the World Business Council on Sustainable Development (WRI/WBCSD). 2.1 The scope of emissions includes all direct emissions of GHGs resulting from the entity ’s use of commercial stationary and mobile refrigerants in retail locations, distribution centres and its transportation fleet. 2.2 For the purpose of this disclosure, the scope of emissions excludes direct emissions of GHGs from the combustion of fossil fuels, non-refrigerant process emissions and other sources unrelated to refrigerants. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |FOOD RETAILERS & DISTRIBUTORS |11",
    "new_id": 297
  },
  {
    "id": 20612,
    "question": "Which of the following most accurately reflects the relationship between incentive structures, lending practices, and regulatory scrutiny as described in the Mortgage Finance – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Incentive structures may inadvertently promote unsuitable lending products, potentially resulting in reputational harm, regulatory scrutiny, and litigation if not aligned with transparent customer communication.",
      "A": "Entities that incentivize loan originators based on loan value are more likely to face regulatory scrutiny due to a lack of transparency with customers.",
      "C": "Compensation policies tied to loan value are prohibited under all circumstances, leading entities to adopt fixed-rate mortgage models exclusively.",
      "D": "Regulatory scrutiny arises only when entities fail to disclose prepayment penalties, which is the primary focus of laws against predatory lending.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "7-8",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Mortgage Finance.pdf",
    "source_text": "Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORYUNIT OF MEASURECODE (1) Number and (2) value of mortgages originated by category: (a) residential and (b) commercialQuantitativeNumber, Presentation currencyFN-MF-000.A (1) Number and (2) value of mortgages purchased by category: (a) residential and (b) commercialQuantitativeNumber, Presentation currencyFN-MF-000.B SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |MORTGAGE FINANCE |7\n\n[Page 8]\nLending Practices Topic Summary The approach mortgage finance entities take when incentivising employees and how they communicate with customers is important for more than one reason. First, the incentive structures and compensation policies of loan originators may unintentionally encourage them to promote lending products and services unsuitable for their clients. Second, a lack of transparency provided to customers with respect to primary and add-on products may impair an entity’s reputation and invite regulatory scrutiny and costly litigation. Finally, as a consequence, the resulting client portfolios may contain a high concentration of risky products sold. Also, laws and regulations restricting predatory lending may prohibit mortgage originators from receiving compensation tied to loan value and may require additional disclosures be provided to borrowers. Entities that develop transparent information, give fair advice to customers and clearly disclose their lending practices may assist shareholders in determining which entities better protect shareholder value. Metrics FN-MF-270a.1. (1) Number and (2) value of residential mortgages of the following types: (a) combined fixed- and variable-rate, (b) prepayment penalty, and (c) total 1The entity shall disclose the (1) number and (2) value of residential mortgage loans held in the entity ’s portfolio of these types: (a) combined fixed- and variable-rate, (b) prepayment penalty, and (c) total. 1.1 Combined fixed- and variable-rate mortgages are mortgages with contracts that include a fixed and a variable-interest rate period that may be defined by a reset date, an exercisable option, or other clause. 1.1.1 The scope of the disclosure shall include mortgages that have interest rate resets of less than five years, negative amortisation, or interest-only payment schedules. 1.1.2 Interest-only mortgages are defined as single-family residential mortgages with scheduled repayments of interest-only for a specified period. 1.1.3 Negative amortisation mortgages are defined as single-family residential mortgages where the borrower only pays a portion of the total amount of interest incurred over a given period, and the remaining amount of interest is added to the principal balance. 1.2 Prepayment penalties are defined as mortgages that have a monetary fee, penalty or expense charged because the customer settles all or part of the mortgage balance prior to the end of the contract term. 1.3 Total is the total number of single-family residential mortgages held in the entity ’s loan portfolio. 2The number of mortgages shall include the absolute number of first lien single-family residential mortgages and junior lien single-family residential mortgages that the entity holds as loan assets. 2.1 The scope of the disclosure includes home equity lines of credit and home equity loans. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |MORTGAGE FINANCE |8",
    "new_id": 298
  },
  {
    "id": 20613,
    "question": "Which of the following would most likely undermine an entity’s ability to demonstrate compliance with non-discriminatory lending practices as outlined in the Mortgage Finance – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Failing to calculate the weighted average loan-to-value ratio while disclosing the number and value of loans issued to minority borrowers.",
      "A": "Calculating loan-to-value ratios based on jurisdictional legal requirements but failing to disclose the specific regulatory framework used.",
      "B": "Categorizing a mortgage application as 'minority' when the primary applicant is from a minority group, even if co-applicants are not.",
      "D": "Including borrowers who share only linguistic characteristics as part of the 'minority' category without considering other cultural or religious affiliations.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "12",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Mortgage Finance.pdf",
    "source_text": "Discriminatory Lending Topic Summary The Mortgage Finance industry aggregates data to determine loan terms and conditions including important provisions such as loan size, interest rate, up-front points or other fees. However, the complex process may result in intentional or unintentional discriminatory lending practices by the mortgage originator. Discriminatory lending may result in fines or settlements for violations of regulations, increased reputational risk, and negative financial performance because of loan mispricing. Disclosing internal processes to ensure non-discriminatory lending, disclosing the amount of mortgage lending categorised by minority status along with relevant financial characteristics, and disclosing the amount of monetary losses resulting from legal proceedings associated with violations of applicable laws and regulations may help investors assess entity performance. Entities in the Mortgage Finance industry may reduce the risk of discriminatory lending, including unintended discriminatory lending, by implementing strong processes, enforcing internal controls, and proactively monitoring their loan portfolio, among other techniques. Metrics FN-MF-270b.1. (1) Number, (2) value, and (3) weighted average loan-to-value ratio of mortgages issued to (a) minority and (b) all other borrowers 1The entity shall disclose the (1) number, (2) value and (3) weighted average loan-to-value ratio of mortgage loans held in the entity ’s portfolio that are issued to (a) minority and (b) all other borrowers. 1.1 Minority is defined according to the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights ’ Special Rapporteur on minority issues as any group of persons which constitutes less than half of the population in the entire territory of a state whose members share common characteristics of culture, religion or language, or a combination of any of these. A person can belong freely to an ethnic, religious or linguistic minority without any requirement of citizenship, residence, official recognition or any other status. 1.2 For mortgage applications where the applicant is of one or more race or ethnicity the entity shall categorise the mortgage as ‘minority’. 1.3 For mortgage applications where there is more than one applicant and the primary or first co-applicant is categorised as ‘minority’, the mortgage shall be categorised as ‘minority’. 1.4 Entities that operate in more than one jurisdiction shall categorise applicants as ‘minority’ or ‘all other borrowers ’ based on the jurisdiction in which the applicant applied for the loan. 1.5 Loan-to-value ratio shall be calculated in accordance with applicable jurisdictional legal or regulatory requirements. The entity shall disclose the applicable jurisdictional legal or regulatory requirements used for the calculation. 1.6 The entity shall calculate the weighted average loan-to-value ratio by weighting each loan-to-value ratio by the respective loan amount and then dividing the sum of the weighted loan-to-value ratios by the total loan amount. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |MORTGAGE FINANCE |12",
    "new_id": 299
  },
  {
    "id": 20873,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the implications of the disclosure requirements for total electricity generated and purchased in relation to generating facilities, as outlined in the Electric Utilities & Power Generators – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Electricity consumed at generating facilities is excluded from both total electricity generated and total wholesale electricity purchased disclosures.",
      "A": "Electricity consumed at generating facilities is included in both the total electricity generated and total wholesale electricity purchased disclosures.",
      "B": "Electricity consumed at generating facilities must be disclosed separately under total electricity generated but excluded from total wholesale electricity purchased.",
      "C": "Electricity consumed at generating facilities is only excluded from total electricity generated, while it remains includable in total wholesale electricity purchased.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "8",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Electric Utilities & Power Generators.pdf",
    "source_text": "Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORYUNIT OF MEASURECODE Number of: (1) residential, (2) commercial, and (3) industrial customers served5 Quantitative Number IF-EU-000.A Total electricity delivered to: (1) residential, (2) commercial, (3) industrial, (4) all other retail customers, and (5) wholesale customersQuantitativeMegawatt hours (MWh)IF-EU-000.B Length of transmission and distribution lines6QuantitativeKilometres (km)IF-EU-000.C Total electricity generated, percentage by major energy source, percentage in regulated markets7 QuantitativeMegawatt hours (MWh), Percentage (%)IF-EU-000.D Total wholesale electricity purchased8QuantitativeMegawatt hours (MWh)IF-EU-000.E 5Note to IF-EU-000.A – The number of customers served for each category shall be the number of meters billed for residential, commercial and industrial customers. 6Note to IF-EU-000.C – The length of transmission and distribution lines shall be calculated on a circuit kilometre basis, where a circuit- kilometre is defined as the total length of circuits, regardless of conductors used per circuit. 7Note to IF-EU-000.D – Generation shall be disclosed for each of the following major energy sources: coal, natural gas, nuclear, petroleum, hydropower, solar, wind, other renewables and other gases. The scope of the disclosure includes owned or operated assets. The scope of the disclosure excludes electricity consumed at generating facilities. 8Note to IF-EU-000.E – The scope of the disclosure excludes electricity consumed at generating facilities. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |ELECTRIC UTILITIES & POWER GENERATORS |8",
    "new_id": 300
  },
  {
    "id": 20899,
    "question": "Which of the following scenarios would pose the greatest regulatory and compliance challenge for an electricity generator based on the disclosure requirements in the Electric Utilities & Power Generators – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "An entity operating multiple facilities in or near urbanized areas, emitting all five regulated pollutants, but disclosing only stationary source emissions while excluding mobile sources such as transportation fleets.",
      "B": "An entity operating a facility near an urbanized area with emissions primarily consisting of NOx and SOx but using continuous emissions monitoring systems (CEMS) for precise data collection.",
      "C": "An entity with facilities located in a remote area, emitting lead and mercury, relying on mass balance calculations to estimate emissions due to lack of advanced monitoring systems.",
      "D": "An entity whose facilities are within 49 kilometers of an urbanized area and emit PM10, with no access to accurate census data but utilizing global population density data from NASA’s SEDAC for emissions reporting.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "14-15",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Electric Utilities & Power Generators.pdf",
    "source_text": "Air Quality Topic Summary Fuel combustion in electricity-generation operations generates hazardous air pollutants. These air pollutants can create significant and localised environmental and health risks. The most common and impactful are nitrogen oxides (excluding nitrous oxide), sulphur oxide, particulate matter (PM), lead and mercury. Emissions of these localised air pollutants often are strictly regulated, creating significant compliance risks for electricity generators. Regulatory and legal risks are higher for entities operating near large communities. Harmful operational air emissions may result in regulatory penalties, higher regulatory compliance costs and capital expenditures to install control technology. In some cases, such expenditures may be cost prohibitive to continued facility operations. Entities may manage air quality concerns by reducing emissions, as well as by working with regulators to establish priorities and manage short- and long-term capital planning risks. Metrics IF-EU-120a.1. Air emissions of the following pollutants: (1) NO x (excluding N 2O), (2) SO x, (3) particulate matter (PM 10), (4) lead (Pb), and (5) mercury (Hg); percentage of each in or near areas of dense population 1The entity shall disclose its emissions of air pollutants, in metric tonnes per pollutant, released into the atmosphere. 1.1 The scope of the disclosure includes air pollutants associated with the entity ’s direct air emissions resulting from all the entity ’s activities and sources of emissions, which may include stationary or mobile sources, production facilities, office buildings and transportation fleets. 2 The entity shall disclose its emissions of (1) oxides of nitrogen (NO X), reported as NO x. 2.1 The scope of NO x includes NO and NO 2 but excludes N 2O. 3 The entity shall disclose its emissions of (2) oxides of sulphur (SO X), reported as SO X. 3.1 The scope of SO x includes SO 2 and SO 3. 4The entity shall disclose its emissions of (3) particulate matter 10 micrometres or less in diameter (PM 10), reported as PM 10. 4.1 PM10 is defined as any airborne finely divided solid or liquid material with an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to a nominal 10 micrometres. 5 The entity shall disclose its emissions of (4) lead and lead compounds, reported as Pb. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |ELECTRIC UTILITIES & POWER GENERATORS |14\n\n[Page 15]\n6 The entity shall disclose its emissions of (5) mercury and mercury compounds, reported as Hg. 7The entity shall disclose the percentage of its NO x, SO x, PM 10, Pb, and Hg emissions from its facilities located in or near areas defined as urbanised areas in the local jurisdiction. 7.1 Generically, urbanised areas include densely developed residential, commercial and other non-residential areas with a population greater than 50,000. The entity may reference the United Nations Statistics Division list of the various national definitions for the word ‘urban’ in its Demographic Yearbook 2005 , Table 6. 7.2 The scope of the disclosure includes facilities located in an urbanised area or those with boundaries within 49 kilometres of an urbanised area, which constitutes an exposed population that is likely to come into contact with air emissions. 7.3 In the absence of available or accurate census data, the entity may use global population density data available from the NASA Socioeconomic Data and Applications Centre ’s (SEDAC) Gridded Population of the World (GPW). 8The entity may discuss the calculation method for its emissions disclosure, such as whether data is from continuous emissions monitoring systems (CEMS), engineering calculations or mass balance calculations. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |ELECTRIC UTILITIES & POWER GENERATORS |15",
    "new_id": 301
  },
  {
    "id": 20900,
    "question": "Which of the following most accurately reflects the relationship between external factors and their impact on electricity affordability, as described in the Electric Utilities & Power Generators – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Entities are required to analyze both the frequency and magnitude of external factors' effects on affordability, while also considering how these factors create financial risks or opportunities.",
      "A": "External factors are limited to those that directly influence electricity rates, excluding any broader economic conditions such as employment rates or poverty levels.",
      "C": "An entity must disclose how external factors like regulations and weather affect affordability trends but is not required to address potential risks or opportunities arising from these factors.",
      "D": "The disclosure of external factors is optional for entities unless they can demonstrate a direct link between those factors and increased customer disconnections.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "24",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Electric Utilities & Power Generators.pdf",
    "source_text": "1.3 Regulations include those enforced by jurisdictions, utility commissions or entities designed to improve the affordability of electricity among residential customers or reduce the number or duration of residential customer disconnections. IF-EU-240a.4. Discussion of impact of external factors on customer affordability of electricity, including the economic conditions of the service territory 1The entity shall describe the external factors that cause, or are reasonably likely to cause, a significant change in the affordability of electricity among the entity ’s retail customers. 1.1 External factors are defined as influences outside the entity ’s direct control. 1.2 The scope of external factors includes factors that directly affect current or future electricity rates, or factors that affect customers ’ current or future ability to pay electricity bills (with no direct effect on electricity rates). 1.3 External factors may include geography, climate, weather, regulations, public policy and public purpose programmes, regardless of whether such factors directly relate to affordability. 1.4 At a minimum, external factors shall include the prevailing economic conditions in the service territory. 1.4.1 The entity may disclose the median household income, poverty rates, employment rates, or other quantitative or qualitative data describing the economic conditions of the service territory. 2For each external factor, in addition to a description of the factor, the entity shall briefly describe: 2.1 the frequency and magnitude with which the factor affects electricity affordability for the entity ’s customers; and 2.2 the trend in how the factor affects electricity affordability for the entity ’s customers. 3The entity shall describe the risks and opportunities that may arise from external factors. 3.1 Risks may include customer non-payment of electricity bills, cost recovery uncertainty, reputational value, and regulations, public policy or public purpose programmes that may generate adverse financial consequences. 3.2 Opportunities may include customer growth, capital investment opportunities, reputational value, and regulations, public policy or public purpose programmes that may generate positive financial effects. 4The scope of the disclosure includes the affordability of electricity for all retail customers within the entity ’s service territory, which may include residential, commercial, industrial and agricultural customers. 4.1 The entity may prioritise low-income residential customers in its disclosures. 5The entity may describe how its average rates, average bills or customer disconnections compare to other utilities in the industry. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |ELECTRIC UTILITIES & POWER GENERATORS |24",
    "new_id": 302
  },
  {
    "id": 20901,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why managing energy affordability is considered a critical business issue for utilities in terms of both customer relations and financial performance, as outlined in the Electric Utilities & Power Generators – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Because effectively managing affordability can lead to favorable regulatory decisions, enhance trust with customers, and mitigate risks associated with grid defection.",
      "A": "Because affordability directly determines the total amount of electricity delivered to all customer types, thereby ensuring consistent revenue growth.",
      "B": "Because affordability conflicts with sustainability objectives, forcing utilities to prioritize one over the other in their long-term strategies.",
      "D": "Because the calculation of average retail electric rates is mandated by financial reporting standards, which ensures transparency and prevents scrutiny.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "22",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Electric Utilities & Power Generators.pdf",
    "source_text": "Energy Affordability Topic Summary An objective of regulated electric utilities is to provide reliable, affordable and sustainable electricity. Entities in the industry manage these potentially competing priorities to maintain favourable relations with customers and regulators —and ultimately to earn appropriate returns for shareholders. The affordability of energy is particularly challenging for entities to balance because it often conflicts with other core objectives. Utility energy bills generally are perceived to be increasingly unaffordable for low-income customers (affordability is determined by both the net cost of energy bills and the underlying customer economics). Ensuring that utility bills are affordable is crucial for utilities working to build trust (intangible asset value) with regulators and customers. Regulatory relations are an important value driver for utilities and one of the issues analysed closely by investment analysts. The willingness of regulators to grant rate requests, rate structure modifications, cost recovery and allowed returns determines financial performance and investment risk. Effectively managing affordability may enable utilities to invest more capital, favourably revise rate structures and increase allowed returns. Furthermore, utilities that ineffectively manage affordability increasingly are exposed to customers defecting from the grid (or reducing reliance on the grid) by implementing distributed energy resources or pursuing other alternative energy sources (for example, industrial customers ’ use of combined heat and power). Managing affordability involves operating an efficient business with a comprehensive, long-term strategy, as well as working closely with regulators and public policymakers on rate structures and, potentially, bill-assistance programmes. Although a utility ’s business model and rate structure largely determine the precise nature of the financial effects, affordability is a critical business issue for utilities managing, maintaining and growing customer bases, building intangible asset value, creating investment and return opportunities, and ultimately delivering shareholder returns. Metrics IF-EU-240a.1. Average retail electric rate for (1) residential, (2) commercial, and (3) industrial customers 1The entity shall disclose its average retail electric rate per kilowatt hour (kWh) of electricity delivered to retail customers. 1.1 The entity shall calculate its average retail electric rate as the total revenue directly resulting from electricity delivered to retail customers divided by the corresponding amount of electricity delivered (in kWh). 2The entity shall disclose its average retail electric rate separately for each type of customer, classified as (1) residential, (2) commercial, and (3) industrial. 2.1 The scope of each customer type shall be consistent with the entity ’s financial reporting. 2.2 Each customer type shall be disclosed as an aggregate for all customers within that respective customer type. 2.2.1 If the entity ’s financial reporting combines commercial and industrial customers into one category, then the entity may combine the commercial and industrial customer types. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |ELECTRIC UTILITIES & POWER GENERATORS |22",
    "new_id": 303
  },
  {
    "id": 21581,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the interplay between compliance metrics and environmental or social considerations, as described in the Processed Foods – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Strategies to reduce the environmental impact of packaging are discussed separately from quantifiable metrics about packaging materials, indicating a dual approach to sustainability reporting.",
      "A": "Monetary losses from legal proceedings related to labelling practices are directly proportional to the non-compliance rate with industry or regulatory codes.",
      "B": "The percentage of food ingredients sourced from regions with high water stress is used to calculate the non-conformance rate of suppliers’ audits.",
      "C": "Certification to third-party standards for ingredient sourcing eliminates the need for corrective actions associated with supplier non-conformances.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "7-8",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Processed Foods.pdf",
    "source_text": "...continued TOPIC METRIC CATEGORYUNIT OF MEASURECODE Product Labelling & MarketingPercentage of advertising impressions (1) made on children and (2) made on children promoting products that meet dietary guidelines 2QuantitativePercentage (%)FB-PF-270a.1 Revenue from products labelled as (1) containing genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and (2) non-GMOQuantitativePresentation currencyFB-PF-270a.2 Number of incidents of non-compliance with industry or regulatory labelling or marketing codesQuantitative Number FB-PF-270a.3 Total amount of monetary losses as a result of legal proceedings associated with labelling or marketing practices 3QuantitativePresentation currencyFB-PF-270a.4 Packaging Lifecycle Management(1) Total weight of packaging, (2) percentage made from recycled or renewable materials, and (3) percentage that is recyclable, reusable, or compostableQuantitativeMetric tonnes (t), Percentage (%)FB-PF-410a.1 Discussion of strategies to reduce the environmental impact of packaging throughout its lifecycleDiscussion and Analysisn/a FB-PF-410a.2 Environmental & Social Impacts of Ingredient Supply ChainPercentage of food ingredients sourced that are certified to third-party environmental or social standards, and percentages by standardQuantitativePercentage (%) by costFB-PF-430a.1 Suppliers ’ social and environmental responsibility audit (1) non-conformance rate and (2) associated corrective action rate for (a) major and (b) minor non- conformancesQuantitative Rate FB-PF-430a.2 Ingredient SourcingPercentage of food ingredients sourced from regions with High or Extremely High Baseline Water StressQuantitativePercentage (%) by costFB-PF-440a.1 List of priority food ingredients and discussion of sourcing risks related to environmental and social considerationsDiscussion and Analysisn/a FB-PF-440a.2 2Note to FB-PF-270a.1 – The disclosure shall include the applicable dietary guidelines and the method used to estimate advertising impressions. 3Note to FB-PF-270a.4 – The entity shall briefly describe the nature, context and any corrective actions taken because of monetary losses. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |PROCESSED FOODS |7\n\n[Page 8]\nTable 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORYUNIT OF MEASURECODE Weight of products sold QuantitativeMetric tonnes (t)FB-PF-000.A Number of production facilities Quantitative Number FB-PF-000.B SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |PROCESSED FOODS |8",
    "new_id": 304
  },
  {
    "id": 21582,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between certification programs and strategies to address consumer concerns, as described in the Processed Foods – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The entity is required to discuss its use of certification programs that address consumer concerns, but these certifications are explicitly excluded from the scope of products marketed to promote health and nutrition attributes.",
      "B": "Certification programs like organic, non-GMO Project Verified, and Certified Gluten-Free are directly tied to formal health and nutrition initiatives such as the WHO Global Strategy on Diet, Physical Activity and Health.",
      "C": "The implementation of certification programs is discussed as a necessary condition for managing nutritional and health concerns but not sufficient without additional risk assessments or ingredient substitutions.",
      "D": "Certification programs are optional strategies that entities may adopt independently of any formal health and nutrition initiative to manage consumer concerns regarding allergens and additives.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "19",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Processed Foods.pdf",
    "source_text": "2.4 that a relative claim, such as ‘light’, ‘reduced’, or ‘less’ can be made regarding a product ’s added sugar content, consistent with applicable jurisdictional laws or regulations for health or nutrition claims. 3The scope of products labelled or marketed to promote health and nutrition attributes excludes products labelled organic, free of genetically modified organism (GMO) ingredients and gluten-free. FB-PF-260a.2. Discussion of the process to identify and manage products and ingredients related to nutritional and health concerns among consumers 1The entity shall discuss its process to identify and manage products and ingredients related to nutritional and health concerns among consumers such as how it identifies concerns, the products and ingredients related to those concerns, and the resulting risks and opportunities. 1.1 Relevant efforts to discuss include risk assessments, organisation of long-term health or toxicology studies, and procedures for receiving and reviewing consumer concerns. 2 The entity shall discuss how identified concerns and risks are managed and communicated. 2.1 Relevant efforts to discuss include labelling transparency; phasing out, substituting or using more sustainable ingredients; updating product portions and product mix; improving the nutritional content of its products; or taking other measures to address consumer concerns, trends and preferences. 2.2 The entity may discuss implementation of relevant food ingredient and additive standards, such as the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations ’ (FAO) and World Health Organisation ’s (WHO) Codex Alimentarius, as a strategy to manage products and ingredients related to nutritional and health concerns among consumers. 2.3 The entity may discuss whether strategies are related to or associated with a formal health and nutrition initiative or strategy (for example, the WHO Global Strategy on Diet, Physical Activity and Health), including regional, national, international and industry-specific programmes. 3The entity shall discuss its use of certification programmes that address consumer concerns and preferences regarding ingredients, additives, and potential allergens. 3.1 Certifications may include: 3.1.1 organic; 3.1.2 non-GMO Project Verified; and 3.1.3 Certified Gluten-Free. 4The entity shall discuss any significant complaints, such as those resulting in significant lawsuits, relating to nutritional and health concerns associated with products or ingredients, and efforts to mitigate any related future risks. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |PROCESSED FOODS |19",
    "new_id": 305
  },
  {
    "id": 21583,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why an entity in the Processed Foods industry might prioritize increasing its percentage of renewable energy consumption as part of its energy management strategy, according to the Processed Foods – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "To mitigate exposure to volatile fossil fuel costs while also reducing its contribution to greenhouse gas emissions.",
      "A": "To directly reduce the total amount of energy consumed by replacing inefficient fossil fuel usage with renewable alternatives.",
      "C": "To comply with mandatory reporting requirements that specifically mandate a minimum threshold for renewable energy usage.",
      "D": "To ensure complete independence from grid electricity, thereby eliminating reliance on external energy providers.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "8-9",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Processed Foods.pdf",
    "source_text": "Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORYUNIT OF MEASURECODE Weight of products sold QuantitativeMetric tonnes (t)FB-PF-000.A Number of production facilities Quantitative Number FB-PF-000.B SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |PROCESSED FOODS |8\n\n[Page 9]\nEnergy Management Topic Summary The Processed Foods industry is reliant on energy and fuel as primary inputs for value creation in manufacturing food products. Energy is needed to operate large manufacturing facilities for cooking, refrigeration and packaging. Energy production and consumption contributes to significant environmental impacts, including climate change and pollution, which have the potential indirectly, yet materially, to affect processed food entity operations. Energy efficiency in production and distribution can mitigate exposure to volatile energy costs and limit an entity ’s contribution to direct and indirect greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Producers may be able to reduce the risk posed by volatile fossil fuel energy costs —particularly natural gas, which the industry uses heavily —by diversifying their energy portfolio across a range of sources. Decisions regarding alternative fuels use, renewable energy and on-site generation of electricity versus purchasing from the grid, may influence both the costs and reliability of the energy supply. Metrics FB-PF-130a.1. (1) Total energy consumed, (2) percentage grid electricity and (3) percentage renewable 1The entity shall disclose (1) the total amount of energy it consumed as an aggregate figure, in gigajoules (GJ). 1.1 The scope of energy consumption includes energy from all sources, including energy purchased from external sources and energy produced by the entity itself (self-generated). For example, direct fuel usage, purchased electricity, and heating, cooling and steam energy all are included within the scope of energy consumption. 1.2 The scope of energy consumption includes only energy directly consumed by the entity during the reporting period. 1.3 In calculating energy consumption from fuels and biofuels, the entity shall use higher heating values (HHV), also known as gross calorific values (GCV), which are measured directly or taken from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2The entity shall disclose (2) the percentage of energy it consumed that was supplied from grid electricity. 2.1 The percentage shall be calculated as purchased grid electricity consumption divided by total energy consumption. 3 The entity shall disclose (3) the percentage of energy it consumed that was renewable energy. 3.1 Renewable energy is defined as energy from sources that are replenished at a rate greater than or equal to their rate of depletion, such as geothermal, wind, solar, hydro and biomass. 3.2 The percentage shall be calculated as renewable energy consumption divided by total energy consumption. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |PROCESSED FOODS |9",
    "new_id": 306
  },
  {
    "id": 21584,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the implicit relationship between ISO standards implementation and packaging sustainability strategies, as discussed in the Processed Foods – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "ISO 18604 establishes criteria for recyclable packaging, which complements lifecycle strategies focused on increasing recycled content but does not address degradable materials.",
      "A": "The implementation of ISO 18602 primarily ensures compliance with hazardous substance minimization without regard to packaging weight optimization.",
      "B": "Adherence to ISO 14855-1 guarantees that all compostable packaging will be free of toxic residues, regardless of other material properties.",
      "D": "ISO 14021 solely governs renewable material claims and excludes any consideration of recycled content or environmental labeling.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "25-26",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Processed Foods.pdf",
    "source_text": "3.3 A material is defined as ‘compostable ’ if it undergoes degradation by biological processes during composting to yield CO 2, water, inorganic compounds and biomass at a rate consistent with other known compostable materials and that leaves no visible, distinguishable or toxic residue. Compostable plastics are defined further by ASTM D6400, Standard Specification for Labeling of Plastics Designed to be Aerobically Composted in Municipal or Industrial Facilities . 3.4 The entity shall calculate the percentage as the weight of recyclable, reusable or compostable packaging divided by the total weight of all packaging used by the entity. 4The entity may disaggregate the disclosure requested above by major packaging substrate (for example, wood fibre, glass, metal and petroleum-based). FB-PF-410a.2. Discussion of strategies to reduce the environmental impact of packaging throughout its lifecycle 1The entity shall discuss its strategies to reduce the environmental impact of the packaging of its products throughout its lifecycle, such as optimising packaging weight and volume for a given application or using alternative materials, including those that are recycled, recyclable, reusable, compostable or degradable. 2The entity shall describe its use of recycled and renewable packaging, including supply availability, consumer preferences and packaging durability requirements. 3The entity shall describe its use of recyclable and compostable packaging, including regulations, packaging end- of-life commitments, consumer demand and packaging durability. 4Relevant disclosures may include discussion of the: 4.1 implementation of ISO 18602, Packaging and the environment —Optimization of the packaging system , which includes criteria for minimisation of packaging weight and optimisation to the amount needed for safety, hygiene and consumer acceptance of the packed product; 4.2 implementation of ISO 18604 , Packaging and the environment —Material recycling , which includes criteria for recyclable packaging; 4.3 implementation of ISO 14855-1, Determination of the ultimate aerobic biodegradability of plastic materials under controlled composting conditions —Method by analysis of evolved carbon dioxide —Part 1: General method ; ASTM D6400, Standard Specification for Labeling of Plastics Designed to be Aerobically Composted in Municipal or Industrial Facilities ; or ASTM D6868, Standard Specification for Labeling of End Items that Incorporate Plastics and Polymers as Coatings or Additives with Paper and Other Substrates Designed to be Aerobically Composted in Municipal or Industrial Facilities; which include criteria for packaging recoverable through biodegradation and composting; 4.4 implementation of ISO 14021, Environmental labels and declarations — Self-declared environmental claims (Type II environmental labelling) , which includes criteria for renewable and recycled material content claims; or SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |PROCESSED FOODS |25\n\n[Page 26]\n4.5 performance on The Consumer Goods Forum ’s Global Protocol on Packaging Sustainability 2.0 metrics for ‘Packaging Weight and Optimization or Assessment ’ and ‘Minimization of Substances Hazardous to the Environment ’. 5The entity may, if relevant, discuss any packaging-related targets and performance against those targets. Examples of such targets may include: 5.1 reducing packaging footprints; 5.2 reducing packaging weight either in total or on a per-unit basis; and 5.3 increasing recycled, recyclable, reusable, renewable, compostable or degradable content. 6The entity may discuss its use of Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) analysis to reduce environmental impacts and maximise product efficiency, including weight reduction and transportation efficiency. 6.1 Improvements to the environmental efficiency of packaging products may be discussed in terms of LCA functional unit service parameters (time, extent and quality of function). SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |PROCESSED FOODS |26",
    "new_id": 307
  },
  {
    "id": 21585,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why an entity in the Processed Foods industry might prioritize the use of lightweight packaging materials, considering both direct and indirect impacts mentioned in the Processed Foods – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "To reduce transportation costs while simultaneously addressing regulatory compliance risks associated with packaging end-of-life management.",
      "A": "To exclusively enhance brand reputation by signaling environmental responsibility to consumers.",
      "B": "To comply with legislation focused solely on the reduction of primary packaging weight as a mandated requirement.",
      "C": "To eliminate the need for secondary packaging by making primary packaging more durable and self-sufficient.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "23",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Processed Foods.pdf",
    "source_text": "Packaging Lifecycle Management Topic Summary Packaging materials represent a major business cost and contribute to the environmental footprint of entities in the Processed Foods industry. Each stage of a package ’s lifecycle, including design, transportation and disposal, presents unique environmental challenges and opportunities. Entities are also affected by legislation regarding allowable packaging materials or packaging end-of-life management. Entities can work with packaging manufacturers on packaging design to reduce costs, improve brand reputation and reduce the environmental impact of packaging. Innovations such as developing lightweight materials may also result in reduced goods transportation costs. Other innovations can improve end-of-life management of products, such as using recyclable or compostable materials, which may mitigate potential risks related to costs and compliance. Metrics FB-PF-410a.1. (1) Total weight of packaging, (2) percentage made from recycled or renewable materials, and (3) percentage that is recyclable, reusable, or compostable 1The entity shall disclose (1) the total weight of packaging purchased by the entity, in metric tonnes. 1.1 The scope of the disclosure includes primary packaging and secondary packaging but excludes tertiary packaging. 1.1.1 Primary packaging is defined as the packaging designed to come into direct contact with the product. 1.1.2 Secondary packaging is defined as the packaging designed to contain one or more primary packages together with any protective materials, if required. 1.1.3 The scope excludes tertiary packaging designed to contain one or more articles or packages, or bulk material, for the purposes of transport, handling or distribution. Tertiary packaging is known also as ‘distribution ’ or ‘transport ’ packaging. 2The entity shall disclose (2) the percentage of packaging, by weight, made from recycled or renewable materials. 2.1 Recycled content is defined, consistent with definitions in ISO 14021, Environmental labels and declarations —Self-declared environmental claims (Type II environmental labelling) , as the proportion, by mass, of recycled or recovered material in a product or packaging, for which only pre-consumer and post- consumer materials shall be considered as recycled content. 2.1.1 Recycled material is defined as material reprocessed from recovered (or reclaimed) material through a manufacturing process and made into a final product or a component to be integrated into a product. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |PROCESSED FOODS |23",
    "new_id": 308
  },
  {
    "id": 22600,
    "question": "Which scenario reflects the most stringent approach to science-based target validation while acknowledging an organization's current inability to commit fully, as described in CDP SME Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 14-21?",
    "options": {
      "A": "An organization that considers its target science-based but plans to seek SBTi validation only within the next two years.",
      "B": "An organization that has set a target, self-assessed it as science-based, and submitted it for SBTi validation but is awaiting review.",
      "C": "An organization that considers its target science-based but does not plan to seek SBTi validation within the next two years, aligning instead with supplier engagement resources.",
      "D": "An organization that anticipates setting a science-based target in the next two years without committing to SBTi validation.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "153",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 14-21.pdf",
    "source_text": "151 • Replaced – Select this option for previously reported targets that have been replaced with another target in the reporting year, for example where a facility target has been incorporated into a organization-wide target. • Retired – Select this option for targets with an end date in the future, that have not been achieved, but will no longer be pursued. Provide more information as to why this target was retired in column 18 “Explain target coverage and identify any exclusions”. Is this a science-based target? (column 16) • A brief description of science-based targets and why CDP is asking companies to set them is provided as additional information to this question. • The Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) has streamlined target-setting route for SMEs. For further information, please see the SBTi’s Frequently Asked Questions for SMEs. o Note that financial institutions and oil and gas sector companies are not allowed to use the SME streamlined route. If these sectors are relevant to your organization, select the most appropriate “No…” option in this column. • In addition, refer to the CDP Technical Note on Science-Based Targets for what qualifies as a science-based target and how to assess your target against the Science Based Targets initiative’s criteria. • Yes, and this target has been approved by the Science Based Targets initiative – Companies are very strongly encouraged to have their targets officially evaluated by the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi). CDP considers targets approved by the initiative to reflect best practice in science-based target setting. Select this option only if the target has been approved by the SBTi. • Yes, we consider this a science-based target, and the target is currently being reviewed by the Science Based Targets initiative – If your company has set a target and has self-assessed it to be science-based, and it has been submitted to the SBTi for validation and is currently being reviewed by the SBTi, you should select this option. You should use column 18 “Explain target coverage and identify any exclusions” to explain why you consider your target to be science-based. • Yes, we consider this a science-based target, and we have committed to seek validation of this target by the Science Based Targets initiative in the next two years – Not all companies have had their target assessed by the SBTi. If your company has set a target and has self-assessed it to be science-based but has not yet submitted it to the SBTi for validation, you should select this option. You should use column 18 “Explain target coverage and identify any exclusions” to explain why you consider your target to be science-based. If you are currently in the process of revising your target to meet SBTi criteria, indicate this by selecting “No, but we anticipate setting one in the next two years. • Yes, we consider this a science-based target, but we have not committed to seek validation of this target by the Science Based Targets initiative within the next two years – Not all companies intend to have their target assessed by the SBTi. If your company has set a target and has self-assessed it to be science-based but has not committed to submit it to the SBTi for validation, you should select this option. You should use column 18 “Explain target coverage and identify any exclusions” to explain why you consider your target to be science-based. If you are a supplier to a company with a supplier engagement target, as part of which you have set a target in line with SBTi resources but are not planning to seek SBTi approval, select this option. • No, but we are reporting another target that is science-based – Another target (absolute or intensity) disclosed is science-based, either in another row in this table, or in 20.16.1. • No, but we anticipate setting one in the next two years – The SBTi’s streamlined route for SMEs enables them to bypass the initial stage of committing to set a science-based target and the standard target validation process. SMEs can immediately set science-based targets (near-term and net-zero options available) by choosing from one of the predefined target options available in the SME science-based target setting form. For larger companies, while not necessary, it is recommended that the company publicly state this by submitting a Science Based Target initiative commitment letter.",
    "new_id": 309
  },
  {
    "id": 22608,
    "question": "Which scenario best illustrates a situation where the financial impact of stranded assets would be incorrectly assessed based on the provided guidelines in CDP SME Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 14-21?",
    "options": {
      "B": "A corporation reports the total portfolio exposure to assets at risk instead of isolating the direct balance sheet impacts caused by climate-related transition risks.",
      "A": "A company calculates the potential write-down of its non-green real estate portfolio by factoring in both the increased demand for sustainable properties and the implementation of carbon pricing regulations.",
      "C": "A capital goods firm evaluates the risk of stranded assets by estimating losses from stricter emissions constraints but excludes the downstream demand shifts toward low-carbon technologies.",
      "D": "A real estate organization assesses the devaluation of coastal properties solely due to projected increases in flooding risks without accounting for broader market trends favoring green buildings.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "33",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 14-21.pdf",
    "source_text": "31 • Note that if providing a potential financial impact figure, this figure should represent the financial impact on your business. For example, if reporting a risk of stranded assets, you should report the potential financial impact (such as the write-down or devaluation) of the assets stranding on your balance sheet (before taking into consideration any controls you may have in place to mitigate the impacts), as opposed to reporting the portfolio exposure to those assets. • Describe risks by sector and/or geography, as relevant. • Consider both physical and transition risks, including the risk of stranded assets. These are assets that are no longer economically viable as a result of climate-related transition or physical risks. Note for real estate companies: • Real estate, being a location-bound and long-term investment, faces significant exposure to environmental risks. • Consider \"stranding risks\" – where assets may be devaluated or underperform, making them “stranded”. • Stranded assets may be subject to write-downs due to: o Demand shifts towards sustainable properties, putting pressure on ‘non-green’ assets; and o Higher exposure to acute physical risks (storms, flooding, wildfires, etc.). Notes for capital goods sector companies: • End markets supplied by this sector are subject to increasing regulation and decarbonization targets; from building standards to mandated technologies for power generation. Organizations in this sector are thus indirectly exposed to risks in their value chain, and should consider, among other issues, risks associated with: o Carbon pricing regulation and stricter emissions constraints on products and services; o Shifts in end-market demand away from fossil fuel dependent technologies. Explanation of terms • Access to capital: cash flows from sources other than an organization’s sales and other revenues. It includes cash infusions from investors or securing lines of credit with banks and other lenders. • Afforestation: establishment of forest through planting and/or deliberate seeding on land that, until then, was not classified as forest, which implies a transformation of land use from non-forest to forest. (FAO, 2015). • Biodiversity offsetting: measures taken to compensate for any residual significant, adverse impacts that cannot be avoided, minimized and/or rehabilitated or restored, in order to achieve no net loss or a net gain of biodiversity. Offsets can take the form of positive management interventions such as restoration of degraded habitat, arrested degradation or averted risk, protecting areas where there is imminent or projected loss of biodiversity (BBOP, 2012) • Capital expenditure: a measure of the value of purchases of fixed assets such as property, buildings, an industrial plant, technology, or equipment. Put differently, CapEx is any type of expense that an organization capitalizes, or shows on its balance sheet as an investment, rather than on its income statement as an expenditure. • Conversion: loss of a natural ecosystem as a result of its replacement with agriculture or another land use, or due to a profound and sustained change in the natural ecosystem’s species composition, structure, or function. o Deforestation is one form of conversion (conversion of natural forests)",
    "new_id": 310
  },
  {
    "id": 22610,
    "question": "Which scenario would most likely challenge an organization's ability to align with the requirements of Module 20 while still meeting broader stakeholder expectations, as described in CDP SME Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 14-21?",
    "options": {
      "C": "An organization uses a generic tool to estimate emissions but cannot access supplier emission factors for Scope 2 reporting.",
      "A": "An organization evaluates its emissions using in-house resources but chooses not to report market-based figures due to competitive concerns.",
      "B": "An organization plans to evaluate emissions within two years but currently lacks both tailored resources and generic estimation tools.",
      "D": "An organization reports Scope 1 emissions accurately but excludes Scope 2 emissions entirely, citing insufficient regulatory pressure.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "87-88",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 14-21.pdf",
    "source_text": "Module 20: SME - Environmental Performance – Climate Change Module Overview This module requests information on emissions methodologies, exclusions, emissions inventory and breakdown, energy related activities, targets, and emission reduction activities. The module also contains questions on allocating emissions to customers shown only to organizations responding to a request from a CDP Supply Chain member. Evaluating emissions is a critical first step that every organization must take to understand their negative impact on the climate and take the right steps to reduce it. Doing so is becoming increasingly important for obtaining financing, ensuring competitiveness and resiliency, and meeting regulatory and supplier requirements. Disclosure of these areas allows organizations to demonstrate their commitment to evaluating their environmental impact, and highlight their efforts and commitments to reduce emissions associated with operational activities.\n\n[Page 88]\n86 Emissions Methodology and Exclusions (20.1) Do you evaluate your organization’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions? Note that you can measure your emissions or estimate them using the assistance of a carbon accounting tool. Question details Question dependencies Your response to this question determines the questions presented in the rest of module 20. Change from last year No change Alignment with full questionnaire New question; Modified question (1.4, 7.3) Rationale Evaluating emissions is a critical first step that every organization must take to understand its negative impact on the climate and take the right steps to reduce it. Doing so is becoming increasingly important for obtaining financing, ensuring competitiveness and resiliency, and meeting regulatory and supplier requirements. This question helps data users understand whether organizations collect this data and the reasons behind those who have not yet initiated the process. Response options Please complete the following table: 0 1 2 3 4 Scope of emissions Emissions evaluated Scope 2 approach Primary reason for not reporting a market-based figure Indicate whether you had any major barriers or challenges evaluating your emissions in the reporting year Scope 1 (direct emissions from owned or controlled activities) Select from: • Yes, we use tailored in-house or paid-for resources to calculate them • Yes, we use a generic tool to estimate them, please specify • No, but we plan to within the next two years • No, and do not plan to in the next two years N/A N/A Select from: • Yes • No Scope 2 (indirect emissions from purchased electricity, heat, steam or cooling) Select from: • We are reporting a Scope 2 Select from: • We have no operations where we are able to access electricity supplier emission factors or",
    "new_id": 311
  },
  {
    "id": 22620,
    "question": "Which of the following statements accurately reflects a condition under which an organization must report its emissions target, considering both the timeline and validation status as outlined in CDP SME Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 14-21?",
    "options": {
      "D": "An organization should report a target if it is considered science-based but does not plan to seek validation from the Science Based Targets initiative within the next two years.",
      "A": "An organization must report a target only if it was set after the reporting year and has been validated by the Science Based Targets initiative within the next two years.",
      "B": "An organization must report a target that was set during the reporting year, even if it anticipates setting a science-based target in the next two years without current validation.",
      "C": "An organization is required to report a target only if it involves offsetting or CO2 removals and has been submitted for validation by the Science Based Targets initiative before the reporting year.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "139-140",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 14-21.pdf",
    "source_text": "137 • Category 5: Waste generated in operations • Category 6: Business travel • Category 7: Employee commuting • Category 8: Upstream leased assets • Category 9: Downstream transportation and distribution • Category 10: Processing of sold products • Category 11: Use of sold products • Category 12: End-of-life treatment of sold products • Category 13: Downstream leased assets • Category 14: Franchises • Category 15: Investments • Other (upstream • Other (downstream) 12 13 14 15 16 17 Total emissions in reporting year covered by target in all selected scopes (metric tons CO2e) % of target achieved relative to base year [auto-calculated] Target status in reporting year Is this a science-based target? Science Based Targets initiative official validation letter Explain target coverage and identify any exclusions Numerical field [0-999,999,999,999] 3 decimal places Percentage field Select from: • New • Underway • Achieved • Achieved and maintained • Expired • Revised • Replaced • Retired Select from: • Yes, and this target has been approved by the Science Based Targets initiative • Yes, we consider this a science-based target, and the target is currently being reviewed by the Science Based Targets initiative • Yes, we consider this a science-based target, and we have committed to seek [Attachment(s)] Text field [maximum 2,500 characters]\n\n[Page 140]\n138 validation of this target by the Science Based Targets initiative in the next two years • Yes, we consider this a science-based target, but we have not committed to seek validation of this target by the Science Based Targets initiative within the next two years • No, but we are reporting another target that is science-based • No, but we anticipate setting one in the next two years • No, and we do not anticipate setting one in the next two years [Add row] Requested content General • Note that CDP is requesting data on gross emissions targets. Gross means total emissions before any deductions or other adjustments are made to take account of offset credits or avoided emissions. • If you have a target that will be met in part by offsetting (including carbon neutrality targets), or CO2 removals only the proportion of the target that relates to emissions reductions (and not offset purchases or CO2 removals) should be reported here. If you are uncertain of the proportion that will be achieved through emissions reductions, make an estimation based on the initiatives that you have in place or planned. • Targets to reduce emissions in the product use phase or to reduce emissions from the value chain should be captured as Scope 3 targets. • If you intend to report a net-zero target in 20.16.3, you should report both the near-term and long-term emissions reduction targets associated with your net-zero target either in this question or in 20.16.2 and link them to your net zero target in column 5 “Targets linked to this net zero targets” of 20.16.3. Please refer to the SBTi Net-Zero Standard for information on science-based net-zero targets. Target reference number (column 1) • Select a unique target reference from the drop-down menu provided to identify the target in subsequent questions and to track progress against the target in subsequent reporting years. • If you reported a target to CDP last year and will be reporting progress against the same target this year, ensure you use the same target reference number as last year. For any new targets you are adding, always use a new reference number that you have not used previously. Date target was set (column 2) • Enter the date on which your company set the target. • This must be either before or during the reporting year but cannot be after the reporting year or after the end date of the target. • If the target is science-based and has been submitted to the SBTi for validation or revalidation, enter the date on which your organization submitted the target for validation or revalidation by the SBTi.",
    "new_id": 312
  },
  {
    "id": 22628,
    "question": "Which of the following accurately describes a scenario where a company can claim full verification of its emissions data over a triennial process as outlined in CDP SME Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 14-21?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The company verifies all emissions sources for the entire three-year cycle in the final year of the process.",
      "B": "The company verifies one-third of its emissions sources each year, completing all sources by the third year.",
      "C": "The company uses an internal team to verify emissions data across all three years at the end of the cycle.",
      "D": "The company relies on partial verification from multiple third-party providers, combining their results over three years.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "118",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 14-21.pdf",
    "source_text": "116 • Scope 3 emissions: Scope 3 emissions are the result of activities from assets not owned or controlled by the reporting organization, but that the organization indirectly impacts in its value chain. Additional information • Annual, biennial and triennial processes: If in the year the verification is completed (for example, Year 3), the data for all sources during the full cycle is verified (for example year 1, 2, and 3) the company can report 100% verification and should attach the verification statements that cover the emissions for all three years. This would be considered a triennial process. • Annual processes: Not all processes taking place over three years will be considered a triennial process. • Another example of a yearly process is when one third of the sources is verified every year. Under this scenario, in Year 3 only 1/3 of the sources are verified, with the second third verified in Year 2, and the remaining third in Year 1. The company should report this as a yearly process where 33% of the sources are verified. Likewise, where a company has 1/3 of their emissions verified every year this is an annual process. • CDP regards verification/assurance as a process undertaken by an independent third party accredited to perform verification/assurance of the GHG emissions data. Please only state that you have had or are having verification/assurance carried out if it is by an independent third party accredited to perform verification/assurance of GHG data. CDP does not prescribe companies’ choice of specific verification/assurance providers. However, companies searching for a provider may want to consult our list of accredited verification partners: Learn more about CDP solution providers offering third party verification services here. Tags Authority Type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level CC only Questionnaire Sector Question level All (20.9) How do your gross global emissions (Scope 1 and 2 combined) for the reporting year compare to those of the previous reporting year? Question details Question dependencies This question only appears if any “Yes” option was selected in the rows “Scope 1 (direct emissions from owned or controlled activities)” or “Scope 2 (indirect emissions from purchased electricity, heat, steam or cooling)” in column 1 of 20.1 Change from last year No change Alignment with full questionnaire Modified question (7.10, 7.10.1) Rationale Investors and data users are interested in understanding whether companies are successfully reducing their emissions year over year. When investigating how year-on-year gross global emissions (Scope 1 + 2 combined) have changed, data users are also interested in gaining insight into factors than have contributed to these changes. Response options Please complete the following table: 1 2 3 How do your gross global emissions (Scope 1 and 2 combined) for the reporting year compare to those of the previous reporting year? Reason Please explain Select from: • Increased • Decreased Select all that apply: • Change in renewable energy consumption Text field [maximum 2,000 characters]",
    "new_id": 313
  },
  {
    "id": 22629,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why an organization might report a 4% increase in gross global emissions despite implementing emissions reduction activities as discussed in CDP SME Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 14-21?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Increased production levels resulted in higher emissions that offset reductions achieved through dedicated emissions reduction activities.",
      "A": "The organization expanded its operational boundary to include previously excluded facilities, leading to higher reported emissions.",
      "C": "The increase in emissions is solely attributable to a change in calculation methodology, such as revised emissions factors.",
      "D": "Unidentified external factors caused a net rise in emissions, rendering the implemented reduction activities ineffective.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "120",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 14-21.pdf",
    "source_text": "118 organic growth, purchase of additional facilities due to business expansion, declines in sales due to a global recession, or release of a new product. • Change in methodology: This refers to changes that occur due to modifications in the way that the inventory is calculated, for example, changes in emissions factors used or changes in methodology protocol followed. Companies that have amended their Scope 2 emissions figure as a result of the changes in Scope 2 accounting practices for low carbon energy should report this here. • Change in boundary: This refers to changes in the boundary used for your inventory calculation, i.e. changing from financial control to operational control. This option could also apply if you have incorporated facilities into your inventory that were excluded in previous years. • Change in physical operating conditions: This refers to changes in weather that have a significant influence on how the company operates, but that cannot be accounted for under the other options available, e.g. increase production of hydroelectricity because of increased rainfall. • Unidentified: Choose this option if you are not able to identify the reason for the change in emissions from year to year. • Other: Other alternative reason(s) for the change. Where you have used this option, please provide details of the reason(s) for the change in the ‘Please explain’ column. Explanation of terms • Scope 1 emissions: Scope 1 emissions refer to direct greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions that occur from sources that are controlled or owned by an organization. • Scope 2 emissions: Scope 2 emissions refer to indirect GHG emissions associated with any purchases of electricity, steam, heat, or cooling. Example response See below: How do your gross global emissions (Scope 1 and 2 combined) for the reporting year compare to those of the previous reporting year? Reason Please explain • Increased • Other emissions reduction activities • Change in output Our gross global emissions (Scope 1 + 2) for this reporting year are 208 metric tons of CO2e. Our gross global emissions for the previous reporting year were 200 metric tons of CO2e. This means that the total change in our emissions was 8 metric tons of CO2e, equal to a 4% increase, according to the formula in the requested content, above: (8/200) * 100 = 4%. The change from 200 to 208 metric tons is attributed to two reasons: 1) an estimated reduction of 4 metric tons of CO2e achieved due to emissions reduction activities implemented during the year; and 2) an increase in 12 metric tons of CO2e emissions due to increased production (i.e. a change in output). If no measures had been introduced, increased demand leading to increase output would have generated an extra 6% more of emissions. Tags Authority Type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level CC only Questionnaire Sector Question level All",
    "new_id": 314
  },
  {
    "id": 22630,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes the implicit relationship between traceability systems and organizational-level action as described in CDP SME Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 14-21?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Traceability systems are restricted to forest-related issues, but their implementation does not depend on direct requests from CDP Supply Chain members.",
      "A": "Improving or establishing traceability systems is exclusively tied to forests and can only be initiated by requests from CDP Supply Chain members.",
      "B": "Traceability systems are considered an optional initiative unless explicitly requested by multiple CDP Supply Chain members influencing the same action.",
      "D": "Traceability systems apply broadly across environmental issues and are automatically triggered without a requesting member’s involvement.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "82",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 14-21.pdf",
    "source_text": "80 Change to supplier operations • Assess life-cycle impact of products or services to identify efficiencies • Implement energy reduction projects [CC only] • Increase proportion of renewable energy purchased [CC only] • Increase water efficiency in operations [W only] • Other change to supplier operations, please specify Communications • Awards – apply for external awards together • Joint case studies or marketing campaign • Other communications, please specify Innovation • Implement new techniques/technologies to ensure sustainable production [F only] • New product or service that has a lower upstream emissions footprint [CC only] • New product or service that has a lower upstream impact on forests [F only] • New product or service that has a lower upstream water impacts [W only] • New product or service that reduces customers’ operational emissions [CC only] • New product or service that reduces customers' operational water consumption [W only] • New product or service that reduces customers’ products/services commodity consumption [F only] • New product or service that reduces customers’ products/services operational emissions [CC only] • Reduce packaging • Other innovation, please specify • Invite customer to collaborate with other users in their river basins to reduce impact [W only] • Invite customer to collaborate in landscape or jurisdictional initiatives [F only] • Other collective action, please specify Relationship sustainability assessment • Align goals to feed into customers targets and ambitions • Sustainability audit of existing relationship • Other assessment, please specify Traceability and transparency • Improve existing traceability system [F only] • New traceability system [F only] • Other traceability system, please specify Other • Other initiative type, please specify Requested content General • Provide information on any initiatives in which a requesting CDP Supply Chain member has prompted your organization to take organizational-level action. • Disclosers must check that the requesting members presented in this table are correct for their organization for the reporting year. Requesting member (column 1) • Select the relevant “Requesting member” that has driven your organization to take organizational-level action. • Note that only the requesting member you select in this column will be able to see the data relevant to them. If you enter any information without selecting a requesting member here, your answer will not be viewable. • If more than one member influenced the same initiative, add one row per requesting member. Commodities the initiative relates to (column 3) • This column only appears if you select “Forests” in column 2 “Environmental issue the initiative relates to”.",
    "new_id": 315
  },
  {
    "id": 22645,
    "question": "Which scenario best illustrates a situation where land alteration constitutes deforestation, even if the resulting use remains forest-related in CDP SME Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 14-21?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Severe and sustained degradation of a natural forest without any subsequent land-use changes.",
      "A": "The introduction of sustainable agroforestry practices that maintain native species composition and ecosystem function.",
      "B": "The replacement of a natural forest with a monoculture tree plantation aimed at timber production.",
      "C": "A temporary disruption in species composition due to seasonal agricultural activities followed by reforestation efforts.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "34",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 14-21.pdf",
    "source_text": "32 o Conversion includes severe degradation or the introduction of management practices that result in a profound and sustained change in the ecosystem’s species composition, structure, or function. o Change to natural ecosystems that meets this definition is considered to be conversion regardless of whether or not it is legal (AFi, 2024). • Deforestation: loss of natural forest as a result of: i) conversion to agriculture or other non-forest land use; ii) conversion to a tree plantation; or iii) severe and sustained degradation o Severe and sustained degradation (scenario iii in the definition) constitutes deforestation even if the land is not subsequently used for a non-forest land use. o Loss of natural forest that meets this definition is considered to be deforestation regardless of whether or not it is legal. o The definition of deforestation signifies “gross deforestation” of natural forest where “gross” is used in the sense of “total; aggregate; without deduction for reforestation or other offset.” (adapted from AFi, 2024). • Direct costs: also known as “costs of goods or services sold”. These expenses can be attributed to the manufacture of a particular product or the provision of a particular service. • Downstream value chain: the activities, sites, resources, relationships, and stakeholders which receive products and/or services from your organization. The downstream value chain varies depending on the nature of the business but may include customers, distributors, logistics providers, and packaging suppliers (adapted from ESRS, 2023). • Due diligence: a risk management process implemented by a company to identify, prevent, mitigate, and account for how it addresses environmental and social risks and impacts in either its direct operations and supply chains, or in its investments (adapted from AFi, 2024). • Grievance mechanism: any routinized process through which grievances concerning business-related negative impacts on human rights or the environment can be raised, and remedy can be sought. o Grievance mechanisms may be State-based or non-State based and they may be judicial or non-judicial (AFi, 2024). • Indirect costs: the essential expenses incurred in order to maintain the business including wages, rent, transport, energy (electricity, fuel, etc.), maintenance, and so on. These expenses cannot be attributed to the manufacture of a particular product or the provision of a particular service - they are standard costs that apply regardless of the volume of goods produced. • Landscape and jurisdictional initiatives: the on-the-ground collaborative program to set common goals, take collective action while reconciling different interests, and monitor progress towards improving social, environmental, and economic outcomes at a landscape/jurisdictional scale • Likelihood: the terms used to describe likelihood are taken from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) 2013 reports. They are associated with probabilities, indicating the percentage likelihood of the event occurring. It is not necessary for respondents to have calculated probabilities for the risks they are considering, however they can give an indication as to the meaning of the terms: o Virtually certain: 99–100% probability o Very likely: 90–100%; o Likely: 66–100%; o More likely than not: 50–100%; o About as likely as not: 33–66%; o Unlikely: 0–33%; o Very unlikely: 0-10%; o Exceptionally unlikely: 0–1%.",
    "new_id": 316
  },
  {
    "id": 22657,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why an organization might be unable to report a Scope 2, market-based figure despite having access to electricity supplier emission factors or residual emission factors as outlined in CDP SME Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 14-21?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The absence of standardized procedures prevents the organization from processing the data effectively.",
      "B": "The organization lacks internal resources, capabilities, or expertise needed to utilize the available data.",
      "C": "The organization has determined that reporting such figures is not strategically important or relevant.",
      "D": "The organization is prioritizing investment in tools and external partnerships over immediate reporting.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "89",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 14-21.pdf",
    "source_text": "87 location-based figure • We are reporting a Scope 2 market-based figure • We are reporting both a Scope 2 location-based and market-based figure • We are reporting a Scope 2 figure but do not know which approach was used residual emission factors, and are unable to report a Scope 2, market-based figure • We have operations where we are able to access electricity supplier emission factors or residual emissions factors, but are unable to report a Scope 2, market-based figure Scope 3 (indirect emissions in upstream/downstream value chain) N/A N/A 5 6 7 8 9 Please explain the major barriers or challenges in evaluating your emissions Main measures which have helped, or would help, to manage or resolve the challenges Primary reason for not evaluating emissions Indicate if you are providing emissions data for past reporting years Number of past reporting years you will be providing emissions data for Text field [maximum 2,500 characters] Select all that apply: • Use of free tools and resources • Investment in paid-for tools and resources • External partnership • Stakeholder or peer support • Involvement in external partnerships and collaboration • Other, please specify Select from: • Lack of internal resources, capabilities, or expertise (e.g., due to organization size) • No standardized procedure • Not an immediate strategic priority • Judged to be unimportant or not relevant • Other, please specify Select from: • Yes • No Select from: • 1 year • 2 years • 3 years • 4 years • 5 years [Fixed row] Requested content Emissions evaluated (column 1) • Select any “Yes” or “No” option that best describes if and how you evaluate the emissions that are associated with your organization’s activities. • “Yes, we use tailored in-house or paid-for resources to calculate them” could involve using online platforms or consultant organizations that provide emission calculation services",
    "new_id": 317
  },
  {
    "id": 22661,
    "question": "Based on CDP SME Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 14-21, if a company plans to report a net-zero target in 20.16.3 and has already set both near-term and long-term emissions reduction targets, which of the following is an essential action they must take according to the SBTi Net-Zero Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Link their near-term and long-term targets to the net-zero target in column 5 of section 20.16.3 while excluding Scope 3 targets.",
      "A": "Report only the gross emissions reductions achieved through offset purchases or CO2 removals.",
      "C": "Estimate the proportion of emissions reductions without considering planned initiatives if the exact value is uncertain.",
      "D": "Ensure that the target submission date for SBTi validation occurs after the reporting year but before the target end date.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "140",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 14-21.pdf",
    "source_text": "138 validation of this target by the Science Based Targets initiative in the next two years • Yes, we consider this a science-based target, but we have not committed to seek validation of this target by the Science Based Targets initiative within the next two years • No, but we are reporting another target that is science-based • No, but we anticipate setting one in the next two years • No, and we do not anticipate setting one in the next two years [Add row] Requested content General • Note that CDP is requesting data on gross emissions targets. Gross means total emissions before any deductions or other adjustments are made to take account of offset credits or avoided emissions. • If you have a target that will be met in part by offsetting (including carbon neutrality targets), or CO2 removals only the proportion of the target that relates to emissions reductions (and not offset purchases or CO2 removals) should be reported here. If you are uncertain of the proportion that will be achieved through emissions reductions, make an estimation based on the initiatives that you have in place or planned. • Targets to reduce emissions in the product use phase or to reduce emissions from the value chain should be captured as Scope 3 targets. • If you intend to report a net-zero target in 20.16.3, you should report both the near-term and long-term emissions reduction targets associated with your net-zero target either in this question or in 20.16.2 and link them to your net zero target in column 5 “Targets linked to this net zero targets” of 20.16.3. Please refer to the SBTi Net-Zero Standard for information on science-based net-zero targets. Target reference number (column 1) • Select a unique target reference from the drop-down menu provided to identify the target in subsequent questions and to track progress against the target in subsequent reporting years. • If you reported a target to CDP last year and will be reporting progress against the same target this year, ensure you use the same target reference number as last year. For any new targets you are adding, always use a new reference number that you have not used previously. Date target was set (column 2) • Enter the date on which your company set the target. • This must be either before or during the reporting year but cannot be after the reporting year or after the end date of the target. • If the target is science-based and has been submitted to the SBTi for validation or revalidation, enter the date on which your organization submitted the target for validation or revalidation by the SBTi.",
    "new_id": 318
  },
  {
    "id": 22675,
    "question": "Which scenario would require specifying details in column 11 about target coverage while also adhering to the base year constraints for RE100 targets, according to CDP SME Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 14-21?",
    "options": {
      "C": "A company with a 5-year average target, where the base year is the same as the RE100 commitment year, but covering only European operations.",
      "A": "A company with a year-on-year rolling target set before its base year, applying only to operations in Asia.",
      "B": "A company with a financial year-based target that applies organization-wide and uses the year of RE100 commitment as the base year.",
      "D": "A company with a maintenance target using the current reporting year as the base year, covering all operations globally.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "157",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 14-21.pdf",
    "source_text": "155 • For year-on-year rolling targets, enter the date that you first set the target. This can be before the base year. • If the target was set based on financial years, enter the date that applies to the end of your financial year and specify this in column 11 “Explain target coverage and identify any exclusions”. • If you do not know the exact date on which your company set the target, enter the end of the year that the target was set. Target coverage (column 4) • If the target applies to the whole company, select “Organization-wide”. Members of the RE100 initiative should select this option to report their RE100 target. Note that “organization” refers collectively to all the companies, businesses, organizations, other entities or groups that fall within your definition of the reporting boundary. • If the target does not apply to the whole company, select the option that best describes the coverage of the target, and provide further details in column 11 “Explain target coverage and identify any exclusions”. E.g. if your target applies only to your European operations, select “Country/area/region” in this column and specify the country/area/region in the column “Explain target coverage and identify any exclusions”. End date of base year (column 6) • The base year is the year against which you are comparing your target. • The base year cannot be after the reporting year. • For RE100 targets, the base year is usually the year that your organization committed to the RE100 initiative. • If you have a year-on-year rolling target, the end date of the base year will be within the previous reporting year. • If you have a maintenance target, your base year will be the same as the base year of the target that is being maintained. If you did not have a target to increase low-carbon energy consumption or production before setting a maintenance target, your base year will be the current reporting year. • If you have a target based on financial years, enter the date that applies to the end of your financial year and specify this in column 10 “Explain target coverage and identify any exclusions”. • If you have a target based on an average over a period of time (e.g. 5-year average), enter the date that applies to the end of the average period and specify this in column 11 “Explain target coverage and identify any exclusions”. End date of the target (column 7) • Enter the date that the target ends. For example, if the target is to increase renewable energy production by 200% by the end of 2030, the end date of the target is 31st December 2030. • If you have a year-on-year rolling target or maintenance target, the end date of your target will be within the reporting year. • If you have a target based on financial years, enter the date that applies to the end of your financial year and specify in column 10 “Explain target coverage and identify any exclusions”. • If you have a target based on an average over a period of time (e.g. 5-year average), enter the date that applies to the end of the average period and specify this in column 10 “Explain target coverage and identify any exclusions”. • You should not report any target that was achieved before the start of the reporting year.",
    "new_id": 319
  },
  {
    "id": 22676,
    "question": "Which role or responsibility listed is most directly involved in both shaping and executing the organization's approach to environmental issues across financial planning, strategic development, and operational execution, according to CDP SME Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 14-21?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Conducting environmental scenario analysis and implementing a climate transition plan.",
      "A": "Setting corporate environmental targets and measuring progress towards science-based targets.",
      "B": "Managing annual budgets related to environmental issues and overseeing major capital expenditures tied to such concerns.",
      "C": "Developing business strategies considering environmental issues while also managing supplier compliance.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "50",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 14-21.pdf",
    "source_text": "48 • Chief Risks Officer (CRO) • Chief Sustainability Officer (CSO) • Chief Government Relations Officer (CGRO) • Chief Technology Officer (CTO) • Chief Compliance Officer (CCO) • Other C-Suite Officer, please specify • President • General Counsel • Other committee, please specify Management level • Business unit manager • Energy manager • Environmental, Health, and Safety manager • Environment/Sustainability manager • Facility manager • Process operation manager • Procurement manager • Public affairs manager • Risk manager Other • Other position, please specify Environmental responsibilities of this position (column 3) Risks and opportunities • Assessing future trends in environmental risks and opportunities • Assessing environmental risks and opportunities • Managing environmental risks and opportunities Policies, commitments, and targets • Setting corporate environmental policies and/or commitments • Monitoring compliance with corporate environmental policies and/or commitments • Setting corporate environmental targets • Measuring progress towards environmental corporate targets • Measuring progress towards environmental science-based targets Engagement • Managing public policy engagement related to environmental issues • Managing value chain engagement related to environmental issues • Managing engagement in landscapes and/or jurisdictions • Managing supplier compliance with environmental requirements Strategy and financial planning • Conducting environmental scenario analysis • Developing a climate transition plan • Implementing a climate transition plan • Developing a business strategy which considers environmental issues • Implementing the business strategy related to environmental issues • Managing acquisitions, mergers, and divestitures related to environmental issues • Managing major capital and/or operational expenditures relating to environmental issues • Managing annual budgets related to environmental issues • Managing priorities related to innovation/low-environmental impact products or services (including R&D) • Managing environmental reporting, audit, and verification processes Other • Providing employee incentives related to environmental performance • Other, please specify Requested content General • If there is more than one senior position/committee with management-level responsibility for the environmental issue, provide details on the highest senior position or committee with management-level responsibility for environmental issues.",
    "new_id": 320
  },
  {
    "id": 22678,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why an organization might exclude certain entities from its CDP response despite including them in its financial statements, as outlined in CDP SME Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 14-21?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Exclusions are justified when the entities fall outside the value chain but are still part of the financial reporting framework.",
      "B": "The excluded entities are not material to the organization’s environmental performance, even though they are financially significant.",
      "C": "The organization is allowed to selectively report only positive environmental impacts and omit negative ones for excluded entities.",
      "D": "Entities outside the reporting boundary cannot be included in the CDP response as it would violate accounting principles.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "12",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 14-21.pdf",
    "source_text": "10 data users interpret how your responses relate to your business operations and compare the environmental performance of different organizations. Ambition • The organization uses the same reporting boundary as the boundary used in the preparation of their financial statements. • The reporting boundary is applied consistently throughout reporting, and information on the value chain outside of the boundary is provided as supplementary information when relating to the dependencies, impacts, risks and opportunities, where relevant, that the organization has identified. Response options Please complete the following table: 1 2 Are the entities included in your CDP response the same as those included used in your financial statements? How do the entities included in your CDP response differ to those included in your financial statement, and why are they different? Select from: • Yes, the entities included in my CDP disclosure are the same as those included in my financial statements • No, the entities included in my CDP disclosure are not the same as those included in my financial statements • Not applicable - we do not publicly disclose financial statements Text field [maximum 2,500 characters] [Fixed row] Requested content General • The reporting boundary defines the set of entities (groups, businesses, or companies) that you are responding for. • Best practice is for an organization’s environmental reporting boundary to be the same reporting boundary as that used in their financial statements to ensure transparency and consistency across reporting. • Unless stated otherwise, the information you provide in response to CDPs SME questionnaire should be presented as one result covering all the companies, entities, businesses etc., within your reporting boundary. You will be able to indicate exclusions to the reporting boundary later in the questionnaire. • If you are unfamiliar with how your financial statements are presented or are unsure of how to respond, legal or accounting are commonly able to provide guidance to help you determine your reporting boundary. How do the entities included in your CDP response differ to those included in your financial statement, and why are they different? (column 2) • If there are entities included in your financial statements that are not included in your CDP response, provide details on the exclusion of these entities from your CDP response in question 20.3.1. Explanation of terms • Financial statements: a structured representation of the financial position, financial performance, and cash flows of an entity according to the accounting principles used by the entity. • Organization: Throughout this information request, “your organization” refers collectively to all the companies, businesses, other entities or groups that fall within the definition of your reporting boundary (provided in 14.5). This term is used interchangeably with “your company”,",
    "new_id": 321
  },
  {
    "id": 22704,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the reason why companies are advised to account for Scope 2 emissions according to CDP SME Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 14-21?",
    "options": {
      "B": "To assess risks and opportunities associated with changing electricity and GHG emissions costs.",
      "A": "To directly reduce the volume of greenhouse gas emissions produced by their owned or controlled activities.",
      "C": "To comply with regulatory requirements that mandate the disclosure of all energy consumption data.",
      "D": "To exclusively track the environmental impact of industrial processes involving steam and cooling.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "108",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 14-21.pdf",
    "source_text": "106 Requested content – [sector] (if applicable) Note for agricultural sector companies: • Scope 2 emissions from the use of electricity for agricultural/forestry, processing/manufacturing and/or distribution activities should be reported as Scope 2 emissions here. Explanation of terms • Electricity: In line with GHG Protocol, this term is used as shorthand for electricity, steam, and heating/cooling. Purchased electricity is defined as electricity that is purchased or otherwise brought into the organizational boundary of the company. Scope 2 emissions physically occur at the facility where electricity is generated. • Scope 2 emissions: Scope 2 emissions refer to indirect GHG emissions associated with any purchases of electricity, steam, heat, or cooling. Additional information • Scope 2 emissions: In many industries, indirect GHG emissions mostly occur from the generation of purchased electricity (and purchased heat, steam and cooling) consumed by the company, as per the GHG Protocol Corporate Standard. Non-energy-intensive companies are likely to have significantly higher Scope 2 figures than Scope 1 figures. The GHG Protocol highlights that “accounting for Scope 2 emissions allows companies to assess the risks and opportunities associated with changing electricity and GHG emissions cost.” • What data is needed to measure scope 2 emissions? o Typical sources of Scope 2 emissions relate to any equipment that consumes electricity (electrical engines, lights, buildings, etc), heat (heat in industrial processes, buildings, etc.), steam (industrial processes) and cooling (industrial processes, buildings). o Emissions associated with the purchase and consumption of electricity, heat, steam and cooling can be calculated by multiplying your organization’s activity data (e.g., the quantity of fuel consumed, typically expressed in MWh) by the fuel’s emission factor for the production of electricity. § Your organization’s activity data can be determined using Purchase receipts or utility bills, contract purchase or firm purchase records. § For information about CDP’s current recommendations on what emission factor to use for electricity accounting, where you can find emission factors and the different types there are, please check the Technical Note “Accounting of Scope 2 emissions.” Note that CH4 and C2O emissions should be included in the emissions factor. • What does metric tons CO2e mean? o Metric tons of CO2e (sometimes also displayed as “tCO2e\") stands for metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent. This unit is essential because it serves as a standardized measurement for quantifying greenhouse gas emissions. Tags Authority Type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level CC only Questionnaire Sector Question level All (20.6) What was the % of revenue produced in the countries/areas reported in 14.7? Question details Question dependencies This question only appears if either “No” option was selected in column 1 and in the row “Scope 1 (direct emissions from owned or controlled activities)” or “Scope 2 (indirect emissions from purchased electricity, heat, steam or cooling)” of 20.1. Change from last year No change",
    "new_id": 322
  },
  {
    "id": 22705,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between evaluating emissions and its implications, as described in CDP SME Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 14-21?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The evaluation of emissions serves as a foundational step for organizations to address climate impact, secure financing, and meet supplier requirements.",
      "A": "Evaluating emissions is primarily important for ensuring regulatory compliance, with little relevance to competitiveness or resiliency.",
      "B": "Organizations that fail to evaluate emissions risk losing access to generic carbon accounting tools, which are critical for all operational activities.",
      "D": "The primary reason organizations evaluate emissions is to allocate them to customers, especially when responding to CDP Supply Chain members.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "87-88",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 14-21.pdf",
    "source_text": "Module 20: SME - Environmental Performance – Climate Change Module Overview This module requests information on emissions methodologies, exclusions, emissions inventory and breakdown, energy related activities, targets, and emission reduction activities. The module also contains questions on allocating emissions to customers shown only to organizations responding to a request from a CDP Supply Chain member. Evaluating emissions is a critical first step that every organization must take to understand their negative impact on the climate and take the right steps to reduce it. Doing so is becoming increasingly important for obtaining financing, ensuring competitiveness and resiliency, and meeting regulatory and supplier requirements. Disclosure of these areas allows organizations to demonstrate their commitment to evaluating their environmental impact, and highlight their efforts and commitments to reduce emissions associated with operational activities.\n\n[Page 88]\n86 Emissions Methodology and Exclusions (20.1) Do you evaluate your organization’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions? Note that you can measure your emissions or estimate them using the assistance of a carbon accounting tool. Question details Question dependencies Your response to this question determines the questions presented in the rest of module 20. Change from last year No change Alignment with full questionnaire New question; Modified question (1.4, 7.3) Rationale Evaluating emissions is a critical first step that every organization must take to understand its negative impact on the climate and take the right steps to reduce it. Doing so is becoming increasingly important for obtaining financing, ensuring competitiveness and resiliency, and meeting regulatory and supplier requirements. This question helps data users understand whether organizations collect this data and the reasons behind those who have not yet initiated the process. Response options Please complete the following table: 0 1 2 3 4 Scope of emissions Emissions evaluated Scope 2 approach Primary reason for not reporting a market-based figure Indicate whether you had any major barriers or challenges evaluating your emissions in the reporting year Scope 1 (direct emissions from owned or controlled activities) Select from: • Yes, we use tailored in-house or paid-for resources to calculate them • Yes, we use a generic tool to estimate them, please specify • No, but we plan to within the next two years • No, and do not plan to in the next two years N/A N/A Select from: • Yes • No Scope 2 (indirect emissions from purchased electricity, heat, steam or cooling) Select from: • We are reporting a Scope 2 Select from: • We have no operations where we are able to access electricity supplier emission factors or",
    "new_id": 323
  },
  {
    "id": 22706,
    "question": "Which scenario would violate the conditions outlined for sharing data with the Pacific Institute according to CDP SME Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 14-21?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Providing the Disclosure Submission Lead contact details alongside responses to questions other than 16.1.1.",
      "A": "Sharing only public response data from question 16.1.1 related to water stewardship projects.",
      "B": "Allowing the Pacific Institute to review responses exclusively tied to the Water environmental issue, such as risks and their locations.",
      "C": "Granting access to contact information while ensuring the organization's responses are considered for potential inclusion on the Water Action Hub.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "174",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 14-21.pdf",
    "source_text": "172 • Select the job category that most closely corresponds with the job title provided in column 1 \"Job title\". The job category selected should clearly correspond with the title given in column 1 \"Job title\". • If you select “Other, please specify”, provide a label for the corresponding job category. Tags Authority Type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level All Questionnaire Sector Question level All Water Action Hub (21.3) Please indicate your consent for CDP to share contact details with the Pacific Institute to support content for its Water Action Hub website. Question details Change from last year No change Alignment with full questionnaire No change (13.4) Rationale The CEO Water Mandate Water Action Hub is an online platform that catalogues water stewardship projects around the world and enables interested parties to connect and work together to solve local and regional water challenges. CDP will share public response data from 16.1.1 with the Pacific Institute to be reviewed as potential water stewardship projects for upload to the Water Action Hub website. Only responses to the following datapoints will be considered for upload: • For the Water environmental issue: Country/Area where the risk occurs; River basin where the risk occurs; Primary response to risk; Description of response. CDP’s Privacy Policy can be found here. Response options Select from: • Yes, CDP may share our Disclosure Submission Lead contact details with the Pacific Institute • No Requested content General • If you select “Yes, CDP may share our Disclosure Submission Lead contact details with the Pacific Institute”, CDP will provide your public response data from one question to the CEO Water Mandate’s Water Action Hub. Only your responses to 16.1.1 will be shared and reviewed as potential water stewardship projects for upload to the Water Action Hub website. • This will also allow the Pacific Institute to contact your organization if your response data includes a project with potential for inclusion on the Water Action Hub. Your contact information will be kept confidential. Tags Authority Type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level W only Questionnaire Sector Question level All",
    "new_id": 324
  },
  {
    "id": 22707,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the implicit relationship between an organization’s financial planning and its approach to environmental risks, as described in CDP SME Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 14-21?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Financial planning encompasses both short- and long-term considerations, including how environmental risks may affect strategic goals over time.",
      "B": "Financial planning is exclusively concerned with short-term objectives, leaving long-term environmental risks unaddressed.",
      "C": "Environmental risks are integrated into financial planning only when they directly influence immediate capital allocation decisions.",
      "D": "The process of financial planning disregards environmental risks unless explicitly mandated by external regulatory frameworks.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "58",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 14-21.pdf",
    "source_text": "56 organization concluded that environmental issues need not affect its strategy and/or financial planning. Explanation of terms • Downstream value chain: the activities, sites, resources, relationships, and stakeholders which receive products and/or services from your organization. The downstream value chain varies depending on the nature of the business but may include customers, distributors, logistics providers, and packaging suppliers (Adapted from ESRS, 2023). • Financial planning: in line with TCFD recommendations, refers to an organization’s consideration of how it will achieve and fund its objectives and strategic goals. The process of financial planning allows organizations to assess future financial positions and determine how resources can be utilized in pursuit of short- and long-term objectives. As part of financial planning, organizations often create “financial plans” that outline the specific actions, assets, and resources (including capital) necessary to achieve these objectives over a 1- 5 year period. However, financial planning is broader than the development of a financial plan as it includes long-term capital allocation and other considerations that may extend beyond the typical 3-5 year financial plan (e.g., investment, research and development, manufacturing, and markets). (TCFD, 2017). • Research and Development (R&D): refers to the activities companies undertake to innovate and introduce new products and services. It is often the first stage in the development process. Investment in R&D is a type of expense associated with the research and development of a company's goods or services • Strategy: an organization’s desired future state. An organization’s strategy establishes a foundation against which it can monitor and measure its progress in reaching that desired state. Strategy formulation generally involves establishing the purpose and scope of the organization’s activities and the nature of its businesses, taking into account the risks and opportunities it faces and the environment in which it operates. (TCFD, 2017). • Upstream value chain: (also referred to as ‘supply chain’) the activities, sites, resources, relationships, and stakeholders that provide products and/or services to your organization. This typically involves activities early in the value chain, such as production or development. The upstream value chain varies depending on the nature of the business but may include raw material, component, or equipment suppliers (Adapted from ESRS, 2023). • Value chain: the entire sequence of upstream and downstream activities, sites, resources, and relationships associated with the reporting organization’s operations, starting with the raw materials, and extending through end-of-life management, aimed at providing or receiving value from an organization’s products and services either within, upstream, or downstream of direct operations (adapted from GHG, 2013; ESRS, 2023; SBTN, 2023) Tags Authority Type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level All Questionnaire Sector Question level All (18.1.1) Describe where and how risks and opportunities created by environmental issues have influenced your strategy and/or financial planning? Question details Question dependencies This question only appears if you select “Yes, strategy only”, “Yes, financial planning only”, or “Yes, both strategy and financial planning” in response to column “Environmental risks & opportunities have influenced our strategy and/or financial planning” of 18.1. Change from last year Modified guidance Alignment with full questionnaire Modified question (5.3.1, 5.3.2) Rationale Through this question, data users seek to understand where the identified environmental risks and opportunities have affected your organization’s strategy and/or financial position and",
    "new_id": 325
  },
  {
    "id": 22708,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why organizations might choose not to report a market-based figure for Scope 2 emissions, based on implicit reasoning within CDP SME Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 14-21?",
    "options": {
      "B": "They lack access to supplier emission factors necessary for accurate reporting.",
      "A": "Market-based figures are considered less reliable than location-based figures.",
      "C": "Reporting tools do not support the calculation of market-based emissions.",
      "D": "Organizations prioritize direct emissions (Scope 1) over indirect emissions (Scope 2).",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "87-88",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 14-21.pdf",
    "source_text": "Module 20: SME - Environmental Performance – Climate Change Module Overview This module requests information on emissions methodologies, exclusions, emissions inventory and breakdown, energy related activities, targets, and emission reduction activities. The module also contains questions on allocating emissions to customers shown only to organizations responding to a request from a CDP Supply Chain member. Evaluating emissions is a critical first step that every organization must take to understand their negative impact on the climate and take the right steps to reduce it. Doing so is becoming increasingly important for obtaining financing, ensuring competitiveness and resiliency, and meeting regulatory and supplier requirements. Disclosure of these areas allows organizations to demonstrate their commitment to evaluating their environmental impact, and highlight their efforts and commitments to reduce emissions associated with operational activities.\n\n[Page 88]\n86 Emissions Methodology and Exclusions (20.1) Do you evaluate your organization’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions? Note that you can measure your emissions or estimate them using the assistance of a carbon accounting tool. Question details Question dependencies Your response to this question determines the questions presented in the rest of module 20. Change from last year No change Alignment with full questionnaire New question; Modified question (1.4, 7.3) Rationale Evaluating emissions is a critical first step that every organization must take to understand its negative impact on the climate and take the right steps to reduce it. Doing so is becoming increasingly important for obtaining financing, ensuring competitiveness and resiliency, and meeting regulatory and supplier requirements. This question helps data users understand whether organizations collect this data and the reasons behind those who have not yet initiated the process. Response options Please complete the following table: 0 1 2 3 4 Scope of emissions Emissions evaluated Scope 2 approach Primary reason for not reporting a market-based figure Indicate whether you had any major barriers or challenges evaluating your emissions in the reporting year Scope 1 (direct emissions from owned or controlled activities) Select from: • Yes, we use tailored in-house or paid-for resources to calculate them • Yes, we use a generic tool to estimate them, please specify • No, but we plan to within the next two years • No, and do not plan to in the next two years N/A N/A Select from: • Yes • No Scope 2 (indirect emissions from purchased electricity, heat, steam or cooling) Select from: • We are reporting a Scope 2 Select from: • We have no operations where we are able to access electricity supplier emission factors or",
    "new_id": 326
  },
  {
    "id": 22709,
    "question": "Which implication regarding the mitigation hierarchy can be drawn from CDP SME Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 14-21, when an organization decides to cease manufacturing a product due to environmental risks?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The decision reflects a prioritization of avoidance over other steps in the mitigation hierarchy because it eliminates the source of risk entirely.",
      "A": "The decision indicates a preference for restoration as the primary step since ceasing manufacturing aligns with repairing environmental damage.",
      "B": "The decision is unrelated to the mitigation hierarchy, as the text explicitly excludes such decisions from its scope.",
      "D": "The decision shows a focus on offsetting impacts, given that ceasing manufacturing reallocates resources toward compensatory measures.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "61",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 14-21.pdf",
    "source_text": "59 § Therefore, option “Climate change” will appear. o Example 2: § Substantive forest and water-related opportunities have been identified in 16.3, § “Opportunities” is selected in column “Effect type”, § Therefore, options “Forests” and “Water” will appear. Describe how environmental risks and/or opportunities have affected your strategy in this area (column 6) • If “Strategy” is selected in column 1 “Area influenced by environmental risks and/or opportunities”: • Use organization-specific examples to describe how the business area in column 2 was affected, including; o The risks and/or opportunities disclosed in 16.1.1 / 16.3.1 that have affected the business area and why the decision was taken (e.g. to avoid loss in revenue, to exploit new markets); o The time horizons over which your business strategy in this area has been affected by environmental risks and/or opportunities; o The most substantial decisions in this area that have been affected by risks and/or opportunities; and o How your organization makes and implements strategic decisions. For example, you may have decided to introduce a new product range or cease the manufacturing of a particular product, divest from a location, or increase capital expenditure on new technologies. You may use the mitigation hierarchy to detail these decisions and explain why this decision was taken. For example, to benefit from increased asset valuations; to exploit new markets; because of a projected lack of resource availability; or because of anticipated consumer behavior shifts. More details on the mitigation hierarchy can be found on p.38 of the TNFD recommendations o If relevant, details on how dependencies and impacts have affected your organization’s strategy; • Include where in your organization’s strategy risks and opportunities are concentrated (for example, geographical areas, facilities and type of assets). • Include current and anticipated changes to your organization’s business model, including resource allocation, to address environment-related risks and opportunities (for example, these changes could include plans to manage or decommission carbon-, energy- or water-intensive operations; resource allocations resulting from demand or upstream value-chain changes; resource allocations arising from business development through capital expenditure or additional expenditure on research and development; and acquisitions or divestments). This may also include current and anticipated changes in policies or efforts to mitigate environmental risks, manage issues and/or contribute towards the goals and targets in the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, Paris Agreement or Sustainable Development Goals. • Detail how your organization plans to achieve, if they have been set, any environment-related targets and, if relevant, targets you are required to meet by law or regulation. • For current and anticipated risks and opportunities include the: o Effects on your organization's business model and value chain; and o Responding direct and indirect adaptation and mitigation activities. • If “Financial planning” is selected in column 1 “Business areas that have been affected”: • Describe how your organization’s financial planning element(s) have been affected by environmental risks and/or opportunities. This may include: o How environmental risks and/or opportunities serve as an input into financial planning processes for the financial planning elements selected; o How your organization’s resourcing, resource allocation and plans to resource, may change due to your organization’s investment and disposal plans and funding of strategies to respond to environmental risks and/or opportunities; o A case study for at least one of the elements selected, including details of the risks or opportunities disclosed in 16.1.1 / 16.3.1 that have affected the financial planning",
    "new_id": 327
  },
  {
    "id": 22710,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why an organization might choose not to develop capabilities for allocating emissions to customers despite acknowledging its potential relevance, according to CDP SME Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 14-21?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The organization has determined that developing these capabilities is not aligned with its immediate strategic priorities, though it may reconsider under certain conditions.",
      "A": "The organization believes that such capabilities would require disclosing proprietary information, which poses an unacceptable risk.",
      "B": "The organization lacks any internal resources or expertise, making the development of these capabilities entirely unfeasible in the foreseeable future.",
      "C": "The organization considers the diversity of its product lines too complex to address, rendering accurate allocation impossible.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "127-128",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 14-21.pdf",
    "source_text": "125 Additional information For further information on allocation methods and dividing emissions of different goods and services between your respective customers, see Chapter 8 (page 86) of the GHG Protocol Corporate Value Chain (Scope 3) Accounting and Reporting Standard. Tags Authority Type Supply Chain Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level CC only Questionnaire Sector Question level All (20.13) What are the challenges in allocating emissions to different customers, and what would help you to overcome these challenges? Question details Change from last year No change Alignment with full questionnaire No change (7.27) Rationale The purpose of this question is to provide your customers with insights about the challenges in assigning specific emissions to them from your products or services. In certain cases, it might be that specific solutions can be found between you and your customer to overcome those challenges. Response options Please complete the following table. You are able to add rows by using the “Add Row” button at the bottom of the table. 1 2 Allocation challenges Please explain what would help you overcome these challenges Select from: • Diversity of product lines makes accurately accounting for each product/product line cost ineffective • Customer base is too large and diverse to accurately track emissions to the customer level • Managing the different emission factors of diverse and numerous geographies makes calculating total footprint difficult • Doing so would require we disclose business sensitive/proprietary information • We face no challenges • Other, please specify Text field [maximum 2,500 characters] [Add row] Requested content General • Your answer to this question will be visible by all parties with access to your response. Tags Authority Type Supply Chain Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level CC only Questionnaire Sector Question level All\n\n[Page 128]\n126 (20.14) Do you plan to develop your capabilities to allocate emissions to your customers in the future? Question details Change from last year No change Alignment with full questionnaire No change (7.28) Rationale This question aims to provide your customers with insights and transparency into how you aim to develop your capabilities to allocate emissions to them, and thus allow them to gain a greater understanding of the emissions and/or energy intensity of the goods/services that you provide to them. Response options Please complete the following table: 1 2 3 4 Do you plan to develop your capabilities to allocate emissions to your customers in the future? Describe how you plan to develop your capabilities Primary reason for no plans to develop your capabilities to allocate emissions to your customers Explain why you do not plan to develop capabilities to allocate emissions to your customers Select from: • Yes • No Text field [maximum 5,000 characters] Select from: • Lack of internal resources, capabilities, or expertise (e.g., due to organization size) • No standardized procedure • Not an immediate strategic priority • Judged to be unimportant or not relevant • Capabilities to allocate emissions to customers already maximized • Other, please specify Text field [maximum 5,000 characters] [Fixed row] Requested content • Describe how you plan to develop your capabilities (column 2) • This column only appears if you select “Yes” in column 1. • Provide a description of how your organization plans to develop its capabilities to allocate emissions to its customers in the future. Explain why you do not plan to develop capabilities to allocate emissions to your customers (column 4) • This column only appears if you select “No” in column 1. • Include in your answer details of: o Why you do not plan to develop capabilities to allocate emissions to your customers; o The barriers that your organization faces that prevent it from allocating emissions to your customers; and; o Potential circumstances that might encourage your organization to develop capabilities to allocate emissions to your customers. Tags Authority Type Supply Chain Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level CC only Sector Question level All",
    "new_id": 328
  },
  {
    "id": 22711,
    "question": "Which statement accurately captures the nuanced relationship between target-setting and organizational strategy as implied in CDP SME Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 14-21?",
    "options": {
      "A": "For financial services companies, climate targets covering operational emissions must exclude Category 15 Investments to qualify as an absolute or intensity target.",
      "B": "Net-zero targets are exclusively focused on eliminating Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions, with residual emissions neutralized through carbon offsets.",
      "C": "Methane-specific targets are considered a subset of low-carbon energy strategies due to their focus on reducing greenhouse gas emissions.",
      "D": "Capital goods organizations are required to prioritize product-level Scope 3 targets over company-wide emissions reductions to align with investor expectations.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "135",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 14-21.pdf",
    "source_text": "133 • Investors request that organizations disclose company-wide targets and, where applicable, at divisional level, and that intensity targets are also expressed as absolute targets where possible. Note for transport OEMs sector organizations: • In addition to any absolute targets, organizations should disclose company-wide CO2 and/or fuel economy targets for products and, where relevant, for specific markets. Targets should be expressed in grams of CO2 per kilometer. Note for financial services sector companies: • Consider any target types related to your lending, investment and insurance portfolios, in addition to targets related to Scope 1, Scope 2 and other Scope 3 emissions. • Select “Absolute emissions target” or “Emissions intensity target” only if you have any climate targets covering your operational emissions, i.e. Scope 1, Scope 2 and Scope 3 emissions excluding Category 15 Investments. Note for capital goods sector organizations: • Companies should consider reporting company-wide and/or product-level Scope 3 targets, and in particular, Scope 3 targets relating to the use of sold products. Explanation of terms • Target to reduce methane emissions, or “methane-specific target” is any target to reduce specifically methane (CH4) emissions e.g. reduction of leakage, venting or flaring of methane. • Net-zero target: the SBTi Net-Zero Standard defines corporate net-zero as: 1. Reducing Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions to zero or to a residual level that is consistent with reaching net-zero emissions at the global or sector level in eligible 1.5°C scenarios or sector pathways and; 2. Neutralizing any residual emissions at the net-zero target date and any GHG emissions released into the atmosphere thereafter. • Low-carbon energy: In line with the IEA definition, low-carbon technologies are technologies that produce low – or zero – greenhouse-gas emissions while operating. In the power sector this includes fossil-fuel plants fitted with carbon capture and storage, nuclear plants and renewable-based generation technologies. Natural gas, combined cycle gas turbine and fossil fuel-based combined heat and power (cogeneration), despite being less carbon intensive than other means of electricity production like coal, are not considered low-carbon. • Renewable energy: Energy taken from sources that are inexhaustible, e.g. wind, water, solar, geothermal energy and sustainable biofuels (adapted from the GHG protocol, 2004). Additional information Why is target setting important for SMEs? • The SME Climate Hub notes the following benefits of committing to a target to reduce your organization’s emissions: o Improve efficiency – Reduce costs by managing your resources more efficiently. You can take steps today that benefit both your business and the climate. o Manage business risk – Build a more resilient business and better protect yourself against climate-related damage, disruptions, and closures. o Gain a competitive advantage – Become a leader in the fight against climate change. Show investors, employees, and customers how you’re adopting ambitious goals. o Enhance access to capital – Keep insurance and lending fees affordable and stay attractive to investors by reducing your exposure to climate-related risks.",
    "new_id": 329
  },
  {
    "id": 22712,
    "question": "What is the primary reason CDP asks organizations to complete Module 15 before disclosing specific risks and opportunities in Module 16, based on CDP SME Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 14-21?",
    "options": {
      "B": "To provide data users with a comprehensive understanding of environmental risks without organizational bias.",
      "A": "To ensure that all geographic areas of operation are accounted for in the risk assessment process.",
      "C": "To allow organizations to consult their accountants before finalizing their responses to complex questions.",
      "D": "To prioritize the identification of small and medium-sized enterprises over larger corporations.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "15-16",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 14-21.pdf",
    "source_text": "13 your responses relate to your operations across different geographical areas. Geographic data can be used by data users to contextualize expectations and understand potential risks and opportunities. Response options Please complete the following table: 1 Country/area Select all that apply: [Country/area drop-down list] Requested content Country/area (column 1) • Select all countries/areas in which you operate from the drop-down list provided. • The countries/areas you select in this question will be shown when providing country-level breakdowns, e.g., in question 20.14.1. • If you are unsure of how to respond, CDP recommends that you consult your accountant. Tags Authority Type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level All Questionnaire Sector Question level All Module 15: SME Identification, Assessment and Management of Risks and Opportunities Module Overview This module requests information about the procedures that organizations have in place to identify, assess, and manage their environmental-related risks and opportunities. CDP recognizes that identifying, assessing, and managing environmental risks is a journey for small and medium-sized enterprises. However, implementing such procedures is considered important for addressing environmental issues, independent of an organization’s own perception or an assessment of any associated net risk for their organizations. This is why CDP asks organizations to answer this question before disclosing whether they consider themselves exposed to environmental related risks and/or opportunities, and what these are. This information provides data users with confidence that the risks and opportunities disclosed in Module 16 (Disclosure of Risks and Opportunities) are comprehensive.\n\n[Page 16]\n14",
    "new_id": 330
  },
  {
    "id": 22713,
    "question": "When determining the time horizon for an environmental risk, which factor below is NOT explicitly mentioned as a consideration in CDP SME Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 14-21?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The dependency of the organization on specific business units.",
      "A": "The geographical distribution of the organization's operations.",
      "B": "The anticipated useful life of the organization’s assets and infrastructure.",
      "D": "How environmental risks may manifest differently across short, medium, and long-term periods.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "29",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 14-21.pdf",
    "source_text": "27 Time horizon over which the risk is anticipated to have a substantive effect on the organization (column 10) • Appropriate time-horizons will vary between organizations as the timing of effects are likely to also vary. As such, standards, frameworks, and stakeholders often don’t specify specific time frames and instead encourage organizations to decide how to define their own timeframes (e.g., TCFD and TNFD). • When defining time horizons, consider the following: o The profile of the environmental risks and opportunities your organization faces, o The sector and geographies in which your organization operates, o The useful life of your organization’s assets and infrastructure, o How environmental risks and opportunities may appear in the short, medium, and long-term. Magnitude (column 12) • The magnitude describes the extent to which the effect, if it occurred, would affect your business. You should consider the business as a whole and therefore the magnitude can reflect both the damage that may be caused and the exposure to that potential damage. • For example, two organizations may have identical facilities located on a coast in an area which is vulnerable to sea level rise. However, if organization A relies on that facility for 90% of its production capacity and organization B relies on it for only 40% of its production capacity, the magnitude of a sea level rise impact on organization A will be comparatively higher than that on company B. • It is not possible for CDP to accurately define terms for magnitude as they will vary from organization to organization. For example, a 1% reduction in profits will have different effects on different organizations depending on the profit margins on which they work. Therefore, organizations are asked to determine magnitude on a qualitative scale. Factors to consider include: o The proportion of business units affected; o The size of the impact on those business units; o The dependency of the company on those units; and o The potential for shareholder or customer concern. • If the financial effect has not been assessed by your organization, select “Unknown”. Are you able to quantify the financial effect of the risk? (column 13) • CDP recognizes that identifying, assessing, and managing environmental risks is a journey for small and medium-sized enterprises and depends on a number of factors, such as size and available resources. o If you are able to quantify the financial effect of the risk, select “Yes” and you will be able to provide these figures in columns 14-16. o If you are not yet able to quantify the financial effect of the risk, select “No” and you will not presented with columns 14-16. Potential financial effect figure minimum/maximum (currency) (columns 14-15) • These columns are presented if you select “Yes” in column 13 “Are you able to quantify the financial effect of the risk?” • Consider all time horizons over which the risk is anticipated to effect the organization when calculating the financial effect figure. For example, if the risk is anticipated to affect the organization in both the short-term and the medium-term, a cumulative figure should be provided to indicate the range of the financial effect on the organization considering both of these time horizons.",
    "new_id": 331
  },
  {
    "id": 22714,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the nuanced relationship between target setting and organizational strategies as implied in CDP SME Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 14-21?",
    "options": {
      "D": "For financial services companies, climate targets covering operational emissions exclude Category 15 Investments, but lending and investment portfolios should still be considered in broader target frameworks.",
      "A": "Net-zero targets are considered achieved when organizations reduce emissions to zero without relying on neutralization mechanisms.",
      "B": "Capital goods sector organizations are encouraged to prioritize Scope 1 and 2 emissions over Scope 3 emissions for target setting due to their direct operational control.",
      "C": "Transport OEMs must report absolute CO2 reductions in grams per kilometer for all markets, regardless of local regulatory requirements or relevance.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "135",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 14-21.pdf",
    "source_text": "133 • Investors request that organizations disclose company-wide targets and, where applicable, at divisional level, and that intensity targets are also expressed as absolute targets where possible. Note for transport OEMs sector organizations: • In addition to any absolute targets, organizations should disclose company-wide CO2 and/or fuel economy targets for products and, where relevant, for specific markets. Targets should be expressed in grams of CO2 per kilometer. Note for financial services sector companies: • Consider any target types related to your lending, investment and insurance portfolios, in addition to targets related to Scope 1, Scope 2 and other Scope 3 emissions. • Select “Absolute emissions target” or “Emissions intensity target” only if you have any climate targets covering your operational emissions, i.e. Scope 1, Scope 2 and Scope 3 emissions excluding Category 15 Investments. Note for capital goods sector organizations: • Companies should consider reporting company-wide and/or product-level Scope 3 targets, and in particular, Scope 3 targets relating to the use of sold products. Explanation of terms • Target to reduce methane emissions, or “methane-specific target” is any target to reduce specifically methane (CH4) emissions e.g. reduction of leakage, venting or flaring of methane. • Net-zero target: the SBTi Net-Zero Standard defines corporate net-zero as: 1. Reducing Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions to zero or to a residual level that is consistent with reaching net-zero emissions at the global or sector level in eligible 1.5°C scenarios or sector pathways and; 2. Neutralizing any residual emissions at the net-zero target date and any GHG emissions released into the atmosphere thereafter. • Low-carbon energy: In line with the IEA definition, low-carbon technologies are technologies that produce low – or zero – greenhouse-gas emissions while operating. In the power sector this includes fossil-fuel plants fitted with carbon capture and storage, nuclear plants and renewable-based generation technologies. Natural gas, combined cycle gas turbine and fossil fuel-based combined heat and power (cogeneration), despite being less carbon intensive than other means of electricity production like coal, are not considered low-carbon. • Renewable energy: Energy taken from sources that are inexhaustible, e.g. wind, water, solar, geothermal energy and sustainable biofuels (adapted from the GHG protocol, 2004). Additional information Why is target setting important for SMEs? • The SME Climate Hub notes the following benefits of committing to a target to reduce your organization’s emissions: o Improve efficiency – Reduce costs by managing your resources more efficiently. You can take steps today that benefit both your business and the climate. o Manage business risk – Build a more resilient business and better protect yourself against climate-related damage, disruptions, and closures. o Gain a competitive advantage – Become a leader in the fight against climate change. Show investors, employees, and customers how you’re adopting ambitious goals. o Enhance access to capital – Keep insurance and lending fees affordable and stay attractive to investors by reducing your exposure to climate-related risks.",
    "new_id": 332
  },
  {
    "id": 22715,
    "question": "When reporting a target partially achieved through offsetting, which of the following best describes how the company must treat the emissions reductions versus offsets under the provided guidance from CDP SME Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 14-21?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Only the proportion attributed to emissions reductions, excluding offsets, should be reported based on estimations or planned initiatives.",
      "B": "The company should report the total target including offsets as a unified figure for simplicity.",
      "C": "The company is required to report both the gross emissions and offset components separately in all cases.",
      "D": "Offsets should be reported as the primary metric while emissions reductions are considered optional supplementary data.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "148-149",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 14-21.pdf",
    "source_text": "146 relative to base year [auto-calculated] Numerical field [enter a number from 0-999,999,999,999 using a maximum of 10 decimal places and no commas] Percentage field Select from: • New • Underway • Achieved • Achieved and maintained • Expired • Revised • Replaced • Retired Select from: • Yes, and this target has been approved by the Science Based Targets initiative • Yes, we consider this a science-based target, and the target is currently being reviewed by the Science Based Targets initiative • Yes, we consider this a science-based target, and we have committed to seek validation of this target by the Science Based Targets initiative in the next two years • Yes, we consider this a science-based target, but we have not committed to seek validation of this target by the Science Based Targets initiative within the next two years • No, but we are reporting another target that is science-based • No, but we anticipate setting one in the next two years • No, and we do not anticipate setting one in the next two years [Attachment(s)] Text field [maximum 5,000 characters] [Add row] Intensity metric (column 7) • Grams CO2e per revenue passenger kilometer • Metric tons CO2e per USD($) value-added • Metric tons CO2e per square meter • Metric tons CO2e per metric ton of aluminum • Metric tons CO2e per metric ton of steel • Metric tons CO2e per metric ton of cement • Metric tons CO2e per metric ton of cardboard • Grams CO2e per kilometer\n\n[Page 149]\n147 • Metric tons CO2e per unit revenue • Metric tons CO2e per unit FTE employee • Metric tons CO2e per unit hour worked • Metric tons CO2e per metric ton of product • Metric tons of CO2e per liter of product • Metric tons CO2e per unit of production • Metric tons CO2e per unit of service provided • Metric tons CO2e per square foot • Metric tons CO2e per kilometer • Metric tons CO2e per passenger kilometer • Metric tons CO2e per megawatt hour (MWh) • Metric tons CO2e per barrel of oil equivalent (BOE) • Metric tons CO2e per vehicle produced • Metric tons CO2e per metric ton of ore processed • Metric tons CO2e per ounce of gold • Metric tons CO2e per ounce of platinum • Metric tons of CO2e per metric ton of aggregate • Metric tons of CO2e per billion (currency) funds under management • Other, please specify Requested content General • Note that CDP is requesting data on gross emissions targets. Gross means total emissions before any deductions or other adjustments are made to take account of offset credits or avoided emissions. • If you have a target that will be met in part by offsetting (including carbon neutrality targets), or CO2 removals only the proportion of the target that relates to emissions reductions (and not offset purchases or CO2 removals) should be reported here. If you are uncertain of the proportion that will be achieved through emissions reductions, make an estimation based on the initiatives that you have in place or planned. • Targets to reduce emissions in the product use phase or to reduce emissions from the value chain should be captured as Scope 3 targets. • If you intend to report a net-zero target in 20.16.3, you should report both the near-term and long-term emissions reduction targets associated with your net-zero target either in this question or in 20.16.1 and link them to your net zero target in column 5 “Targets linked to this net zero targets” of 20.16.3. Please refer to the SBTi Net-Zero Standard for information on science-based net-zero targets. Target Reference Number (column 1) • Select a unique target reference from the drop-down menu provided to identify the target in subsequent questions and to track progress against the target in subsequent reporting years. • If you reported a target to CDP last year and will be reporting progress against the same target this year, ensure you use the same target reference number as last year. For any new targets you are adding, always use a new reference number that you have not used previously. Date target was set (column 2) • Enter the date on which your company set the target. • This must be either before or during the reporting year but cannot be after the reporting year or after the end date of the target.",
    "new_id": 333
  },
  {
    "id": 22716,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the implicit relationship between cost reporting flexibility and organizational resource allocation as described in CDP SME Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 14-21?",
    "options": {
      "B": "The ability to report either absolute or percentage-based costs allows organizations to align disclosure with their financial capacity and operational priorities.",
      "A": "Organizations are required to allocate a fixed percentage of their budget to risk response actions, ensuring standardized reporting across entities.",
      "C": "Reporting zero costs for risk response indicates that an organization has fully integrated risk management into its core business operations without additional expenditure.",
      "D": "Organizations must prioritize collective action initiatives over individual risk responses to qualify for flexible cost calculations.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "31",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 14-21.pdf",
    "source_text": "29 Cost of response to risk (column 18) • CDP recognizes that identifying, assessing, and managing environmental risks is a journey for small and medium-sized enterprises and depends on a number of factors, such as size and available resources. If you are able to do so, provide a quantitative figure representing the cost of your risk response actions. If there are no costs associated with responding to the risk, enter 0. • If an absolute value cannot be provided, you may report a percentage value by entering 0 in this column and then reporting the percentage figure in column “Explanation of cost calculation”, including an explanation of the percentage calculation. • This figure should be in the same currency that you selected in question 14.2 for all financial information disclosed throughout your response. Explanation of cost calculation (column 19) • Explain the methodology used to calculate the figure for the cost of managing the risk (in column 17), including numerical values used in your calculation. • If there are no costs associated with responding to the risk, explain how you arrived at a figure of 0, even if the cost is absorbed into business-as-usual activities. Description of response (column 20) • Provide details of your organization’s response to mitigate, control, transfer or accept the risk, including, if applicable, how the risk has been managed so far and future risk management procedures. • You may also provide the financial effect figures of the residual risk, if applicable. • Describe the effect the response has had/is likely to have. • Include an example of organization-specific risk responses actions (activities, projects, products and/or services). • Report whether the response strategy involves any collective action initiatives, or if it contributes to the progress of a UN Sustainable Development Goal. • Note for water security disclosers: Your public response to this question may be shared with the Water Action Hub for knowledge sharing and collaboration in water stewardship. Before submitting your disclosure to CDP, you will be requested to indicate your permission for CDP to share contact details. This enables the Hub to contact you about a project suitable for sharing on their platform and obtain your consent. This is optional. Provide as much relevant information as possible about your response, particularly local projects, including: o Partners involved in the joint project/initiative (e.g., organization names or government offices) or who you would like to work with (e.g., government agencies, other companies, NGOs); o Project objectives, including expected benefits for the river basin beyond the organization. o Timeline (e.g., start/end date or ongoing project); and o Specific location, if possible. o Note that these criteria are not scored but are crucial to building a project to share in the Water Action Hub and without this detail the project may not be suitable to transfer to this platform. Requested content – [sector] (if applicable) Note for oil and gas sector companies: • Consider the impact of national and international emissions targets on oil and gas product demand. Will these targets lead to a shift towards a less carbon-intensive fuel mix? How will fuel efficiency standards influence demand for fuel?",
    "new_id": 334
  },
  {
    "id": 22717,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why organizations might exclude certain emissions sources from their disclosure, based on the implicit reasoning in CDP SME Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 14-21?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The exclusions are justified when data acquisition is hindered by structural changes such as mergers or divestments, or when sources are located in areas with unreliable data systems.",
      "A": "Exclusions are primarily due to an organization's deliberate choice to omit data that could harm its public image.",
      "B": "Organizations exclude emissions sources only when they are legally permitted to do so under international reporting standards.",
      "D": "Exclusions occur exclusively when emissions fall below a universally accepted threshold of materiality.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "95",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 14-21.pdf",
    "source_text": "93 • If the methodology you have used is not listed, select “Other, please specify;” and indicate the methodology used. • If you have estimated your emissions using a generic tool, select which standard, protocol, or methodology the tool adheres to. This is generally publicly available information and can commonly be found on the tool’s website, platform, or through inquiry with the organization directly. For example, the SME Climate Hub “Business Carbon Calculator”, is a free tool which helps SMEs measure scope 1, scope 2, and scope 3 emissions and is based on the GHG protocol standards. If your organization used this tool to measure scope 1, 2, and 3, select \"The Greenhouse Gas Protocol: A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard (Revised Edition)\", The Greenhouse Gas Protocol: Scope 2 Guidance” and the “The Greenhouse Gas Protocol: Corporate Value Chain (Scope 3) Standard”. Tags Authority Type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level CC only Questionnaire Sector Question level All (20.3) Are there any sources (e.g. facilities, specific GHGs, activities, geographies, etc.) of Scope 1, Scope 2 or Scope 3 emissions which are attributed to the entities you are including in your CDP response which are not included in your disclosure? Question details Question dependencies This question only appears if either “Yes” option has been selected in column 1 and any row of 20.1. Change from last year Modified guidance Alignment with full questionnaire Minor change (7.4) Rationale In some cases it can be difficult to gather data for all sources. Circumstances where this might be the case include sources in countries/areas or small facilities where data acquisition is difficult or unreliable. Structural changes to the organization including mergers, acquisitions and divestments can also be reasons where emissions data are not included in your disclosure. This question enables companies to report where these sources are not included in the disclosure and thus provides data users transparency into reported emissions inventories. Ambition The organization reports on all exclusions from the reporting boundary and does not have any significant exclusions from their disclosure. Response options Select one of the following options: • Yes • No Requested content General • Identify sources that would normally be within the consolidation approach used by your organization to determine the climate-related impacts that are reported on throughout your response, as identified in your disclosure in 19.1 (i.e. financial control, operational control, equity share or other) but for which greenhouse gases are not reported in this disclosure. Excluded sources may be in a particular country/area or represent a number of very small facilities making it difficult to gather data. • Common reasons for exclusions, both relevant or not relevant, can include the following: o Incomplete information for the period in question;",
    "new_id": 335
  },
  {
    "id": 22718,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes why organizations responsible for transporting fossil fuels must report Scope 3 category 11 emissions, even when they do not own the fuels, according to CDP SME Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 14-21?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Because these emissions are a consequence of the organization’s activities despite lack of ownership of the fuels.",
      "A": "Because these emissions are directly controlled by the organization during transportation.",
      "B": "Because the ACT initiative mandates ownership of all emissions generated during fuel processing.",
      "C": "Because reporting is only required for emissions from fuels owned and distributed by the organization.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "112",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 14-21.pdf",
    "source_text": "110 companies, but which are made possible because those companies are financed by the lending and investment (and insurance underwriting) of financial institutions. • As the majority of emissions occur in relation to financial products and services and/or investments, financed emissions, Scope 3 Category 15 “Investments” emissions as defined by the GHG Protocol as the most relevant category to financial services organizations. Use row “Scope 3 category 15: Investments” to provide your portfolio emissions, including emissions from banking (bank), investing (asset manager, asset owner) and insurance underwriting (insurance). Note for organizations responsible for the transportation (including maritime), storage, transmission and distribution of fossil fuels: • Scope 3 emissions from the handling of fossil fuels can be significant, as highlighted by the IEEFA. Therefore, organizations responsible for the transportation (including maritime), storage, transmission and distribution of fossil fuels should disclose emissions from the final use of these products as Scope 3 category 11 “Use of Sold Products”. • Scope 3 category 11 emissions from fossil fuels should be calculated based on the throughput of fossil fuel products in your operations during the reporting year. • As per the ACT initiative’s O&G Sector methodology, these emissions are a consequence of a organizations’ activities even though the fossil fuels may not be owned by the organization and thus are included in Scope 3. • Please refer to the CDP Technical Note “Guidance methodology for the estimation of Scope 3 category 11 emissions for oil and gas companies” for further guidance Note for real estate sector organizations: • For real estate organizations, the categories that are likely to be highly relevant and should always be evaluated are: o Capital goods o Use of sold products o End-of-life treatment of sold products o Downstream leased assets • You may wish to refer to “Guide to Scope 3 Reporting in Commercial Real Estate” (UK Green Building Council, 2019) that has been specifically developed to build consensus and promote common approaches to reporting Scope 3 emissions. It aims to provide clarity on interpreting the GHG Protocol for commercial real estate companies and enable consistency in reporting across the sector. Note for capital goods sector organizations: • For capital goods organizations, the categories that are likely to be highly relevant and should always be evaluated are: o Purchased goods and services o Use of sold products o End-of-life treatment of sold products Explanation of terms • Scope 3 emissions: Scope 3 emissions are the result of activities from assets not owned or controlled by the reporting organization, but that the organization indirectly impacts in its value chain. • Well-to-Wheel (WTW): A Well-to-Wheel analysis considers both the emissions from the vehicle itself, but also the emissions from the process of extracting the fuel used to power the vehicle's engine. It can be subdivided into the Well-to-Tank (WTT) (energy provision) analysis and the Tank-to-Wheel (TTW) (vehicle efficiency) analysis. Compared to a full emissions Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), the production, maintenance, and disposal of the vehicle are not assessed. Additional information • Relevance criteria for Scope 3 emissions sources: Companies should not exclude any activity that would compromise the relevance of the reported inventory. The Corporate Value Chain (Scope 3) Accounting and Reporting Standard provides a list of criteria for determining relevance (Table 6.1, p61). Companies in one of CDP’s high-impact sectors should also refer",
    "new_id": 336
  },
  {
    "id": 22719,
    "question": "When determining major sources of emissions for reporting purposes, which scenario best reflects the most challenging limitation an organization might face according to CDP SME Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 14-21?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The organization's assumptions about emission sources are constrained by insufficient knowledge of its operational boundaries.",
      "B": "The organization lacks access to published industry data and must rely solely on internal measurements.",
      "C": "The organization excludes all Scope 3 emissions as they are not considered relevant to purchased products.",
      "D": "The organization chooses to report only Scope 1 emissions due to a lack of financial control over other sources.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "126",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 14-21.pdf",
    "source_text": "124 • Your selection in this column should align with the previous column, “Allocation method”. For example, if “Allocation based on the area of products purchased” is selected, the unit may be cubic feet, cubic meters, square meters, or hectares. Or, if “Allocation based on the market value of products purchased” is selected, the unit will be “Currency” o If “currency” is selected, the figure provided in column 8 “Market value or quantity of goods/services supplied to the requesting member” should be in the same currency that you selected in question 14.2 for all financial information disclosed throughout your response. Market value or quantity of goods/services supplied to the requesting member (numerator) (column 8) • Report the unit of goods/services provided to the customer. • If you provide multiple goods/services that do not share a common unit, provide the market value of the goods and/or services supplied. Emissions in metric tons of CO2e (column 9) • Specify the metric tons of CO2e you are allocating to your customer for the scope given in column 2 “Scope of emissions”. Major sources of emissions (column 11) • Describe significant sources of emissions for which you have provided a figure. The following list of examples is non-exhaustive: o Scope 1 emissions may be equipment in which fuel is burnt to provide heat (e.g. ovens, driers or kilns); emissions from organization owned or controlled vehicles; emissions from production processes e.g. in cement manufacture; o Scope 2 emissions may include electricity used to power production lines, lighting in offices, electricity for data centers, etc.; and o Scope 3 covers a broader range of possible sources. For example, the “Scope 3, Business travel” category would include air travel for organization employees; the “Scope 3, Capital goods” category would include the manufacture of steel to make heavy machinery or infrastructure; and the “Scope 3, Waste generated in operations category” would include emissions from out-sourced treatment of organic waste. Please explain how you have identified the GHG source, including major limitations to this process and assumptions made (column 13) • Organizations often have many different sources of emissions and this question seeks to understand how you have selected major emission sources. • The GHG Protocol Corporate Standard states companies should report on all emissions within their chosen organizational boundary. This defines the sources of emissions on which you are going to report. There are three options: sources in which the organization has an equity share; sources over which the organization has financial control; sources over which the company has operational control. If you exclude any sources within the boundary, you are asked to disclose and justify those exclusions. • However, it may be that you have been limited by your knowledge of potential emission sources or made assumptions about which sources were the largest. Or alternatively, that certain sources do not play a role for the specific products your customers are purchasing from you. Please explain the thinking behind your selection including the difficulties that you encountered. Where published information has been used, please provide a reference(s) (column 14) • To allocate emissions to your customer you may have used your own (primary) data in answering this question. Alternatively, you may have relied on publications that give industry-average (secondary) data for particular materials or processes or you may have used a mixture of both. In order to make the origin of the data clear, provide references where published information has been used, as well as flag where they have been used.",
    "new_id": 337
  },
  {
    "id": 22720,
    "question": "Which of the following best reflects a scenario where an organization's environmental policy would fail to meet the accountability expectations outlined in CDP SME Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 14-21?",
    "options": {
      "B": "The organization has a standalone climate policy addressing energy efficiency but does not make it publicly available.",
      "A": "The organization integrates environmental guidelines into its employee handbook, which is accessible to all staff but not explicitly shared with external stakeholders.",
      "C": "The organization lacks formal documentation but verbally communicates environmental commitments during internal meetings.",
      "D": "The organization develops a comprehensive sustainability policy covering its value chain risks but delays publishing it until next year.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "52",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 14-21.pdf",
    "source_text": "50 Alignment with full questionnaire Modified question (4.6) Rationale An environmental policy is a key governance tool which serves as a foundation to drive action while ensuring accountability. Setting a corporate environmental policy for environmental issues indicates that the organization understands their importance and recognizes its responsibility in taking environmental action. Therefore, data users wish to know that organizations have articulated and documented a policy that acknowledges the organization’s risks and opportunities associated with environmental issues, and have clear intentions and direction for action. For accountability to the organization’s stakeholders, the policy should be publicly available. Ambition The organization has publicly available policies which address environmental risks and opportunities related to the organization and its value chain. Response options Please complete the following table: 1 2 Does your organization have any environmental policies? Primary reason for not having a environmental policy Select from: • Yes • No, but we plan to within the next two years • No, and we do not plan to within the next two years Select from: • Lack of internal resources, capabilities, or expertise (e.g., due to organization size) • No standardized procedure • Not an immediate strategic priority • Judged to be unimportant or not relevant • Other, please specify [Fixed row] Requested content Does your organization have any environmental policies? (column 1) • Select “Yes” if your organization addresses environmental issues anywhere within your policy framework. It may be a stand-alone policy document (regardless of the title), or another equivalent document or set of documents that includes policies that address environmental issues relevant to your organization. For example, some organizations may have an overarching ‘environmental’ or ‘sustainability policy’, while others may have policies specific to particular environmental issues, e.g., ‘climate policy’. • An example of an environmental policy is documenting guidelines for improving energy efficiency within your operations, such as upgrading equipment or encouraging energy-saving practices in the workplace. Explanation of terms • Environmental policy: a statement or framework of statements which outlines and communicates the intentions and direction of an organization related to environmental performance, as formally expressed by senior management (adapted from ISO 14001:2015) Additional information • SMEs may have few (or no) policies formalised in written documents. However, best practice is for an organization to have publicly available policies that address the environmental risks and opportunities related to the organization and its upstream/downstream value chain. Tags Authority Type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level All Questionnaire Sector Question level All (17.2.1) Provide details of your environmental policies. Question details Question dependencies This question only appears if you select “Yes” in response to column 1 “Does your organization have any environmental policies?” of 17.2.",
    "new_id": 338
  },
  {
    "id": 22721,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the reason why traceability systems are critical for organizations reporting to requesting CDP Supply Chain Members, as outlined in CDP SME Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 14-21?",
    "options": {
      "C": "They enable organizations to monitor and verify the realization of estimated CO2e and water savings specifically tied to their customers.",
      "A": "They ensure that all suppliers within the upstream value chain hold necessary certifications against environmental standards.",
      "B": "They provide a standardized method for calculating lifetime GHG emissions across downstream value chains.",
      "D": "They allow organizations to reconcile differing stakeholder interests in landscape and jurisdictional initiatives.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "78",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 14-21.pdf",
    "source_text": "76 • Note that the water savings should only be those you are associating with your customer, not the whole initiative. Please explain (column 11) • Provide any further details useful to requesting members, such as: o the calculation methods or tools you used to estimate the lifetime CO2e savings reported in column 10 “Estimated lifetime CO2e savings” and/or lifetime water savings in column 11 “Estimated lifetime water savings (megaliters)”; o how these figures are associated with your customer; o any additional details on estimated timeframe for realization of benefits if an average timeframe was provided in column 8 \" Estimated timeframe for realization of benefits\"; and o any customer-specific contextual information. Explanation of terms • Certification: the action or process of providing a product with an official document attesting to a status or level of achievement against a certain standard. • Downstream value chain: the activities, sites, resources, relationships, and stakeholders which receive products and/or services from your organization. The downstream value chain varies depending on the nature of the business but may include customers, distributors, logistics providers, and packaging suppliers (Adapted from ESRS, 2023). • Landscape and jurisdictional initiatives: the on-the-ground collaborative program to set common goals, take collective action while reconciling different interests, and monitor progress towards improving social, environmental, and economic outcomes at a landscape/jurisdictional scale. • Requesting CDP Supply Chain Member: Organizations working with CDP’s Supply Chain program to engage suppliers on environmental issues and performance to pinpoint risks and identify opportunities in their upstream value chain. If you are responding to CDP because of a request from your customer, you will need to answer the relevant supply chain questions in addition to the main questionnaire. • Traceability: the ability to follow a product or its components through stages of the value chain (e.g., production, processing, manufacturing, and distribution) (Adapted from AFi, 2024). • Traceability system: a system that records and follows the trail of products and/or raw materials along the value chain as they move from suppliers and are processed and ultimately distributed as end products. Systems used to ensure traceability can be digital/electronic or manual/paper based (ISEAL, 2016). • Upstream value chain: (also referred to as ‘supply chain’) the activities, sites, resources, relationships, and stakeholders that provide products and/or services to your organization. This typically involves activities early in the value chain, such as production or development. The upstream value chain varies depending on the nature of the business but may include raw material, component, or equipment suppliers (Adapted from ESRS, 2023). Additional information For further details on upstream activities: GHG Protocol Corporate Value Chain (Scope 3) Accounting and Reporting Standard. Tags Authority Type Supply Chain Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level All Questionnaire Sector Question level All",
    "new_id": 339
  },
  {
    "id": 22722,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures an implicit but necessary condition for realizing both CO2e and water savings in downstream value chains as outlined in CDP SME Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 14-21?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Downstream value chain savings require alignment with customer targets and ambitions through relationship sustainability assessments.",
      "A": "The initiative must involve logistical changes such as route optimization or transportation mode switching to ensure downstream reductions.",
      "B": "Customers’ operational emissions and water consumption reductions are contingent upon upstream suppliers adopting renewable energy practices.",
      "C": "Certification coverage increases for deforestation-free materials inherently lead to reductions in both downstream CO2e and water impacts.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "75",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 14-21.pdf",
    "source_text": "73 • Lower price per unit • Price premiums for deforestation and conversion-free materials [F only] • Reduction of customers’ operational emissions (customer scope 1 & 2) • Reduction of own operational emissions (own scope 1 & 2) • Reduction of downstream value chain emissions (own scope 3) • Reduction of customers’ operational water withdrawals and/or consumption [W only] • Reduction of own operational water withdrawals and/or consumption [W only] • Reduction of downstream value chain water withdrawals and/or consumption [W only] • Other, please specify 7 8 9 10 11 Estimated timeframe for realization of benefits Are you able to estimate the lifetime CO2e and/or water savings of this initiative? Estimated lifetime CO2e savings Estimated lifetime water savings (megaliters) Please explain Select from: • 0-1 year • 1-3 years • 3-5 years • 5 years • Other, please specify Select from: • Yes, both lifetime CO2e and lifetime water savings • Yes, lifetime CO2e savings only • Yes, lifetime water savings only • No Numerical field [enter a range of 0-999,999,999,999 using a maximum of 2 decimal places] Numerical field [enter a range of 0-999,999,999 using a maximum of 2 decimal places] Text field [maximum 1,000 characters] [Add row] Initiative category and type (column 4) Certification • Increase coverage of commodity certified [F only] • Other certification, please specify Change to provision of goods and services • More online/virtual provision of services [CC only] • Reduce packaging weight • Reduce water-related impacts [W only] • Other change to provision of goods and services, please specify Change to supplier operations • Assess life-cycle impact of products or services to identify efficiencies • Implement energy reduction projects [CC only] • Increase proportion of renewable energy purchased [CC only] • Increase water efficiency in operations [W only] Logistical change • Change timing of logistics [CC only] • Change transportation mode (e.g., switch from aviation to rail) [CC only] • Consolidate logistics [CC only] • Route optimization [CC only] • Other logistical change, please specify Promote collective action • Invite customer to collaborate with other users in their river basins to reduce impact [W only] • Invite customer to collaborate in landscape or jurisdictional initiatives [F only] • Other collective action, please specify Relationship sustainability assessment • Align goals to feed into customers targets and ambitions • Sustainability audit of existing relationship",
    "new_id": 340
  },
  {
    "id": 22723,
    "question": "When estimating the percentage of total Scope 3 emissions represented by an excluded source, which condition must be met to ensure compliance with the principle of relevance as outlined in CDP SME Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 14-21?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The estimation approach must align with stakeholder expectations and adequately reflect the organization's overall emissions profile.",
      "B": "The estimation must rely exclusively on industry-average emissions intensities for all excluded sources.",
      "C": "The excluded source must contribute less than 5% of the total emissions inventory to be considered relevant.",
      "D": "The excluded source must be evaluated solely based on its potential to drive emissions reductions.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "101",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 14-21.pdf",
    "source_text": "99 • Estimated percentage of total Scope 3 emissions the excluded source represents = 100% x (Estimated Scope 3 emissions the excluded source represents) / (Total gross Scope 3 emissions reported in 20.7) • If you have not yet calculated Scope 3 emissions from the excluded source, or if activity data is unavailable, you may estimate the Scope 3 emissions for the excluded source. You should choose an estimation approach that is appropriate to your sector, organization, the excluded source, and the data available. For example, absolute Scope 3 emissions could be estimated using the Scope 3 emissions intensity of a similar source for which data is available, such as an industry-average emissions intensity for the type of source excluded per e.g. unit revenue, floor area, or FTE employee, or using proxy data and rough estimates. Ensure to be transparent in column 12 with regards to the estimation approach (what is estimated and how), and the data used for the estimation. Explain why this source is excluded (column 11) • Use this text field to describe why the source is excluded and its significance. Explain how you estimated the percentage of emissions this excluded source represents (column 12) • This column is presented if any option other than “Emissions excluded due to recent acquisition or merger” or “Emissions are not evaluated” is selected in column 3, 4, 5, 6, or 7. • Explain how you calculated the estimated percentage of your total, gross, global Scope 1+2, and Scope 3 emissions that the exclusion represents, including details of any emissions estimations and the estimation approaches used. • State whether you used the location-based or market-based Scope 2 figure from 20.5 in your calculation of the figure reported in column 9. Explanation of terms • Scope 1 emissions: Scope 1 emissions refer to direct greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions that occur from sources that are controlled or owned by an organization. • Scope 2 emissions: Scope 2 emissions refer to indirect GHG emissions associated with any purchases of electricity, steam, heat, or cooling. • Scope 3 emissions: Scope 3 emissions are the result of activities from assets not owned or controlled by the reporting organization, but that the organization indirectly impacts in its value chain. Additional information Relevance in GHG reporting • The GHG Protocol’s Corporate Value Chain (Scope 3) Accounting and Reporting Standard (page 24) provides the following definition of relevance for GHG reporting: “A relevant GHG report contains the information that users – both internal and external to the company – need for their decision making. Companies should use the principle of relevance when determining whether to exclude any activities from the inventory boundary. Companies should also use the principle of relevance as a guide when selecting data sources. Companies should collect data of sufficient quality to ensure that the inventory is relevant (i.e., that it appropriately reflects the GHG emissions of the company and serves the decision-making needs of users) (...) and should not exclude any activities from the inventory that would compromise the relevance of the reported inventory.” • A practical rule of thumb often applied to evaluate the relevance of an emissions’ source or activity is to consider the sources that contribute to 95% of the emissions inventory once sources are listed by the size of emissions. This rule is of practical value in particular when a low number of sources contribute to a large proportion of the total emissions while a large number of sources contribute to a small percentage of emissions. In order to utilize the 95% threshold, the emissions from all sources or activities need to be quantified or estimated to ensure they meet this threshold. Relevance should apply not only to the size of emissions, but also other criteria, such as the potential to drive emissions reductions, the cost-benefit of gathering the data, stakeholder expectations, and potential uses of the data.",
    "new_id": 341
  },
  {
    "id": 22724,
    "question": "Which of the following statements accurately reflects the conditions under which hydrogen or waste energy would be excluded from MWh calculations for renewable sources, as outlined in CDP SME Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 14-21?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Both hydrogen and waste energy are excluded if derived from fossil fuels, but waste energy from renewable sources is permissible.",
      "A": "Hydrogen and waste energy are excluded only when they are derived from non-renewable biomass.",
      "C": "Hydrogen is excluded if derived from fossil fuels, but waste energy is always included regardless of its origin.",
      "D": "Waste energy is excluded if it originates from renewable sources, while hydrogen is excluded only when certified as unsustainable.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "131",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 14-21.pdf",
    "source_text": "129 • Further guidance on unit conversion is available in the following Technical Note: “Conversion of fuel data to MWh”. • If you only have electricity consumption data on part of your operations, you may extrapolate the rest, but include a note in column 4 “Comment”. • For more information on fuel definitions, please view the CDP Technical Note: Fuel Definitions. Country/area (column 1) • Organizations should add a row for each country/area they operate in (as reported in 14.7). • You should include consumption from both purchased/acquired energy in this question. Energy that is purchased but not physically consumed (e.g. traded power, financial instruments), should not be included here. • Energy consumption figures should be for the reporting year only (as defined by your answer to 14.4). MWh from renewable sources (column 2) • Waste energy should not be included if it is derived from fossil fuels. • Hydrogen should not be included if it is derived from fossil fuels. MWh from non-renewable sources (column 3) • Any source not identified as deriving from renewable sources should be entered, e.g. coal, oil, natural gas, etc. • Consumption of purchased or acquired electricity from nuclear sources should be included. Total (renewable + non-renewable) MWh [auto-calculated] (column 4) • This field is auto-calculated using your response in column 1 “MWh from renewable sources” and column 2 “MWh from non-renewable sources”. Please ensure that both fields are filled out. Comment (column 5) • Ensure to include any comments about calculation methodology, data extrapolations, assumptions, etc. Explanation of terms • Biomass: any organic matter, i.e. biological material, available on a renewable basis. Includes feedstock derived from animals or plants, such as wood and agricultural crops, and organic waste from municipal and industrial sources. Biomass fuels should be sustainably sourced and certified where possible, and include: o Solid biofuels: solid fuels derived from biomass. Includes feedstock derived from animals or plants, such as wood and agricultural crops, and organic waste from municipal and industrial sources. o Biogas: a mixture of methane (CH4) and carbon dioxide (CO2) used as fuel and produced by bacterial degradation of organic matter or through gasification of biomass. o Liquid biofuels: liquid fuels derived from biomass such as ethanol and biodiesel. • Renewable energy: Energy taken from sources that are inexhaustible, e.g. wind, water, solar, geothermal energy and sustainable biofuels (adapted from the GHG protocol, 2004). Tags Authority Type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level CC only Questionnaire Sector Question level All",
    "new_id": 342
  },
  {
    "id": 22725,
    "question": "Which of the following risks is most directly associated with both a disruption in production capacity and an increased cost of raw materials, while also being relevant to companies operating in regions prone to seasonal supply variability, as outlined in CDP SME Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 14-21?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Water stress",
      "A": "Scarcity of land resources",
      "B": "Saline intrusion",
      "D": "Permafrost thawing",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "26",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 14-21.pdf",
    "source_text": "24 • Changing customer behavior • Inadequate access to water, sanitation, and hygiene services [W only] • Increased commodity prices [F only] • Increased cost of certified sustainable commodities [F only] • Increased cost of raw materials [C only] • Lack of availability of certified sustainable material [F, P only] • Leakage markets [F only] • Limited visibility of embedded commodities [F only] • Uncertainty about commodity origin and/or legality [F only] • Uncertainty in market signals • Other market risk, please specify • Permafrost thawing [C, W only] • Poorly managed sanitation [W only] • Rationing of municipal water supply [W only] • Saline intrusion [F, W only] • Scarcity of land resources [F only] • Sea level rise • Seasonal supply variability [F, W only] • Soil degradation • Soil erosion • Solifluction • Temperature variability • Water stress • Other chronic physical risk, please specify Primary financial effect of the risk (column 8) • Brand damage • Change in revenue mix and sources • Closure of operations • Constraint to growth • Decrease in shareholder value • Decreased access to capital • Decreased asset value or asset useful life leading to write-offs, asset impairment or early retirement of existing assets • Decreased revenues due to reduced demand for products and services • Decreased revenues due to reduced production capacity • Delays in securing operating licenses • Disruption in production capacity • Disruption to sales • Disruption in upstream supply chain (suppliers) • Disruption to workforce management and planning • Fines, penalties or enforcement orders • Increased capital expenditures • Increased compliance costs • Increased cost of capital • Increased credit risk • Increased direct costs • Increased indirect [operating] costs • Increased insurance premiums • Increased production costs • Litigation • Loss of license to operate • Reduced availability of insurance on assets in “high-risk” locations • Upfront costs to adopt/deploy new practices and processes • Other, please specify",
    "new_id": 343
  },
  {
    "id": 22726,
    "question": "When identifying major sources of emissions, which of the following best captures the reasoning behind why certain sources might be excluded from reporting, based on the described methodology in CDP SME Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 14-21?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Exclusions are justified if the organization lacks operational control over the source, even when financial or equity control exists.",
      "A": "Sources can be excluded if they contribute less than 5% to total emissions, as minor contributions do not significantly affect overall figures.",
      "B": "Exclusions occur only when industry-average data is unavailable, making primary data collection impractical or overly burdensome.",
      "C": "All potential emission sources must be reported regardless of their relevance to specific customer purchases.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "126",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 14-21.pdf",
    "source_text": "124 • Your selection in this column should align with the previous column, “Allocation method”. For example, if “Allocation based on the area of products purchased” is selected, the unit may be cubic feet, cubic meters, square meters, or hectares. Or, if “Allocation based on the market value of products purchased” is selected, the unit will be “Currency” o If “currency” is selected, the figure provided in column 8 “Market value or quantity of goods/services supplied to the requesting member” should be in the same currency that you selected in question 14.2 for all financial information disclosed throughout your response. Market value or quantity of goods/services supplied to the requesting member (numerator) (column 8) • Report the unit of goods/services provided to the customer. • If you provide multiple goods/services that do not share a common unit, provide the market value of the goods and/or services supplied. Emissions in metric tons of CO2e (column 9) • Specify the metric tons of CO2e you are allocating to your customer for the scope given in column 2 “Scope of emissions”. Major sources of emissions (column 11) • Describe significant sources of emissions for which you have provided a figure. The following list of examples is non-exhaustive: o Scope 1 emissions may be equipment in which fuel is burnt to provide heat (e.g. ovens, driers or kilns); emissions from organization owned or controlled vehicles; emissions from production processes e.g. in cement manufacture; o Scope 2 emissions may include electricity used to power production lines, lighting in offices, electricity for data centers, etc.; and o Scope 3 covers a broader range of possible sources. For example, the “Scope 3, Business travel” category would include air travel for organization employees; the “Scope 3, Capital goods” category would include the manufacture of steel to make heavy machinery or infrastructure; and the “Scope 3, Waste generated in operations category” would include emissions from out-sourced treatment of organic waste. Please explain how you have identified the GHG source, including major limitations to this process and assumptions made (column 13) • Organizations often have many different sources of emissions and this question seeks to understand how you have selected major emission sources. • The GHG Protocol Corporate Standard states companies should report on all emissions within their chosen organizational boundary. This defines the sources of emissions on which you are going to report. There are three options: sources in which the organization has an equity share; sources over which the organization has financial control; sources over which the company has operational control. If you exclude any sources within the boundary, you are asked to disclose and justify those exclusions. • However, it may be that you have been limited by your knowledge of potential emission sources or made assumptions about which sources were the largest. Or alternatively, that certain sources do not play a role for the specific products your customers are purchasing from you. Please explain the thinking behind your selection including the difficulties that you encountered. Where published information has been used, please provide a reference(s) (column 14) • To allocate emissions to your customer you may have used your own (primary) data in answering this question. Alternatively, you may have relied on publications that give industry-average (secondary) data for particular materials or processes or you may have used a mixture of both. In order to make the origin of the data clear, provide references where published information has been used, as well as flag where they have been used.",
    "new_id": 344
  },
  {
    "id": 22727,
    "question": "Which scenario best aligns with the implicit reasoning behind why an organization would select 'Third-party verification or assurance process in place' despite not completing the process before the CDP deadline according to CDP SME Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 14-21?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The organization's verification schedule is misaligned with the CDP deadline, yet it remains committed to periodic third-party validation.",
      "B": "The organization has decided to bypass third-party verification entirely due to budget constraints but still wants to appear compliant.",
      "C": "The organization exclusively relies on internal audits for all emissions reporting and considers this sufficient for CDP standards.",
      "D": "The organization believes that third-party verification is unnecessary for Scope 3 emissions and therefore skips the process.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "117",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 14-21.pdf",
    "source_text": "115 Explanation of terms • Scope 3 emissions: Scope 3 emissions are the result of activities from assets not owned or controlled by the reporting organization, but that the organization indirectly impacts in its value chain. Tags Authority Type All requesters Environmental Issue (Theme) Question level CC only Questionnaire Sector Question level All (20.8) Indicate the verification/assurance status that applies to your reported emissions. Question details Question dependencies This question only appears if “Yes, we use tailored in-house or paid-for resources to calculate them” option is selected in column 1 of each row in 20.1 Change from last year No change Alignment with full questionnaire Modified question (7.9) Rationale CDP supports verification and assurance as good practice in environmental reporting. This question gives data users further confidence in the accuracy of the data reported. Response options Please complete the following table: 1 2 3 Scope Verification/assurance status Attach verification evidence/report (optional) Scope 1 (direct emissions from owned or controlled activities) Select from: • No third-party verification or assurance • Third-party verification or assurance process in place [Attachment functionality] Scope 2 (location-based or market-based indirect emissions from purchased electricity, heat, steam or cooling) Select from: • No third-party verification or assurance • Third-party verification or assurance process in place [Attachment functionality] Scope 3 (indirect emissions in upstream/downstream value chain) Select from: • No third-party verification or assurance • Third-party verification or assurance process in place [Attachment functionality] [Fixed row] Requested content General • It is recognized that for some organizations, the verification/assurance schedule is out of synchronization with the CDP disclosure process and therefore it is difficult to complete the verification/assurance process before the CDP deadline. In addition, verification/assurance processes may occur every two years (biennial verification) or every three years (triennial verification). Where this is the case, you should select “Third-party verification or assurance process in place”. Explanation of terms • Scope 1 emissions: Scope 1 emissions refer to direct greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions that occur from sources that are controlled or owned by an organization. • Scope 2 emissions: Scope 2 emissions refer to indirect GHG emissions associated with any purchases of electricity, steam, heat, or cooling.",
    "new_id": 345
  },
  {
    "id": 22729,
    "question": "Which scenario best exemplifies a capital goods sector organization leveraging an opportunity in alignment with the TCFD’s recommendations as described in CDP SME Questionnaire April 2025 Modules 14-21?",
    "options": {
      "B": "A firm introduces a product that enhances manufacturing efficiency and incorporates recycled materials, aligning with circular economy principles.",
      "A": "A company develops a new line of industrial machinery that reduces water usage but does not address energy efficiency or closed-loop solutions.",
      "C": "An organization launches a service that focuses exclusively on carbon offsetting through reforestation without integrating energy-saving technologies.",
      "D": "A business invests in agricultural expansion in degraded lands to avoid deforestation, targeting improvements in raw material sourcing.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "45",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 14-21.pdf",
    "source_text": "43 o Your organization’s views on any opportunities that may result from policies on renewable energy or low emissions technologies e.g. current or planned investments in these areas; and o The extent to which you receive financial incentives to reduce the electricity use of customers. Note for agricultural sector organizations: • Agricultural organizations should report on opportunities that the revenue associated with the agricultural/forestry, processing/manufacturing and/or distribution of raw materials and goods. For example, opportunities might arise from: o Increased efficiency by reducing energy use during the production of raw materials and/or the manufacture of food, beverage and other goods; o Reduced costs due to carbon payments by adopting practices or technology to reduce carbon footprint; o Government of private financial incentives for adoption low impact agriculture/forestry. Note for financial services companies: • Consider opportunities associated with financial products and services such as green and blue bonds, sustainable infrastructure, sustainable loans/mortgages, sustainable insurance products, financial products and services ensuring resiliency, specialty environmental risk advisory services and others, or opportunities your clients/investees are exploiting that have a positive impact on your portfolio (e.g. clients reducing costs through water efficiency resulting in less credit risk) • You should consider providing a description of your opportunities by sector and/or geography, as appropriate. Note for capital goods sector organizations: • In line with the TCFD’s recommendations, organizations in this sector should consider opportunities for products or services that improve efficiency, reduce energy use and support closed-loop product solutions. Explanation of terms • Access to capital: cash flows from sources other than an organization’s sales and other revenues. It includes cash infusions from investors or securing lines of credit with banks and other lenders. • Agricultural expansion in degraded land: is the expansion of agricultural activities such as soy, palm oil, and timber production into degraded lands (e.g. unproductive pasture for cattle ranching), with the objective of avoiding the need of converting forests and/or other natural ecosystems. • Alternative protein: a general term that covers plant-based and food-technology alternatives to animal protein (FAIRR). • Climate change adaption: The process of adjustment to actual and expected climate change and its impacts. • Direct costs: also known as “costs of goods or services sold”. These expenses can be attributed to the manufacture of a particular product or the provision of a particular service. • Downstream value chain: the activities, sites, resources, relationships, and stakeholders which receive products and/or services from your organization. The downstream value chain varies depending on the nature of the business but may include customers, distributors, logistics providers, and packaging suppliers (Adapted from ESRS, 2023). • Environmental Reserve Quotas or CRA (Brazil only): a Brazilian offsetting mechanism that allows landowners with a deficit of the minimum forest cover requirement to purchase",
    "new_id": 346
  },
  {
    "id": 22768,
    "question": "Which scenario would most likely fall outside the scope of disclosures as defined in the Security & Commodity Exchanges – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "An exchange reports on a trading halt caused by a jurisdictional authority due to an entity's failure to file periodic reports.",
      "A": "A market operator discloses risks associated with automated trading systems related to potential declines in latency requirements.",
      "B": "An entity calculates the percentage of trades executed through algorithmic systems, including high-frequency trading but excluding program trading.",
      "D": "A security exchange describes its alert policy regarding the timing of public releases that could affect stock prices.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "9",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Security & Commodity Exchanges.pdf",
    "source_text": "5The scope of the disclosure excludes trading halts and pauses disclosed in metric FN-EX-550a.1, suspensions of trading of individual securities by the jurisdictional legal or regulatory authorities (for example, failure of an entity to file periodic reports) and market-wide trading suspension mechanisms required by the authorities (for example, in response to market-wide volatility). 6 The entity may summarise the disclosure in this table format: Table 3. Market Suspension Trading Halts and Duration NUMBER DURATION Halt Pause FN-EX-410a.2. Percentage of trades generated from automated trading systems 1 The entity shall disclose the percentage of its total trades generated by automated or algorithmic trading systems. 1.1 Automated or algorithmic trading is defined as the use of electronic platforms for entering trading orders with an automated algorithm that executes pre-programmed trading instructions. 1.1.1 This includes high-frequency trading. 1.1.2 This excludes programme trading. 2The percentage of trades shall be calculated as the volume of trades executed (bought, sold and sold short) by an automated algorithm divided by the total volume of trades. 3The scope of the disclosure includes trades occurring on public exchanges, in dark pools or through other trading systems. Note to FN-EX-410a.2 1The entity shall identify risks associated with automated or algorithmic trading occurring on its exchanges or in dark pools that it operates, such as regulatory, reputational or volatility risks, as well as risks to capital expenditures (for example, the risk that data centres could become stranded assets if the need for latency declines). 2The entity shall identify opportunities associated with automated or algorithmic trading occurring on its exchanges or in dark pools that it operates, such as increased trading volume, revenue from co-location facilities and sales of trading software. FN-EX-410a.3. Description of alert policy regarding timing and nature of public release of information 1The entity shall describe its alert policy relating to listed entities ’ public release of information or developments that may (positively or negatively) affect a listed entity ’s stock price, such as: SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |SECURITY & COMMODITY EXCHANGES |9",
    "new_id": 347
  },
  {
    "id": 23140,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between the management policies for biodiversity and the mitigation strategies for acid rock drainage, as described in the Metals & Mining – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Biodiversity management applies uniformly across all operations unless mineral-specific differences exist, while ARD mitigation is assessed based solely on production output weight without regard to resource type.",
      "A": "Both biodiversity management and ARD mitigation require alignment with IFC Performance Standards, but only biodiversity management explicitly involves evaluating impacts on endangered species.",
      "B": "Mitigation of ARD is considered complete once acidic water is captured and treated, whereas biodiversity management requires ongoing policy alignment with multiple external frameworks.",
      "C": "The entity must disclose percentages of sites where ARD occurs or is mitigated, but no such disclosure requirement exists for areas with high biodiversity value.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "25",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Metals & Mining.pdf",
    "source_text": "2.1 areas with high biodiversity value, including (i) habitat of significant importance to Critically Endangered or Endangered species; (ii) habitat of significant importance to endemic or restricted-range species; (iii) habitat supporting globally significant concentrations of migratory species or congregatory species; (iv) highly threatened or rare ecosystems; or (v) areas associated with important evolutionary processes. 3If the management policies and practices do not apply to all the entity ’s sites or operations, it shall include the percentage of sites to which they were applied. 4If environmental management policies and practices differ significantly by mineral resource (for example, bauxite mining as compared to silver mining), then the entity shall describe the relevant differences for each resource. 5The entity shall disclose the degree to which its policies and practices are aligned with the IFC ’s Performance Standards on Environmental and Social Sustainability , 2012, including: 5.1 Performance Standard 1, Assessment and Management of Environmental and Social Risks and Impacts ; 5.2 Performance Standard 3, Resource Efficiency and Pollution Prevention ; 5.3 Performance Standard 4, Community Health, Safety, and Security ; and 5.4 Performance Standard 6, Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Management of Living Natural Resources . 6Additional relevant references may include: 6.1 Joint E&P Forum/UNEP , Environmental Management in Oil and Gas Exploration and Production –an Overview of Issue and Management Approaches , 1997; and 6.2 World Bank Multistakeholder Initiative, Towards Sustainable Decommissioning and Closure of Oil Fields and Mines: A Toolkit to Assist Government Agencies . EM-MM-160a.2. Percentage of mine sites where acid rock drainage is: (1) predicted to occur, (2) actively mitigated, and (3) under treatment or remediation 1The entity shall disclose the percentage of its mine sites (by annual production output from mines by weight) for which acid-generating seepage into surrounding surface water or groundwater is: (1) predicted to occur, (2) actively mitigated, and (3) under treatment or remediation. 2Acid rock drainage (ARD) is predicted to occur if computer simulations, chemical evaluations or acid-base accounting evaluate that ARD is likely to form at the mine site. 3ARD is considered actively mitigated if the entity is preventing ARD through methods that include: storing or covering sulphite-bearing minerals to prevent oxidation, flood prevention, mine sealing, mixing of acid-buffering materials with acid-producing materials, and chemical treatment of sulphide wastes (for example, using organic chemicals designed to kill sulphide-oxidising bacteria). 4ARD is considered under treatment or remediation if the acidic water discharged from the mine area is captured and undergoes a wastewater treatment process (whether active or passive). SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |METALS & MINING |25",
    "new_id": 348
  },
  {
    "id": 23150,
    "question": "Which scenario would most likely be considered a situation where an entity's reserves in a protected area or endangered species habitat present low risks to biodiversity, based on the implicit reasoning in the Metals & Mining – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Probable reserves near a habitat of an IUCN Red List species classified as Critically Endangered, where the entity demonstrates minimal disruption to critical ecosystem services.",
      "B": "Reserves located within five kilometers of a Natura 2000 site but with negligible ecological impact due to advanced mitigation measures.",
      "C": "Proved reserves situated directly inside an IUCN-defined protected area where mining operations are restricted to non-invasive extraction methods.",
      "D": "Reserves identified in areas with no official biodiversity designation but where significant risks to biodiversity arise from extensive land-use changes.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "27-28",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Metals & Mining.pdf",
    "source_text": "3.5 Natura 2000 sites; or 3.6 sites that meet the IUCN ’s definition of a protected area: ‘A protected area is a clearly defined geographical space, recognized, dedicated and managed, through legal or other effective means, to achieve the long- term conservation of nature with associated ecosystem services and cultural values. ’2 3.6.1 These sites may be listed in the World Database of Protected Areas (WDPA) and mapped on Protected Planet. 4Reserves are considered to be in endangered species habitat if they are in or near areas where species on the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species that are classified Critically Endangered (CR) or Endangered (EN) are extant. 4.1 A species is considered extant in an area if it is a resident, present during breeding or non-breeding season, or if it makes use of the area for passage. 4.1.1 For the purposes of disclosure, ‘passage ’ is defined as all areas of land or water that a migratory species inhabits, stays in temporarily, crosses or overflies at any time on its normal migration route. 5For the purposes of this disclosure, ‘near’ is defined as within five kilometres (km) of the boundary of an area of protected conservation status or an endangered species habitat and the location of the entity ’s proved and probable reserves. 6Reserves are defined as the weight of a mineral deposit that could be economically and legally extracted or produced at the time of the reserves determination. 6.1 Proved reserves are reserves for which (i) the quantity of the mineral deposit is computed from dimensions revealed in outcrops, trenches, workings or drill holes; grade or quality are computed from the results of detailed sampling, and (ii) the sites for inspection, sampling and measurement are spaced so closely, and the geographical character is so well defined, that size, shape, depth and mineral content of reserves are well established. 6.2 Probable reserves are reserves for which quantity and grade (quality) are computed from information similar to that used for proved reserves, but the sites for inspection, sampling and measurement are farther apart or are otherwise less adequately spaced. The degree of assurance for probable reserves, although lower than that for proved reserves, is high enough to assume continuity between points of observation. 7The entity should follow the Combined Reserves International Reporting Standards Committee (CRIRSCO) guidance for classifying ore reserves and mineral resources, including the use of a ‘competent person ’ to compile information. 8The entity may separately identify reserves in areas with additional ecological, biodiversity or conservation designations such as those listed by the Biodiversity A –Z resource prepared by the United Nations Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC). 2IUCN, Guidelines for Applying Protected Areas Management Categories , 2008, pp. 8 –9. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |METALS & MINING |27\n\n[Page 28]\n9The entity may discuss reserves located in protected areas or endangered species habitats, but that present low risks to biodiversity or ecosystem services; the entity may provide similar discussion for reserves located in areas with no official designation of high biodiversity value but that present high risks to biodiversity or ecosystem services. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |METALS & MINING |28",
    "new_id": 349
  },
  {
    "id": 23151,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes why the disclosure for work stoppages under EM-MM-310a.2 might be considered insufficient if it only provided numerical data without additional context, as outlined in the Metals & Mining – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Because the root cause description is mandated to ensure transparency regarding underlying issues.",
      "A": "Because numerical data alone cannot capture the severity or operational impact of each work stoppage.",
      "C": "Because the text explicitly states that all disclosures must include training hours for health and safety.",
      "D": "Because collective agreements are the primary factor influencing the duration of strikes and lockouts.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "8",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Metals & Mining.pdf",
    "source_text": "...continued TOPIC METRIC CATEGORYUNIT OF MEASURECODE Labour PracticesPercentage of active workforce employed under collective agreementsQuantitativePercentage (%)EM-MM-310a.1 (1) Number and (2) duration of strikes and lockouts 1 Quantitative Number, Days EM-MM-310a.2 Workforce Health & Safety(1) All-incidence rate, (2) fatality rate, (3) near miss frequency rate (NMFR) and (4) average hours of health, safety, and emergency response training for (a) direct employees and (b) contract employeesQuantitative Rate EM-MM-320a.1 Business Ethics & TransparencyDescription of the management system for prevention of corruption and bribery throughout the value chainDiscussion and Analysisn/a EM-MM-510a.1 Production in countries that have the 20 lowest rankings in Transparency International ’s Corruption Perception IndexQuantitativeMetric tonnes (t) saleableEM-MM-510a.2 Tailings Storage Facilities ManagementTailings storage facility inventory table: (1) facility name, (2) location, (3) ownership status, (4) operational status, (5) construction method, (6) maximum permitted storage capacity, (7) current amount of tailings stored, (8) consequence classification, (9) date of most recent independent technical review, (10) material findings, (11) mitigation measures, (12) site-specific EPRPQuantitative Various EM-MM-540a.1 Summary of tailings management systems and governance structure used to monitor and maintain the stability of tailings storage facilitiesDiscussion and Analysisn/a EM-MM-540a.2 Approach to development of Emergency Preparedness and Response Plans (EPRPs) for tailings storage facilitiesDiscussion and Analysisn/a EM-MM-540a.3 Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORYUNIT OF MEASURECODE Production of (1) metal ores and (2) finished metal products QuantitativeMetric tonnes (t) saleableEM-MM-000.A Total number of employees, percentage contractors QuantitativeNumber, Percentage (%)EM-MM-000.B 1Note to EM-MM-310a.2 – The disclosure shall include a description of the root cause for each work stoppage. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |METALS & MINING |8",
    "new_id": 350
  },
  {
    "id": 23188,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes why an entity might report both the number and duration of strikes and lockouts, as well as the reason for each work stoppage and its effect on production, according to the Metals & Mining – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "To provide a comprehensive account of operational disruptions and their potential financial and reputational impacts.",
      "A": "To demonstrate compliance with jurisdictional health and safety regulations regarding workforce training.",
      "B": "To ensure transparency in reporting near misses that could lead to future fatalities or injuries.",
      "D": "To calculate the total days idle as a measure of environmental damage caused by work stoppages.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "38-39",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Metals & Mining.pdf",
    "source_text": "EM-MM-310a.2. (1) Number and (2) duration of strikes and lockouts 1The entity shall disclose (1) the number of work stoppages involving 1,000 or more workers lasting one full shift or longer. 1.1 The scope of work stoppages includes strikes and lockouts. 1.1.1 A strike is defined as a temporary stoppage of work by a group of employees (not necessarily union members) to express a grievance or enforce a demand. 1.1.2 A lockout is defined as a temporary withholding or denial of employment during a labour dispute to enforce terms of employment upon a group of employees. 2 The entity shall disclose (2) the duration of strikes and lockouts as the total days idle because of work stoppages. 2.1‘Days idle ’ is defined as the aggregate number of workdays lost because of work stoppages. 2.2 Total days idle shall be calculated as the sum of the products of the number of workers involved in each work stoppage and the number of days each respective work stoppage was in effect. 3The scope of the disclosure excludes work stoppages because of other non-technical reasons disclosed in EM- MM-210b.2. Note to EM-MM-310a.2 1The entity shall describe the reason for each work stoppage (as stated by labour), the effect on production, and any corrective actions taken as a result. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |METALS & MINING |38\n\n[Page 39]\nWorkforce Health & Safety Topic Summary Safety is critical to mining operations because of the hazardous working conditions involved. The Metals & Mining industry has relatively high fatality rates compared to other industries. Fatalities and injuries can result from the many hazards associated with the industry, including working with powered haulage and machinery, as well as mine integrity. Poor health and safety records can result in fines and penalties, and an increase in regulatory compliance costs resulting from more stringent oversight. An entity ’s ability to protect employee health and safety, and to create a culture of safety and well-being among employees at all levels, may prevent accidents, mitigate costs, reduce operational downtime and enhance workforce productivity. Metrics EM-MM-320a.1. (1) All-incidence rate, (2) fatality rate, (3) near miss frequency rate (NMFR) and (4) average hours of health, safety, and emergency response training for (a) direct employees and (b) contract employees 1The entity shall disclose (1) all-incidence rate and (2) work-related fatality rate. 1.1 Incidents include: 1.1.1 fatalities or work-related injuries resulting in death of employees on active mine property; 1.1.2 non-fatal days lost cases or occupational injuries that result in the loss of one or more days from the entity’s scheduled work, or days of limited or restricted activity while at work; 1.1.3 no days lost cases or occurrences requiring only medical treatment (beyond first aid); that is, non- fatal injury occurrences resulting only in loss of consciousness or medical treatment other than first aid; and 1.1.4 additional criteria defining an incident that are unique to an entity ’s jurisdiction may also be incorporated. 1.2 First aid, defined as emergency care or treatment for an ill or injured person before regular medical aid can be provided, and other non-recordable incidents may be defined in accordance with jurisdictional guidelines. The entity shall disclose the legal, regulatory or industry framework used as the source for these guidelines. 2 The entity shall disclose (3) its near miss frequency rate (NMFR) for work-related near misses. 2.1 A near miss is defined as an unplanned or uncontrolled event or chain of events that has not resulted in a recordable injury, illness, physical damage or environmental damage, but had the potential to do so in other circumstances. 2.2 The entity may disclose its process for classifying, identifying and reporting near misses. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |METALS & MINING |39",
    "new_id": 351
  },
  {
    "id": 23189,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes why the entity must disclose both water withdrawn and water consumed in areas with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress as percentages of their respective totals, according to the Metals & Mining – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "To provide a comprehensive view of operational dependency on water resources under significant stress conditions.",
      "A": "To ensure compliance with technology-based standards for hazardous substance discharges.",
      "B": "To directly address violations related to pre-treatment requirements or TMDL exceedances.",
      "C": "To identify facilities that exclusively rely on continuous discharge limitations.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "18",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Metals & Mining.pdf",
    "source_text": "4The entity shall analyse all its operations for water risks and identify activities that withdraw and consume water in locations with High (40 –80%) or Extremely High (>80%) Baseline Water Stress as classified by the World Resources Institute ’s (WRI) Water Risk Atlas tool, Aqueduct. 4.1 The entity shall list its facilities or operations which are located in areas of High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress. 5The entity shall disclose water withdrawn in locations with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress as a percentage of the total water withdrawn. 6The entity shall disclose water consumed in locations with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress as a percentage of the total water consumed. EM-MM-140a.2. Number of incidents of non-compliance associated with water quality permits, standards and regulations 1The entity shall disclose the total number of incidents of non-compliance, including violations of a technology- based standard and exceedances of quantity or quality-based standards. 2The scope of disclosure includes incidents governed by applicable jurisdictional statutory permits and regulations, which include the discharge of a hazardous substance, violation of pre-treatment requirements or total maximum daily load (TMDL) exceedances. 2.1 Typical parameters of concern include arsenic, copper, lead, nickel, zinc, cyanide, radium-226, total suspended solids, pH and toxicity. 3The scope of disclosure shall only include incidents of non-compliance that resulted in a formal enforcement action(s). 3.1 Formal enforcement actions are defined as governmental recognised actions that address a violation or threatened violation of water quantity or quality laws, regulations, policies or orders, and can result in administrative penalty orders, administrative orders and judicial actions, among others. 4Violations shall be disclosed, regardless of their measurement methodology or frequency. These include violations for: 4.1 Continuous discharges, limitations, standards and prohibitions that are generally expressed as maximum daily, weekly and monthly averages; and 4.2 Non-continuous discharges, limitations that are generally expressed in terms of frequency, total mass, maximum rate of discharge and mass or concentration of specified pollutants. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |METALS & MINING |18",
    "new_id": 352
  },
  {
    "id": 23190,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the reason why materials incinerated for energy recovery are explicitly excluded from the definition of recycled hazardous waste, as stated in the Metals & Mining – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Because energy recovery through incineration is considered a form of waste disposal rather than material reintegration into products.",
      "B": "Because incineration processes do not align with the Basel Convention's focus on reducing environmental harm.",
      "C": "Because incineration produces emissions that violate jurisdictional regulatory frameworks governing hazardous waste.",
      "D": "Because the text prioritizes recycling methods that involve direct reuse of hazardous materials without transformation.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "20",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Metals & Mining.pdf",
    "source_text": "EM-MM-150a.7. Total weight of hazardous waste generated 1 The entity shall disclose the total weight, in metric tonnes, of waste generated that was hazardous. 1.1 Hazardous wastes are defined in accordance with the applicable jurisdictional legal or regulatory framework where the waste is generated. 1.1.1 The entity may use definitions from the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal . 2The entity shall disclose the frameworks used to define hazardous waste and the amounts defined in accordance with each applicable framework. EM-MM-150a.8. Total weight of hazardous waste recycled 1 The entity shall disclose the total weight, in metric tonnes, of hazardous waste it generated that was recycled. 1.1 Hazardous wastes are defined in accordance with the applicable jurisdictional legal or regulatory framework where the waste is generated. 1.1.1 The entity may use definitions from the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal (Basel Convention). 1.2 Recycled materials are defined as waste reprocessed or treated through production or manufacturing processes and made into a final product or a component to be integrated into a product. 1.2.1 This definition is based on the Basel Convention. 1.3 Materials incinerated, including for energy recovery, shall not be considered within the scope of recycled waste. 1.3.1 Energy recovery is defined as the use of combustible waste to generate energy through direct incineration, with or without other waste, but with recovery of the heat. 2The entity shall disclose the frameworks used to define recycled hazardous waste and the amounts defined in accordance with each applicable framework. EM-MM-150a.9. Number of significant incidents associated with hazardous materials and waste management 1The entity shall disclose the total number of significant incidents associated with the handling, storage, transportation or disposal of hazardous materials used in mineral processing activities and hazardous waste being generated. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |METALS & MINING |20",
    "new_id": 353
  },
  {
    "id": 23191,
    "question": "Which scenario would most likely result in an entity facing substantial costs related to compensation or settlement payments, based on the interplay between regulatory risk and community-related risks, as described in the Metals & Mining – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "An entity perceived as violating indigenous peoples’ rights in a jurisdiction with emerging laws protecting those rights and weak governance structures.",
      "A": "An entity operating in a region with strong governance institutions but failing to engage local communities regarding environmental impacts.",
      "C": "An entity using private security forces in an area with robust human rights legislation and minimal indigenous populations.",
      "D": "An entity disclosing all its reserves located near conflict zones without actively extracting resources from these areas.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "29",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Metals & Mining.pdf",
    "source_text": "Security, Human Rights & Rights of Indigenous Peoples Topic Summary Metals and mining entities face additional community-related risks when operating in conflict zones and in areas with weak or absent governance institutions, rule of law or legislation to protect human rights; or in areas with vulnerable communities such as indigenous peoples. Entities using private or government security forces to protect their workers and assets may knowingly, or unknowingly, contribute to human rights violations, including the use of excessive force. Entities perceived as contributing to human rights violations or failing to account for indigenous peoples ’ rights may be affected by protests, riots or suspension of permits. These entities could face substantial costs related to compensation or settlement payments, and write-downs in the value of their reserves in such areas. In the absence of applicable jurisdictional laws or regulations to address such cases, several international instruments have emerged to provide guidelines for entities. These instruments include obtaining the free, prior and informed consent of indigenous peoples for decisions that affect them. Several countries have implemented specific laws protecting indigenous peoples’ rights, increasing the regulatory risk for entities that violate those rights. Metrics EM-MM-210a.1. Percentage of (1) proved and (2) probable reserves in or near areas of conflict 1The entity shall disclose (1) the percentage, by weight, and grade (in percentage metal content) of its proved reserves located in or near areas of active conflict. 1.1 The percentage of proved reserves shall be calculated as the quantity (tonnage) of proved reserves located in or near areas of active conflict divided by the total quantity of proved reserves. 1.2 The entity shall provide a disaggregation of the disclosure by grade (in percentage metal content) of proved reserves. 1.3 The entity shall, if relevant, provide a disaggregation of the disclosure by mineral or business unit where minerals or business units include, for example: aluminium, copper, zinc, iron ore, platinum group metals and diamonds. 2The entity shall disclose (2) the percentage, by weight, and grade (in percentage metal content) of its probable reserves located in or near areas of active conflict. 2.1 The percentage of probable reserves shall be calculated as the quantity (tonnage) of probable reserves located in or near areas of active conflict divided by the total quantity of probable reserves. 2.2 The entity shall provide a disaggregation of the disclosure by grade (in percentage metal content) of probable reserves. 2.3 The entity shall, if relevant, provide a disaggregation of the disclosure by mineral or business unit where minerals or business units include, for example: aluminium, copper, zinc, iron ore, platinum group metals or diamonds. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |METALS & MINING |29",
    "new_id": 354
  },
  {
    "id": 23192,
    "question": "Which scenario best illustrates a situation where an entity must provide a disaggregation of probable reserves by grade and mineral type, but *not* necessarily by proximity to indigenous peoples' land, as outlined in the Metals & Mining – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "An entity's probable reserves are located far from any indigenous peoples' lands, but the reserves include multiple minerals with varying grades.",
      "A": "An entity operates in a region with no identified indigenous peoples' lands within five kilometers of its probable reserves.",
      "B": "An entity's probable reserves are located entirely within areas recognized as indigenous peoples' lands, but the reserves consist of only one mineral type.",
      "D": "An entity has probable reserves near indigenous peoples' lands, but the reserves are of uniform grade and distributed across multiple mineral types.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "31",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Metals & Mining.pdf",
    "source_text": "1.3 The entity shall, if relevant, provide a disaggregation of the disclosure by mineral or business unit where minerals or business units include, for example: aluminium, copper, zinc, iron ore, platinum group metals or diamonds. 2The entity shall disclose (2) the percentage, by weight, and grade (in percentage metal content) of probable reserves located in or near areas that are considered to be indigenous peoples ’ land. 2.1 The percentage of probable reserves shall be calculated as the quantity (tonnage) of probable reserves located in or near areas considered to be indigenous peoples ’ land divided by the total quantity of probable reserves. 2.2 The entity shall provide a disaggregation of the disclosure by the grade (in percentage metal content) of probable reserves. 2.3 The entity shall, if relevant, provide a disaggregation of the disclosure by mineral or business unit where minerals or business units include, for example: aluminium, copper, zinc, iron ore, platinum group metals or diamonds. 3Indigenous people ’s lands are considered as those occupied by people who self-identify as indigenous in accordance with Article 33 of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and the International Labour Organization Convention 169, and based on the working definition of ‘Indigenous Peoples ’ adopted by the United Nations, probably have one or more of the following characteristics, such as: 3.1 historical continuity with pre-colonial or pre-settler societies; 3.2 strong link to territories and surrounding natural resources; 3.3 distinct social, economic or political systems; 3.4 distinct language, culture and beliefs; 3.5 form non-dominant groups of society; and 3.6 resolve to maintain and reproduce ancestral environments and systems as distinct peoples and communities. 4For the purposes of this disclosure, ‘near’ is defined as within five kilometres of the recognised boundary of an area considered to be indigenous land and the location of the entity ’s proved and probable reserves. 5Reserves are defined as the weight of a mineral deposit which could be economically and legally extracted or produced at the time of the reserves determination. 5.1 Proved reserves are reserves for which (i) the quantity of the mineral deposit is computed from dimensions revealed in outcrops, trenches, workings or drill holes; grade or quality are computed from the results of detailed sampling, and (ii) the sites for inspection, sampling and measurement are spaced so closely and the geographical character is so well defined that size, shape, depth and mineral content of reserves are well established. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |METALS & MINING |31",
    "new_id": 355
  },
  {
    "id": 23299,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the Task Force's reasoning for encouraging companies to disclose Scope 3 GHG emissions despite its conditional nature, as described in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Guidance on Metrics, Targets, and Transition Plans?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The Task Force views Scope 3 emissions as less critical than Scope 1 and Scope 2 but still valuable for a comprehensive risk assessment.",
      "A": "Scope 3 emissions are universally considered material, making their disclosure mandatory under all circumstances.",
      "B": "Disclosure of Scope 3 emissions is encouraged only when it aligns with existing climate-related opportunities and capital deployment strategies.",
      "C": "The Task Force mandates Scope 3 emissions disclosure whenever internal carbon prices are applied across operations.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "22-23",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD WS 5.pdf",
    "source_text": "22Cross- Industry, Climate -Related Metric Categories The Task Force also identified climate -related metric categories that all companies should disclose, where data and methodologies allow Cross -Industry, Climate -Related Metric Categories and Examples Metric Category Description Examples GHG Emissions1 Absolute Scope 1, Scope 2, and Scope 3; emissions intensity•Absolute Scope 1, Scope 2, and Scope 3 GHG emissions •Financed emissions by asset class •Weighted average carbon intensity •GHG emissions per MWh of electricity produced •Gross global Scope 1 GHG emissions covered under emissions- limiting regulations Transition Risks Amount and extent of assets or business activities vulnerable to transition risks•Volume of real estate collaterals highly exposed to transition risk •Concentration of credit exposure to carbon -related assets •Percent of revenue from coal mining •Percent of revenue passenger kilometers not covered by Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation (CORSIA) Physical Risks Amount and extent of assets or business activities vulnerable to physical risks•Number and value of mortgage loans in 100 -year flood zones •Wastewater treatment capacity located in 100 -year flood zones •Revenue associated with water withdrawn and consumed in regions of high or extremely high baseline water stress •Proportion of property, infrastructure, or other alternative asset portfolios in an area subject to flooding, heat stress, or water stress •Proportion of real assets exposed to 1:100 or 1:200 climate -related hazards 1. The Task Force believes all companies should disclose absolute Scope 1 and Scope 2 GHG emissions independent of a material ityassessment. The disclosure of Scope 3 GHG emissions is subject to a materiality assessment; however, the Task Force encourages companies to disc lose such emissions. Source: TCFD, Guidance on Metrics, Targets, and Transition Plans , 2021 The Task Force defined metric categories rather than specific metrics, recognizing companies may define relevant metrics for their respective industries differently for a given category.\n\n[Page 23]\n23Cross- Industry, Climate -Related Metric Categories (continued) The Task Force also identified climate -related metric categories that all companies should disclose, where data and methodologies allow Cross -Industry, Climate -Related Metric Categories and Examples Metric Category Description Examples Climate -Related OpportunitiesProportion of revenue, assets, or other business activities aligned with climate -related opportunities•Net premiums written related to energy efficiency and low -carbon technology •Number of (1) zero -emissions vehicles (ZEV), (2) hybrid vehicles, and (3) plug - in hybrid vehicles sold •Revenues from products or services that support the transition to a low - carbon economy •Proportion of homes delivered certified to a third -party, multiattribute green building standard Capital DeploymentAmount of capital expenditure, financing, or investment deployed toward climate -related risks and opportunities•Percentage of annual revenue invested in R&D of low -carbon products/services •Investment in climate adaptation measures (e.g., soil health, irrigation, technology) Internal Carbon PricesPrice on each ton of GHG emissions used internally by a company •Internal carbon price •Shadow carbon price, by geography Remuneration Proportion of executive management remuneration linked to climate considerations•Portion of employee’s annual discretionary bonus linked to investments in climate -related products •Weighting of climate goals on long- term incentive •Scorecards for Executive Directors •Weighting of performance against operational emissions’ targets for remuneration scorecard Note: More disclosure examples can be found in the Appendix. Source: TCFD, Guidance on Metrics, Targets, and Transition Plans , 2021",
    "new_id": 356
  },
  {
    "id": 23353,
    "question": "Which of the following best reflects an obligation for companies when disclosing climate-related targets, based on the interplay between target descriptions, performance assessments, and methodological clarifications, as described in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Companies should disclose methodologies for calculating targets only when such methodologies are not apparent or differ significantly from established frameworks.",
      "B": "Companies must always disclose short-term targets before providing any medium- or long-term goals, regardless of materiality.",
      "C": "Companies are required to describe whether their targets are absolute or intensity-based but can omit time frames if they align with anticipated regulatory requirements.",
      "D": "Companies must provide interim targets in aggregate or by business line whenever medium- or long-term targets are disclosed, even if these details seem redundant.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "16-17",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD WS 5.pdf",
    "source_text": "16Example Disclosure: Maersk (Transportation) TCFD alignment: the following example describes Maersk’s Scope 1, Scope 2, and Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions, represented as carbon dioxide equivalents, as well as sources of primary emissions and estimates of material Scope 3 emissions categories. Example of Disclosure for Metrics and Targets b) Disclose Scope 1, Scope 2, and, if appropriate, Scope 3 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and the related risks Source: Maersk, 2020 Sustainability Report , 2020 Note: Some content was reformatted in order to fit the page; and some content has been removed, denoted by […]. The examples included are not intended to represent “best practice” nor demonstrate disclosures that fully meet the associate d recommended disclosure. They may not be applicable to all sectors and should be considered within the framework of the sector in which the company operate s. The mention of specific companies does not imply that they are endorsed by the TCFD or its members in preference to others of a similar nature that a re not mentioned.\n\n[Page 17]\n17Metrics and Targets Disclose the metrics and targets used to assess and manage relevant climate -related risks and opportunities where such information is material. All Sectors Recommended disclosure c) Describe the targets used by the company to manage climate - related risks andopportunities and performance against targetsCompanies should describe their key climate -related targets such as those related to GHG emissions, water usage, energy usage, etc ., in line with the cross- industry, climate -related metric categories in Table A2.1 of the 2021 Annex (see Appendix), where relevant, and in line with anticipated regulatory requirements or market constraints or other goals . Other goals may include efficiency or financial goals, financial loss tolerances, avoided GHG emissions through the entire product life cycle, or net revenue goals for products and services designed for a low -carbon economy. In describing their targets, companies should consider including the following: •whether the target is absolute or intensity based; •time frames over which the target applies; •base year from which progress is measured; and •key performance indicators used to assess progress against targets. Companies disclosing medium -term or long -term targets should also disclose associated interim targets in aggregate or by business line , where available. Where not apparent, companies should provide a description of the methodologies used to calculate targets and measures.Metrics and Targets c) Metrics and Targets c) asks companies to disclose the targets used by the company to manage climate- related risks and opportunities Source: TCFD, Annex: Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate -related Financial Disclosures , 2021",
    "new_id": 357
  },
  {
    "id": 23388,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why disclosing climate-related targets is considered less comprehensive than other Metrics and Targets disclosures, despite being among the most decision-useful types of information, as described in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Climate-related targets are disclosed by fewer companies compared to other metrics, reducing their comparative usefulness.",
      "A": "Climate-related targets lack integration into overall risk management processes, making them less actionable for investors.",
      "C": "The timeframes over which climate-related targets apply are not disclosed, limiting their utility in assessing long-term organizational resilience.",
      "D": "Key performance indicators used to assess progress against climate-related targets are not consistently reported, undermining their reliability.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "8-9",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD WS 5.pdf",
    "source_text": "8TCFD -Aligned Disclosure by Year, for Each Recommended Disclosure Recommendation Recommended Disclosure% Point Change ’18–’20% of Companies Disclosing Information Aligned with TCFD Recommended Disclosures Governancea)Board Oversight 16 b)Management's Role 9 Strategya)Climate -Related Risks and Opportunities14 b)Impact on company 13 c)Resilience of Strategy 8 Risk Managementa)Risk Identification and Assessment Processes14 b)Risk Management Processes15 c)Integration into Overall Risk Management17 Metrics and Targetsa)Climate -Related Metrics 10 b)Scope 1, Scope 2, and Scope 3 GHG Emissions10 c)Climate -Related Targets 139%13% 25% 9% 11% 18% 38%42% 52% 26%30% 39% 5%7%13% 16%20% 30% 14%17%29% 10%17% 27% 34%40% 44% 27%31% 37% 21%24%34%Disclosure Varies Across Recommendations More than 30% of companies assessed in 2020 disclosed on each of the Metrics and Targets recommended disclosures, with climate -related targets having the lowest rate of disclosure at 34% FY 2020 FY 2019 FY 2018 Note: Results are based on the Task Force’s artificial intelligence analysis of 1,651 public companies. Source: TCFD, 2021 Status Report , 2021\n\n[Page 9]\n9Six of the top ten most “decision useful” types of information companies can disclose fall under the Metrics and Targets recommendation.1 Recommended Disclosure Disclosure Element* Rank Strategy b) How climate -related issues have affected business and strategy 1 Metrics and Targets a) Key metrics on climate -related issues for most recent period and historical periods 2 Strategy a) The material climate -related issues identified for each sector and geography 3 Metrics and Targets b) Scope 1 GHG emissions for the most recent period and historical periods 4 Metrics and Targets c) Climate -related targets related to GHG emissions 5 Strategy a) The material climate -related issues identified 6 Metrics and Targets b) Scope 2 GHG emissions for the most recent period and historical periods 7 Metrics and Targets c) The timeframes over which climate -related targets apply 8 Metrics and Targets c) Key performance indicators used to assess progress against climate -related targets 9 Governance a)Board consideration of climate -related issues for major capital expenditures, acquisitions, and divestitures10Providing Decision Useful Information to Investors and Other UsersImportance of the Metrics and Targets Recommendation Disclosing information in line with the Metrics and Targets recommendation allows investors and other stakeholders to better assess the organization’s potential risk -adjusted returns, general exposure to climate -related issues, and progress in managing or adapting to those issues. * These disclosure elements are segments of the guidance under each recommended disclosure. They do not encompass all of the information conveyed in each recommended disclosure. 1. These findings are based on a survey in which users were asked to rate the usefulness of specific disclosure elements associa tedwith the 11 recommended disclosures when making financial decisions. Source: TCFD, 2020 Status Report , 2020",
    "new_id": 358
  },
  {
    "id": 23390,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between internal carbon pricing and its implications for companies, as discussed in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Internal carbon pricing allows users to assess which companies are adapting their business models to mitigate transition risks associated with future policy responses to climate change.",
      "A": "Internal carbon pricing is universally applicable to all companies, regardless of their exposure to climate-related risks.",
      "B": "The disclosure of internal carbon prices primarily serves to highlight companies that are currently profitable under existing climate policies.",
      "D": "Companies using internal carbon prices are guaranteed to demonstrate resilience against all forms of climate-related financial risks.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "44-45",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD WS 5.pdf",
    "source_text": "44Example Disclosure: Liberty Mutual Insurance company’s inclusion of traditional disclosures alongside climate -related disclosures to allow users to understand the scale of investment deployed towards climate -related risks and opportunitiesKey Takeaways from Guidance •Capital investment disclosure by non-financial companies and financing by financial organizations gives an indication of the extent to which long -term enterprise value might be affected , for example by demonstrating how a company is investing to take advantage of climate -related opportunities •Capital expenditures, capital investments, or the amount of financing for new technologies, infrastructure, or products can be reported in line with financial reporting standards and commonly used taxonomies for delineating climate -related risks and opportunities.Example of Disclosure for Capital Deployment Amount of capital expenditure, financing, or investment deployed toward climate -related risks and opportunities Source: Liberty Mutual, 2020 ESG Review , p. 8 Note: Some content was reformatted in order to fit the page; and some content has been removed, denoted by […]. The examples included are not intended to represent “best practice” nor demonstrate disclosures that fully meet the associate d recommended disclosure. They may not be applicable to all sectors and should be considered within the framework of the sector in which the company operate s. The mention of specific companies does not imply that they are endorsed by the TCFD or its members in preference to others of a similar nature that a re not mentioned.\n\n[Page 45]\n45Example Disclosure: Aker BP Energy company provides internal planning assumptions along with internal carbon prices from two IEA scenarios•Internal carbon prices provide users with an understanding of the reasonableness of a company’s risk and opportunity assessment and strategy resilience. The disclosure of internal carbon prices can help users identify which companies have business models that are vulnerable to future policy responses to climate change and which are adapting their business models to ensure resilience to transition risks. •An increasing number of companies are setting an internal notional or actual price on the amount of CO 2emitted from assets and investment projects. This will allow users to see how, where, and when their GHG emissions could affect their strategy, profit- and- loss (P&L) statements, and investment choices •The Task Force acknowledges that internal carbon prices may not be relevant to all companies , such as those without material physical or transition risks or those already subject to external carbon prices Example of Disclosure for Internal Carbon Prices Price on each ton of GHG emissions used internally by a company Source: Aker BP, Sustainability Report 2020 , p. 25 Note: Some content was reformatted in order to fit the page; and some content has been removed, denoted by […]. The examples included are not intended to represent “best practice” nor demonstrate disclosures that fully meet the associate d recommended disclosure. They may not be applicable to all sectors and should be considered within the framework of the sector in which the company operate s. The mention of specific companies does not imply that they are endorsed by the TCFD or its members in preference to others of a similar nature that a re not mentioned. Key Takeaways from Guidance",
    "new_id": 359
  },
  {
    "id": 23391,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why disclosing climate-related targets is considered decision-useful, yet remains the least disclosed element within the Metrics and Targets category, as outlined in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The complexity of setting measurable climate-related targets makes companies hesitant to disclose incomplete or evolving data.",
      "A": "Climate-related targets are less relevant to investors compared to other disclosures, leading to lower prioritization.",
      "B": "Companies avoid disclosing climate-related targets due to fears of legal liability if they fail to meet them.",
      "C": "Investors find climate-related targets redundant when Scope 1, Scope 2, and Scope 3 GHG emissions data is already disclosed.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "8-9",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD WS 5.pdf",
    "source_text": "8TCFD -Aligned Disclosure by Year, for Each Recommended Disclosure Recommendation Recommended Disclosure% Point Change ’18–’20% of Companies Disclosing Information Aligned with TCFD Recommended Disclosures Governancea)Board Oversight 16 b)Management's Role 9 Strategya)Climate -Related Risks and Opportunities14 b)Impact on company 13 c)Resilience of Strategy 8 Risk Managementa)Risk Identification and Assessment Processes14 b)Risk Management Processes15 c)Integration into Overall Risk Management17 Metrics and Targetsa)Climate -Related Metrics 10 b)Scope 1, Scope 2, and Scope 3 GHG Emissions10 c)Climate -Related Targets 139%13% 25% 9% 11% 18% 38%42% 52% 26%30% 39% 5%7%13% 16%20% 30% 14%17%29% 10%17% 27% 34%40% 44% 27%31% 37% 21%24%34%Disclosure Varies Across Recommendations More than 30% of companies assessed in 2020 disclosed on each of the Metrics and Targets recommended disclosures, with climate -related targets having the lowest rate of disclosure at 34% FY 2020 FY 2019 FY 2018 Note: Results are based on the Task Force’s artificial intelligence analysis of 1,651 public companies. Source: TCFD, 2021 Status Report , 2021\n\n[Page 9]\n9Six of the top ten most “decision useful” types of information companies can disclose fall under the Metrics and Targets recommendation.1 Recommended Disclosure Disclosure Element* Rank Strategy b) How climate -related issues have affected business and strategy 1 Metrics and Targets a) Key metrics on climate -related issues for most recent period and historical periods 2 Strategy a) The material climate -related issues identified for each sector and geography 3 Metrics and Targets b) Scope 1 GHG emissions for the most recent period and historical periods 4 Metrics and Targets c) Climate -related targets related to GHG emissions 5 Strategy a) The material climate -related issues identified 6 Metrics and Targets b) Scope 2 GHG emissions for the most recent period and historical periods 7 Metrics and Targets c) The timeframes over which climate -related targets apply 8 Metrics and Targets c) Key performance indicators used to assess progress against climate -related targets 9 Governance a)Board consideration of climate -related issues for major capital expenditures, acquisitions, and divestitures10Providing Decision Useful Information to Investors and Other UsersImportance of the Metrics and Targets Recommendation Disclosing information in line with the Metrics and Targets recommendation allows investors and other stakeholders to better assess the organization’s potential risk -adjusted returns, general exposure to climate -related issues, and progress in managing or adapting to those issues. * These disclosure elements are segments of the guidance under each recommended disclosure. They do not encompass all of the information conveyed in each recommended disclosure. 1. These findings are based on a survey in which users were asked to rate the usefulness of specific disclosure elements associa tedwith the 11 recommended disclosures when making financial decisions. Source: TCFD, 2020 Status Report , 2020",
    "new_id": 360
  },
  {
    "id": 23392,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between a company's interim GHG emissions target and its broader climate-related objectives, as described in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The interim GHG emissions target is designed to align progress with pathways consistent with a 2°C scenario but may require updates to achieve more ambitious goals.",
      "B": "The interim GHG emissions reduction target of 50% by 2030 is sufficient to ensure alignment with a 1.5°C scenario without further adjustments.",
      "C": "Achieving the interim GHG emissions target guarantees the firm will meet its commitment to net-zero emissions by 2050 under all NGFS scenarios.",
      "D": "The interim target of reducing emissions by 50% applies exclusively to Scope 3 emissions, while Scope 1 and 2 are addressed separately in later stages.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "26-27",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD WS 5.pdf",
    "source_text": "26Cross -Industry Metric Category Climate -Related Target Examples GHG Emissions •Reduce net Scope 1, Scope 2, and Scope 3 GHG emissions to zero by 2050, with an interim target to cut emissions by 70% relative to a 2015 baseline by 2035 Transition Risks •Reduce percentage of asset value exposed to transition risks by 30% by 2030, relative to a 2019 baseline Physical Risks •Reduce percentage of asset value exposed to acute and chronic physical climate - related risks by 50% by 2050 •Ensure at least 60% of flood- exposed assets have risk mitigation in place in line with the 2060 projected 100- year floodplain Climate -Related Opportunities •Increase net installed renewable capacity so that it comprises 85% of total capacity by 2035 Capital Deployment •Invest at least 25% of annual capital expenditure into electric vehicle manufacturing •Lend at least 10% of portfolio to projects focused primarily on physical climate -related risk mitigation Internal Carbon Pricing •Increase internal carbon price to $150 by 2030 to reflect potential changes in policy Remuneration •Increase amount of executive management remuneration impacted by climate considerations to 10% by 2025 Source: TCFD, Annex: Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate -related Financial Disclosures , 2021 See next pageExamples of Quantified Climate -Related Targets The guidance also provides examples of quantified targets that align with the cross -industry, climate- related metric categories\n\n[Page 27]\n272015 2025 2010 2000 2005 2020 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050CO2–Equivalent GHG Emissions (Tonnes)Our firm commits to reducing net Scope 1 and 2 GHG emissions —as defined by the GHG Protocol —to zero by 2050, with an interim target to cut Scope 1 and 2 GHG emissions by 2030 by 50%, relative to a 2015 baseline. -20% -50% -70% -90%Historical Metrics Historical data GHG emissions under immediate 2 °C scenarioCompany target GHG emissions path GHG emissions under current policies scenario GHG emissions under delayed 2 °C scenario GHG emissions under 1.5 °C scenarioCurrent Metrics Forward -Looking Information -100% Interim target -% Illustrative Disclosure Example: GHG Emissions Reduction Targets Example Disclosure Climate -related targets should be linked to defined metrics in order to measure and track progress against targets and assist with periodic reviews to determine whether updates to the targets may be necessary. The figure on the right shows the relationship between GHG emissions and targets for a hypothetical firm. The illustrative GHG emissions pathways were adapted from Network for Greening the Financial System (NGFS) scenario data. Source: TCFD, Guidance on Metrics, Targets, and Transition Plans , 2021 The examples included are not intended to represent “best practice” nor demonstrate disclosures that fully meet the associate d recommended disclosure. They may not be applicable to all sectors and should be considered within the framework of the sector in which the company opera tes. The mention of specific companies does not imply that they are endorsed by the TCFD or its members in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned.",
    "new_id": 361
  },
  {
    "id": 23394,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the implicit relationship between the metrics disclosed by insurance companies and asset owners regarding their alignment with a well below 2°C scenario, as described in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "B": "While insurance companies focus on aggregated risk exposure to weather-related catastrophes, asset owners emphasize GHG emissions and weighted average carbon intensity to align with a well below 2°C scenario using approaches suited to their context.",
      "A": "Insurance companies and asset owners are both required to use the same specific metrics, such as weighted average carbon intensity, to demonstrate alignment with a well below 2°C scenario.",
      "C": "Both insurance companies and asset owners must disclose metrics for all jurisdictions and asset classes without exception, ensuring comprehensive alignment with a well below 2°C scenario.",
      "D": "Asset owners are instructed to prioritize disclosing property business risks, similar to insurance companies, to maintain consistency in reporting alignment with a well below 2°C scenario.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "50-51",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD WS 5.pdf",
    "source_text": "50Metrics and Targets Disclose the metrics and targets used to assess and manage relevant climate -related risks and opportunities where such information is material. Insurance Companies Recommended disclosure a) Disclose the metrics used by the company to assess climate -related risks and opportunities in line with its strategy and risk management processInsurance companies should provide aggregated risk exposure to weather -related catastrophes of their property business (i.e., annual aggregated expected losses from weather -related catastrophes) by relevant jurisdiction. Insurance companies should describe the extent to which their insurance underwriting activities , where relevant, are aligned with a well below 2° C scenario , using whichever approach or metrics best suit their organizational context or capabilities. Insurance companies should also indicate which insurance underwriting activities (e.g., lines of business) are included. Recommended disclosure b) Disclose Scope 1, Scope 2, and, if appropriate, Scope 3greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and the related risksInsurance companies should disclose weighted average carbon intensity or GHG emissions associated with commercial property and specialty lines of business where data and methodologies allow.Supplemental Metrics and Targets Guidance for the Financial Sector (continued) Note: For readability, we removed footnote references from these excerpts. Please see the annex referenced below for more inf ormation. Source: TCFD, Annex: Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate -related Financial Disclosures , 2021\n\n[Page 51]\n51Metrics and Targets Disclose the metrics and targets used to assess and manage relevant climate -related risks and opportunities where such information is material. Asset Owners Recommended disclosure a) Disclose the metrics used by the company to assess climate -related risks and opportunities in line with its strategy and risk management processAsset owners should describe metrics used to assess climate -related risks and opportunities in each fund or investment strategy. Where relevant, asset owners should also describe how these metrics have changed over time. Where appropriate, asset owners should provide metrics considered in investment decisions and monitoring . Asset owners should describe the extent to which assets they own and their funds and investment strategies , where relevant, are aligned with a well below 2° C scenario , using whichever approach or metrics best suit their organizational context or capabilities. Asset owners should also indicate which asset classes are included. Recommended disclosure b) Disclose Scope 1, Scope 2, and, if appropriate, Scope 3greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and the related risksAsset owners should disclose GHG emissions for assets they own and the weighted average carbon intensity (WACI) for each fund or investment strategy , where data and methodologies allow. These emissions should be calculated in line with the Global GHG Accounting and Reporting Standard for the Financial Industry developed by the Partnership for Carbon Accounting Financials (PCAF Standard) or a comparable methodology (see Table 2, of the 2021 Annex ). In addition to WACI, asset owners should consider providing other carbon footprinting metrics they believe are useful for decision- making . See Table 3 of the 2021 Annex for additional common carbon footprinting and exposure metrics.Supplemental Metrics and Targets Guidance for the Financial Sector (continued) Note: For readability, we removed footnote references from these excerpts. Please see the annex referenced below for more inf ormation. Source: TCFD, Annex: Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate -related Financial Disclosures , 2021",
    "new_id": 362
  },
  {
    "id": 23395,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the implications of linking executive compensation to climate considerations, as discussed in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Disclosure practices may vary, with some companies reporting percentage weightings and others providing descriptive explanations of how climate factors influence executive pay.",
      "A": "Companies are required to disclose the exact monetary value of executive compensation tied to climate performance.",
      "B": "The Task Force mandates that all companies use quantitative disclosure methods for remuneration policies related to climate issues.",
      "D": "Climate-related remuneration policies are standardized across industries to ensure consistency and comparability.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "46-47",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD WS 5.pdf",
    "source_text": "46 Key Takeaways from Guidance •Remuneration policies are important incentives for achieving a company’s goals and objectives and may provide insight on a company’s governance, oversight, and accountability for managing climate -related issues. •The ways in which companies link executive compensation to performance on issues related to climate change will be specific to their company and governance structure: –Some companies choose to report the percentage of the executive’s pay linked to climate considerations –Others discuss weighting factors or total amount of compensation that could be impacted •While the Task Force encourages quantitative disclosure , companies may include descriptive language on remuneration policies and practices, such as how climate change issues are included in balanced scorecards for executive remunerationExample Disclosure: HSBC Bank’s disclosure notes the percentage weighting linked to climate consideration within the scorecards of executive and managing directorsExample of Disclosure for Remuneration Proportion of executive management remuneration linked to climate considerations Source: HSBC, Annual Report 2020 , p. 20 Note: Some content was reformatted in order to fit the page; and some content has been removed, denoted by […]. The examples included are not intended to represent “best practice” nor demonstrate disclosures that fully meet the associate d recommended disclosure. They may not be applicable to all sectors and should be considered within the framework of the sector in which the company operate s. The mention of specific companies does not imply that they are endorsed by the TCFD or its members in preference to others of a similar nature that a re not mentioned.\n\n[Page 47]\n47Supplemental guidance for the financial sector and non-financial groups",
    "new_id": 363
  },
  {
    "id": 23396,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the implicit reasoning behind why companies are advised to disclose metrics related to GHG emissions, energy, water, and other physical risk exposures, as outlined in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "D": "To provide insights into strategic planning and risk management processes tied to climate-related risks and opportunities.",
      "A": "To ensure compliance with mandatory international reporting standards.",
      "B": "To directly improve the accuracy of financial statements for investors.",
      "C": "To exclusively support the company’s internal operational efficiency initiatives.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "53",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD WS 5.pdf",
    "source_text": "53Metrics and Targets Disclose the metrics and targets used to assess and manage relevant climate -related risks and opportunities where such information is material. Energy, Transportation, Materials & Buildings, and Agriculture, Food, and Forest Products Recommended disclosure a) Disclose the metrics used by the company to assess climate -related risks and opportunities in line with its strategy and risk management processFor all relevant metrics, companies should consider providing historical trends and forward- looking projections (by relevant country and/or jurisdiction, business line, or asset type). Companies should also consider disclosing metrics that support their scenario analysis and strategic planning process and that are used to monitor the company’s business environment from a strategic and risk management perspective. Companies should consider providing key metrics related to GHG emissions, energy, water and other physical risk exposures, land use , and, if relevant, investments in climate adaptation and mitigation that address potential financial aspects of shifting demand, expenditures, asset valuation, and cost of financing.Supplemental Metrics and Targets Guidance for the Non- Financial Groups Source: TCFD, Annex: Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate -related Financial Disclosures , 2021",
    "new_id": 364
  },
  {
    "id": 23509,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes why an entity’s failure to manage sourcing risks could indirectly limit its ability to capitalize on new market opportunities, as described in the Agricultural Products – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Because reduced margins and increased crop price volatility diminish the entity's capacity to adapt to climate change scenarios, thereby missing potential competitive advantages.",
      "B": "Because higher costs of capital directly reduce the quality of crops, leading to a weaker brand reputation.",
      "C": "Because constrained revenue growth prevents investment in supplier relationships, which are critical for developing innovative products.",
      "D": "Because identifying principal crops is insufficient without also controlling the entire production process, which limits scalability.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "28",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Agricultural Products.pdf",
    "source_text": "Ingredient Sourcing Topic Summary Agricultural products entities source a wide variety of commodities and ingredients from farmers or intermediary distributors. The industry ’s ability to reliably source ingredients at desired price points fluctuates with crop yield, which may be affected by climate change, water scarcity, land management and other resource scarcity considerations. Entities that source more productive and less resource-intensive crops, or those that work closely with suppliers to increase their adaptability to climate change and other resource scarcity risks, may reduce crop price volatility and crop supply disruptions. Additionally, entities may improve their brand reputation and develop new market opportunities. Failure to effectively manage sourcing risks can result in higher costs of capital, reduced margins and constrained revenue growth. Metrics FB-AG-440a.1. Identification of principal crops and description of risks and opportunities presented by climate change 1The entity shall identify any principal crops that are a priority to its business. 1.1 Principal crops are those crops that accounted for 10% or more of consolidated revenue in any of the last three reporting periods, as disclosed in FB-AG-000.A. 2The scope of disclosure shall include crops cultivated directly by the entity, grown on a contract basis or sourced as a commodity. 2.1 Crops cultivated directly by the entity include those grown on farms owned or operated by the entity. 2.2 Crops grown on a contract basis include those for which the entity has contracted directly for the conditions of crop production and the quality of crops with the farmer, consistent with the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) ‘Contract Farming Resource Center ’. 2.3 Crops sourced as a commodity include those bought through the spot market, to-arrive bids, grain elevators or other measures by which the entity is unable to control the production process. 3The entity shall describe the risks or opportunities that are presented to its principal crops by climate change scenarios, including, where relevant: 3.1 Identification of the risks presented by climate change, which may include availability of water, shifts in crop regions, pest migration and extreme weather events 3.2 Discussion of the scenarios used to determine the risks and opportunities presented by climate change 3.3 Discussion of how such scenarios will manifest (for example, effects directly on the entity or the entity ’s supply chain) and the potential implications that these would have on its priority crops SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS |28",
    "new_id": 365
  },
  {
    "id": 23518,
    "question": "Which combination of metrics would BEST allow a company to evaluate its comprehensive sustainability performance related to both water usage and workforce safety risks, while excluding energy-related disclosures, as outlined in the Agricultural Products – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Water withdrawal/consumption percentages in high-stress regions, number of water quality compliance incidents, and total recordable incident rate (TRIR) for direct employees.",
      "A": "Operational energy consumption, percentage renewable energy, and fatality rates for contract employees.",
      "C": "Total water withdrawn, corrective action rates from supplier audits, and near miss frequency rates (NMFR) for contract employees.",
      "D": "Percentage of agricultural products sourced from high water-stress regions, non-conformance rates in food safety audits, and fleet fuel consumption.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "6-7",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Agricultural Products.pdf",
    "source_text": "SUSTAINABILITY DISCLOSURE TOPICS & METRICS Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORYUNIT OF MEASURECODE Greenhouse Gas EmissionsGross global Scope 1 emissions QuantitativeMetric tonnes (t) CO₂-eFB-AG-110a.1 Discussion of long- and short-term strategy or plan to manage Scope 1 emissions, emissions reduction targets, and an analysis of performance against those targetsDiscussion and Analysisn/a FB-AG-110a.2 Fleet fuel consumed, percentage renewableQuantitativeGigajoules (GJ), Percentage (%)FB-AG-110a.3 Energy Management(1) Operational energy consumed, (2) percentage grid electricity and (3) percentage renewableQuantitativeGigajoules (GJ), Percentage (%)FB-AG-130a.1 Water Management(1) Total water withdrawn, (2) total water consumed; percentage of each in regions with High or Extremely High Baseline Water StressQuantitativeThousand cubic metres (m³), Percentage (%)FB-AG-140a.1 Description of water management risks and discussion of strategies and practices to mitigate those risksDiscussion and Analysisn/a FB-AG-140a.2 Number of incidents of non-compliance associated with water quality permits, standards and regulationsQuantitative Number FB-AG-140a.3 Food SafetyGlobal Food Safety Initiative (GFSI) audit (1) non-conformance rates and (2) associated corrective action rates for (a) major and (b) minor non-conformancesQuantitative Rate FB-AG-250a.1 Percentage of agricultural products sourced from suppliers certified to a Global Food Safety Initiative (GFSI) recognised food safety certification programmeQuantitativePercentage (%) by costFB-AG-250a.2 (1) Number of recalls issued and (2) total amount of food product recalled 1 QuantitativeNumber, Metric tonnes (t)FB-AG-250a.3 continued... 1Note to FB-AG-250a.3 – The disclosure shall include a description of notable recalls, such as those that affected a significant amount of product or those related to serious illnesses or fatalities. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS |6\n\n[Page 7]\n...continued TOPIC METRIC CATEGORYUNIT OF MEASURECODE Workforce Health & Safety(1) Total recordable incident rate (TRIR), (2) fatality rate, and (3) near miss frequency rate (NMFR) for (a) direct employees and (b) contract employeesQuantitative Rate FB-AG-320a.1 Environmental & Social Impacts of Ingredient Supply Chain(1) Percentage of agricultural products sourced that are certified to a third-party environmental or social standard, and (2) percentages by standardQuantitativePercentage (%) by costFB-AG-430a.1 Suppliers ’ social and environmental responsibility audit (1) non-conformance rate and (2) associated corrective action rate for (a) major and (b) minor non- conformancesQuantitative Rate FB-AG-430a.2 Discussion of strategy to manage environmental and social risks arising from contract growing and commodity sourcingDiscussion and Analysisn/a FB-AG-430a.3 GMO ManagementDiscussion of strategies to manage the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs)Discussion and Analysisn/a FB-AG-430b.1 Ingredient SourcingIdentification of principal crops and description of risks and opportunities presented by climate changeDiscussion and Analysisn/a FB-AG-440a.1 Percentage of agricultural products sourced from regions with High or Extremely High Baseline Water StressQuantitativePercentage (%) by costFB-AG-440a.2 Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORYUNIT OF MEASURECODE Production by principal crop2QuantitativeMetric tonnes (t)FB-AG-000.A Number of processing facilities3Quantitative Number FB-AG-000.B Total land area under active production Quantitative Hectares FB-AG-000.C Cost of agricultural products sourced externally4QuantitativePresentation currencyFB-AG-000.D 2Note to FB-AG-000.A – Principal crops are crops that accounted for 10% or more of consolidated revenue in any of the last three fiscal years. 3Note to FB-AG-000.B – Processing facilities include facilities that are involved in the manufacturing, processing, packing or holding of agricultural products, and exclude administrative offices. 4Note to FB-AG-000.D – Agricultural products are defined as food, feed and biofuel ingredients sourced for use in the entity ’s operations. The scope of agricultural products sourced externally excludes agricultural products grown on land owned or operated by the entity. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS |7",
    "new_id": 366
  },
  {
    "id": 23519,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the reason why entities in the Agricultural Products industry might prioritize improving fuel efficiency and utilizing alternative fuels, based on the interplay between regulatory costs, operational challenges, and technological innovation in the Agricultural Products – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "To ensure compliance with emissions regulations while simultaneously reducing exposure to volatile fuel pricing and supply disruptions, which could otherwise increase operational costs.",
      "A": "To exclusively eliminate their reliance on carbon dioxide as a primary greenhouse gas emission source.",
      "B": "To adopt strategies that allow them to entirely offset gross emissions through credits and similar mechanisms before accounting for actual emission reductions.",
      "D": "To align with region-specific guidance such as the GHG Reporting Guidance for the Aerospace Industry, which mandates the use of alternative fuels.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "8",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Agricultural Products.pdf",
    "source_text": "Greenhouse Gas Emissions Topic Summary Entities in the Agricultural Products industry generate direct greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from processing and transporting goods via land and sea freight operations. Emissions regulations may increase the cost of capital, operational costs and affect the operational efficiency of entities without strategies to manage GHG emissions. Employing innovative technologies that use alternative fuels and energy inputs —including biomass waste generated from internal processes —and improving fuel efficiency are ways entities can limit exposure to volatile fuel pricing, supply disruptions, future regulatory costs and other potential consequences of GHG emissions. Metrics FB-AG-110a.1. Gross global Scope 1 emissions 1The entity shall disclose its gross global Scope 1 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to the atmosphere of the seven GHGs covered under the Kyoto Protocol —carbon dioxide (CO 2), methane (CH 4), nitrous oxide (N 2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), sulphur hexafluoride (SF 6), and nitrogen trifluoride (NF 3). 1.1 Emissions of all GHGs shall be consolidated and disclosed in metric tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalents (CO 2-e) and calculated in accordance with published 100-year time horizon global warming potential (GWP) values. To date, the preferred source for GWP values is the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fifth Assessment Report (2014). 1.2 Gross emissions are GHGs emitted into the atmosphere before accounting for offsets, credits or other similar mechanisms that have reduced or compensated for emissions. 2Scope 1 emissions are defined and shall be calculated according to the methodology contained in The Greenhouse Gas Protocol: A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard (GHG Protocol), Revised Edition, March 2004, published by the World Resources Institute and the World Business Council on Sustainable Development (WRI/WBCSD). 2.1 Acceptable calculation methodologies include those that conform to the GHG Protocol as the base reference, but provide additional guidance, such as industry- or region-specific guidance. Examples may include: 2.1.1 GHG Reporting Guidance for the Aerospace Industry published by the International Aerospace Environmental Group (IAEG) 2.1.2 Greenhouse Gas Inventory Guidance: Direct Emissions from Stationary Combustion Sources published by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 2.1.3 India GHG Inventory Program 2.1.4 ISO 14064-1 SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS |8",
    "new_id": 367
  },
  {
    "id": 23994,
    "question": "Which scenario would be considered compliant with the entity's disclosure requirements regarding recycled materials and wood fibre sourcing, as described in the Building Products & Furnishings – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "An entity discloses that 45% of its total wood fibre materials are certified under ATFS standards and provides a breakdown of other certifications applied to remaining purchases.",
      "A": "An entity reports that 60% of its wood fibre is sourced from third-party certified forests, including biomass used for energy.",
      "B": "An entity calculates the percentage of recycled material by including all incoming recovered material, even if some portions were discarded in landfills.",
      "C": "An entity claims full compliance by reporting energy recovery through incineration of wood waste as part of its recycling efforts.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "14-15",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Building Products & Furnishings.pdf",
    "source_text": "2.4 The scope of recycled and remanufactured products includes primary recycled materials, co-products (outputs of equal value to primary recycled materials), and by-products (outputs of lesser value than primary recycled materials). 2.5 The entity shall calculate the percentage as the weight of incoming recovered material recycled or remanufactured divided by the total weight of incoming recovered material. 2.6 Portions of products and materials discarded in landfills are not considered recycled. Only the portions of products directly incorporated into new products, co-products or by-products shall be included in the percentage recycled. 2.7 Materials incinerated, including for energy recovery, are not considered reused, recycled or reclaimed. 2.7.1 Energy recovery is defined as the use of combustible waste to generate energy through direct incineration, with or without other waste, but with recovery of the heat. 3 The entity may disclose: 3.1 Whether it directly conducts product take-back, recovery and recycling or if it contracts with a third party the task of collection for the express purpose of reuse, recycling or refurbishment 3.2 If it supports infrastructure for product recovery and recycling through joint ventures, partnerships or by funding research into recycling technologies 3.3 Whether its product take-back, recovery and recycling efforts are voluntary or mandatory 3.4 Relevant performance measures or targets for its product take-back, recovery and recycling efforts such as the total amount of material recovered and the total amount of material recycled SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |BUILDING PRODUCTS & FURNISHINGS |14\n\n[Page 15]\nWood Supply Chain Management Topic Summary The Building Products & Furnishings industry uses large amounts of wood sourced from forests worldwide. Unsustainable production and timber harvesting can result in adverse environmental and social impacts, including biodiversity loss and harm to the livelihoods of forest-dependent communities. Entities inadvertently may source wood from areas susceptible to unsustainable forestry practices. Reports of illegal logging, environmental pollution or adverse impacts on communities can result in reputational repercussions that can damage an entity ’s brand value, affecting demand for their products. In addition, regulations banning the importation of illegally produced wood can result in supply constraints, penalties and further damage to brand value. To mitigate these risks, entities increasingly are adopting third-party certifications verifying wood is grown and harvested in a sustainable manner. Obtaining wood sourcing certifications also can provide entities with a potential growth channel because they can satisfy customer demand for certified products. Metrics CG-BF-430a.1. (1) Total weight of wood fibre materials purchased, (2) percentage from third-party certified forestlands, (3) percentage by standard and (4) percentage certified to other wood fibre standards, (5) percentage by standard 1The entity shall disclose the total amount of wood fibre materials (in air-dried metric tonnes) purchased during the reporting period. 1.1 Wood fibre materials include wood-fibre-based raw materials, components, and semi-finished and finished goods. 1.2 The scope of wood-fibre-based materials includes all inputs processed to be sold as finished goods, including recycled raw materials, virgin raw materials and goods consumed directly in the production process, excluding biomass for energy. 1.3 If wood fibre comprises a portion of a material, component or product, the entity shall include the portion in the total amount. 2The entity shall disclose the percentage of its total wood fibre materials purchased that have been sourced from forestlands certified to a third-party forest management standard. 2.1 Third-party forest management standards are those certifying forests are harvested in a sustainable manner and ensuring adherence to environmental and social criteria including legal compliance, land rights, community and worker relations, environmental impact and biodiversity, forest management plans and practices, land use, wildlife habitat conservation and water conservation, among others. 2.2 Third-party forest management standards include: 2.2.1 American Tree Farm (ATFS) SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |BUILDING PRODUCTS & FURNISHINGS |15",
    "new_id": 368
  },
  {
    "id": 25225,
    "question": "Under which circumstance would an entity be permitted to revise a comparative amount for a forward-looking metric without violating the prohibition on hindsight, as outlined in IFRS S1?",
    "options": {
      "A": "If the revision does not involve the use of hindsight and aligns with newly identified trends or conditions.",
      "B": "If the revision reflects new information that provides evidence of circumstances existing in the preceding period.",
      "C": "If the entity determines it is impracticable to recreate data from the prior period due to missing or incomplete records.",
      "D": "If the entity introduces a new metric in the reporting period and finds it necessary to adjust comparatives retroactively.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "36-37",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S1.pdf",
    "source_text": "provided in interim sustainability-related financial disclosures may be more condensed than in annual sustainability-related financial disclosures, an entity is not prohibited or discouraged from publishing a complete set of sustainability-related financial disclosures as specified in this Standard as part of its interim general purpose financial report. Comparative information (paragraphs 52, 70 and 83 –86) Paragraph 70 requires an entity to disclose comparative information in respect of the preceding period for all amounts disclosed in the reporting period. Metrics In some cases, the amount disclosed for a metric is an estimate. Except as specified in paragraph B51, if an entity identifies new information in relation to the estimated amount disclosed in the preceding period and the new information provides evidence of circumstances that existed in that period, the entity shall: (a) disclose a revised comparative amount that reflects that new information; (b) disclose the difference between the amount disclosed in the preceding period and the revised comparative amount; and (c) explain the reasons for revising the comparative amount. In applying the requirement in paragraph B50, an entity need not disclose a revised comparative amount: (a) if it is impracticable to do so (see paragraph B54). (b) if the metric is forward-looking. Forward-looking metrics relate to possible future transactions, events and other conditions. The entity is permitted to revise a comparative amount for a forward-looking metric if doing so does not involve the use of hindsight. If an entity redefines or replaces a metric in the reporting period, the entity shall: (a) disclose a revised comparative amount, unless it is impracticable to do so; (b) explain the changes; and (c) explain the reasons for those changes, including why the redefined or replacement metric provides more useful information. If an entity introduces a new metric in the reporting period, it shall disclose a comparative amount for that metric unless it is impracticable to do so. Sometimes, it is impracticable to revise a comparative amount to achieve comparability with the reporting period. For example, data might not have been collected in the preceding period in a way that allows retrospective application of a new definition of a metric, and it might be impracticable toB49 B50 B51 B52 B53 B54IFRS SUSTAINABILITY DISCLOSURE STANDARDS © IFRS Foundation 35\n\n[Page 37]\nrecreate the data. If it is impracticable to revise a comparative amount for the preceding period, an entity shall disclose that fact. Errors Paragraph 83 requires an entity to correct material prior period errors. Such errors include: the effects of mathematical mistakes, mistakes in applying the definitions for metrics or targets, oversights or misinterpretations of facts, and fraud. Potential reporting period errors discovered in that period are corrected before the sustainability-related financial disclosures are authorised for issue. However, material errors are sometimes not discovered until a subsequent period. If an entity identifies a material error in its prior period(s) sustainability- related financial disclosures, it shall disclose: (a) the nature of the prior period error; (b) the correction, to the extent practicable, for each prior period disclosed; and (c) if correction of the error is impracticable, the circumstances that led to the existence of that condition and a description of how and from when the error has been corrected. When it is impracticable to determine the effect of an error on all prior periods presented, the entity shall restate the comparative information to correct the error from the earliest date practicable.B55 B56 B57 B58 B59IFRS S1 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR DISCLOSURE OF SUSTAINABILITY- RELATED FINANCIAL INFORMATION —JUNE 2023 36 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 369
  },
  {
    "id": 25263,
    "question": "Under which circumstance is an entity permitted to omit a revised comparative amount for a forward-looking metric without violating the requirements outlined in IFRS S1?",
    "options": {
      "B": "When the entity determines that hindsight would be required to revise the comparative amount.",
      "A": "When the metric has been redefined or replaced in the reporting period and it is impracticable to provide a revised amount.",
      "C": "When the new information pertains to circumstances that arose after the preceding period.",
      "D": "When the comparative amount was originally disclosed as an estimate rather than an exact value.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "36-37",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S1.pdf",
    "source_text": "provided in interim sustainability-related financial disclosures may be more condensed than in annual sustainability-related financial disclosures, an entity is not prohibited or discouraged from publishing a complete set of sustainability-related financial disclosures as specified in this Standard as part of its interim general purpose financial report. Comparative information (paragraphs 52, 70 and 83 –86) Paragraph 70 requires an entity to disclose comparative information in respect of the preceding period for all amounts disclosed in the reporting period. Metrics In some cases, the amount disclosed for a metric is an estimate. Except as specified in paragraph B51, if an entity identifies new information in relation to the estimated amount disclosed in the preceding period and the new information provides evidence of circumstances that existed in that period, the entity shall: (a) disclose a revised comparative amount that reflects that new information; (b) disclose the difference between the amount disclosed in the preceding period and the revised comparative amount; and (c) explain the reasons for revising the comparative amount. In applying the requirement in paragraph B50, an entity need not disclose a revised comparative amount: (a) if it is impracticable to do so (see paragraph B54). (b) if the metric is forward-looking. Forward-looking metrics relate to possible future transactions, events and other conditions. The entity is permitted to revise a comparative amount for a forward-looking metric if doing so does not involve the use of hindsight. If an entity redefines or replaces a metric in the reporting period, the entity shall: (a) disclose a revised comparative amount, unless it is impracticable to do so; (b) explain the changes; and (c) explain the reasons for those changes, including why the redefined or replacement metric provides more useful information. If an entity introduces a new metric in the reporting period, it shall disclose a comparative amount for that metric unless it is impracticable to do so. Sometimes, it is impracticable to revise a comparative amount to achieve comparability with the reporting period. For example, data might not have been collected in the preceding period in a way that allows retrospective application of a new definition of a metric, and it might be impracticable toB49 B50 B51 B52 B53 B54IFRS SUSTAINABILITY DISCLOSURE STANDARDS © IFRS Foundation 35\n\n[Page 37]\nrecreate the data. If it is impracticable to revise a comparative amount for the preceding period, an entity shall disclose that fact. Errors Paragraph 83 requires an entity to correct material prior period errors. Such errors include: the effects of mathematical mistakes, mistakes in applying the definitions for metrics or targets, oversights or misinterpretations of facts, and fraud. Potential reporting period errors discovered in that period are corrected before the sustainability-related financial disclosures are authorised for issue. However, material errors are sometimes not discovered until a subsequent period. If an entity identifies a material error in its prior period(s) sustainability- related financial disclosures, it shall disclose: (a) the nature of the prior period error; (b) the correction, to the extent practicable, for each prior period disclosed; and (c) if correction of the error is impracticable, the circumstances that led to the existence of that condition and a description of how and from when the error has been corrected. When it is impracticable to determine the effect of an error on all prior periods presented, the entity shall restate the comparative information to correct the error from the earliest date practicable.B55 B56 B57 B58 B59IFRS S1 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR DISCLOSURE OF SUSTAINABILITY- RELATED FINANCIAL INFORMATION —JUNE 2023 36 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 370
  },
  {
    "id": 25272,
    "question": "Under what circumstances can an entity omit material sustainability-related opportunity information while still complying with disclosure standards, and how does this interact with legal restrictions, as outlined in IFRS S1?",
    "options": {
      "C": "If the information is commercially sensitive, not publicly available, and disclosing it would seriously prejudice economic benefits, even if no legal prohibition exists.",
      "A": "If the information is commercially sensitive, already publicly available, and its disclosure would prejudice economic benefits, regardless of legal prohibitions.",
      "B": "If the information is not commercially sensitive but is prohibited by law, provided the entity identifies the omitted information type and explains the restriction source.",
      "D": "If the information pertains to abundant resources like water in non-stressed areas, making aggregation unnecessary despite legal requirements.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "32",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S1.pdf",
    "source_text": "An entity shall not aggregate information if doing so would obscure information that is material. Information shall be aggregated if items of information have shared characteristics and shall not be aggregated if they do not have shared characteristics. The entity might need to disaggregate information about sustainability-related risks and opportunities, for example, by geographical location or in consideration of the geopolitical environment. For example, to ensure that material information is not obscured, an entity might need to disaggregate information about its use of water to distinguish between water drawn from abundant sources and water drawn from water- stressed areas. Interaction with law or regulation Law or regulation might specify requirements for an entity to disclose sustainability-related information in its general purpose financial reports. In such circumstances, the entity is permitted to include in its sustainability- related financial disclosures information to meet legal or regulatory requirements, even if that information is not material. However, such information shall not obscure material information. An entity shall disclose material sustainability-related financial information, even if law or regulation permits the entity not to disclose such information. An entity need not disclose information otherwise required by an IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standard if law or regulation prohibits the entity from disclosing that information. If an entity omits material information for that reason, it shall identify the type of information not disclosed and explain the source of the restriction. Commercially sensitive information If an entity determines that information about a sustainability-related opportunity is commercially sensitive in the limited circumstances described in paragraph B35, the entity is permitted to omit that information from its sustainability-related financial disclosures. Such an omission is permitted even if information is otherwise required by an IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standard and the information is material. An entity qualifies for the exemption specified in paragraph B34 if, and only if: (a) information about the sustainability-related opportunity is not already publicly available; (b) disclosure of that information could reasonably be expected to prejudice seriously the economic benefits the entity would otherwise be able to realise in pursuing the opportunity; and (c) the entity has determined that it is impossible to disclose that information in a manner —for example, at an aggregated level —that would enable the entity to meet the objectives of the disclosure requirements without prejudicing seriously the economic benefits the entity would otherwise be able to realise in pursuing the opportunity.B30 B31 B32 B33 B34 B35IFRS SUSTAINABILITY DISCLOSURE STANDARDS © IFRS Foundation 31",
    "new_id": 371
  },
  {
    "id": 25278,
    "question": "When assessing the materiality of information about possible future events with uncertain outcomes, which factor would most likely lead an entity to judge such information as immaterial, according to IFRS S1?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The event has significant potential effects but is unlikely to occur within the short or medium term.",
      "A": "The event could cause supply chain disruption, but only one source of risk exists and its likelihood is minimal.",
      "B": "The event's effects are scrutinized by primary users, regardless of timing or magnitude of impact.",
      "C": "The event involves low-probability and high-impact outcomes that cumulatively pose a substantial risk.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "30",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S1.pdf",
    "source_text": "An entity shall assess whether the information identified in applying paragraph B20, either individually or in combination with other information, is material in the context of the entity ’s sustainability-related financial disclosures taken as a whole. In assessing whether information is material, an entity shall consider both quantitative and qualitative factors. For example, an entity might consider the magnitude and the nature of the effect of a sustainability-related risk or opportunity on the entity. In some cases, IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards require the disclosure of information about possible future events with uncertain outcomes. In judging whether information about such possible future events is material, an entity shall consider: (a) the potential effects of the events on the amount, timing and uncertainty of the entity ’s future cash flows over the short, medium and long term (referred to as ‘the possible outcome ’); and (b) the range of possible outcomes and the likelihood of the possible outcomes within that range. When considering possible outcomes, an entity shall consider all pertinent facts and circumstances. Information about a possible future event is more likely to be judged as being material if the potential effects are significant and the event is likely to occur. However, an entity shall also consider whether information about low-probability and high-impact outcomes might be material either individually or in combination with information about other low-probability and high-impact outcomes. For example, an entity might be exposed to several sustainability-related risks, each of which could cause the same type of disruption —such as disruption to the entity ’s supply chain. Information about an individual source of risk might not be material if disruption from that source is highly unlikely to occur. However, information about the aggregate risk —the risk of supply chain disruption from all sources —might be material. If a possible future event is expected to affect an entity ’s cash flows, but only many years in the future, information about that event is usually less likely to be judged material than information about a possible future event with similar effects that are expected to occur sooner. However, in some circumstances, an item of information could reasonably be expected to influence primary users ’ decisions regardless of the magnitude of the potential effects of the future event or the timing of that event. For example, this might happen if information about a particular sustainability-related risk or opportunity is highly scrutinised by primary users of an entity ’s general purpose financial reports. An entity need not disclose information otherwise required by an IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standard if the information is not material. This is the case even if the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standard contains a list of specific requirements or describes them as minimum requirements.B21 B22 B23 B24 B25IFRS SUSTAINABILITY DISCLOSURE STANDARDS © IFRS Foundation 29",
    "new_id": 372
  },
  {
    "id": 25280,
    "question": "Which of the following best reflects the implication of an entity's reassessment obligation when a significant change in its value chain occurs, according to the interplay between materiality and cost-effort considerations in IFRS S1?",
    "options": {
      "A": "An entity should reassess affected sustainability-related risks and opportunities unless the cost or effort outweighs the benefits for primary users, with the threshold for such balance being dynamic.",
      "B": "The entity must always reassess all sustainability-related risks and opportunities throughout its value chain regardless of cost or effort.",
      "C": "Reassessment is triggered only if the entity directly causes the significant event or change in circumstances affecting its value chain.",
      "D": "An entity is prohibited from reassessing sustainability-related risks more frequently than required, even if new regulations suggest heightened exposure.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "28",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S1.pdf",
    "source_text": "An entity may use various sources of data that may be both internal and external. Possible data sources include the entity ’s risk management processes; industry and peer group experience; and external ratings, reports and statistics. Information that is used by the entity in preparing its financial statements, operating its business model, setting its strategy and managing its risks and opportunities is considered to be available to the entity without undue cost or effort. An entity need not undertake an exhaustive search for information to identify sustainability-related risks and opportunities that could reasonably be expected to affect the entity ’s prospects. The assessment of what constitutes undue cost or effort depends on the entity ’s specific circumstances and requires a balanced consideration of the costs and efforts for the entity and the benefits of the resulting information for primary users. That assessment can change over time as circumstances change. Reassessment of the scope of sustainability-related risks and opportunities throughout the value chain On the occurrence of a significant event or significant change in circumstances, an entity shall reassess the scope of all affected sustainability- related risks and opportunities throughout its value chain. A significant event or significant change in circumstances can occur without the entity being involved in that event or change in circumstances or as a result of a change in what the entity assesses to be important to users of general purpose financial reports. For example, such significant events or significant changes in circumstances might include: (a) a significant change in the entity ’s value chain (for example, a supplier in the entity ’s value chain makes a change that significantly alters the supplier’s greenhouse gas emissions); (b) a significant change in the entity ’s business model, activities or corporate structure (for example, a merger or acquisition that expands the entity ’s value chain); and (c) a significant change in an entity ’s exposure to sustainability-related risks and opportunities (for example, a supplier in the entity ’s value chain is affected by the introduction of a new regulation that the entity had not anticipated). An entity is permitted, but not required, to reassess the scope of any sustainability-related risk or opportunity throughout its value chain more frequently than required by paragraph B11. Materiality (paragraphs 17 –19) Paragraph 17 requires an entity to disclose material information about the sustainability-related risks and opportunities that could reasonably be expected to affect the entity ’s prospects. Materiality of information is judged in relation to whether omitting, misstating or obscuring that information could reasonably be expected to influence decisions of primary users ofB9 B10 B11 B12 B13IFRS SUSTAINABILITY DISCLOSURE STANDARDS © IFRS Foundation 27",
    "new_id": 373
  },
  {
    "id": 25282,
    "question": "When applying the principles of fair presentation in sustainability-related financial disclosures, which statement accurately reflects the relationship between materiality and the disclosure requirements under IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards, as outlined in IFRS S1?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Materiality is an entity-specific aspect of relevance that complements the need for additional disclosures when compliance with specific standards is insufficient.",
      "A": "Materiality is solely determined by the magnitude of risks or opportunities, irrespective of their nature, and overrides all other disclosure considerations.",
      "C": "Materiality ensures complete neutrality in reporting but does not require consideration of whether users can understand the disclosed effects of risks and opportunities.",
      "D": "Materiality depends exclusively on external benchmarks and eliminates the need for verifiability or timeliness in disclosures.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "8",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S1.pdf",
    "source_text": "An entity may apply IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards irrespective of whether the entity ’s related general purpose financial statements (referred to as ‘financial statements ’) are prepared in accordance with IFRS Accounting Standards or other generally accepted accounting principles or practices (GAAP). This Standard uses terminology suitable for profit-oriented entities, including public-sector business entities. If entities with not-for-profit activities in the private sector or the public sector apply this Standard, they might need to amend the descriptions used for particular items of information when applying IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards. Conceptual foundations For sustainability-related financial information to be useful, it must be relevant and faithfully represent what it purports to represent. These are fundamental qualitative characteristics of useful sustainability-related financial information. The usefulness of sustainability-related financial information is enhanced if the information is comparable, verifiable, timely and understandable. These are enhancing qualitative characteristics of useful sustainability-related financial information (see Appendix D). Fair presentation A complete set of sustainability-related financial disclosures shall present fairly all sustainability-related risks and opportunities that could reasonably be expected to affect an entity ’s prospects. To identify sustainability-related risks and opportunities that could reasonably be expected to affect an entity ’s prospects, an entity shall apply paragraphs B1–B12. Fair presentation requires disclosure of relevant information about sustainability-related risks and opportunities that could reasonably be expected to affect the entity ’s prospects, and their faithful representation in accordance with the principles set out in this Standard. To achieve faithful representation, an entity shall provide a complete, neutral and accurate depiction of those sustainability-related risks and opportunities. Materiality is an entity-specific aspect of relevance based on the nature or magnitude, or both, of the items to which the information relates, in the context of the entity ’s sustainability-related financial disclosures. Fair presentation also requires an entity: (a) to disclose information that is comparable, verifiable, timely and understandable; and (b) to disclose additional information if compliance with the specifically applicable requirements in IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards is insufficient to enable users of general purpose financial reports to understand the effects of sustainability-related risks and opportunities8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15IFRS SUSTAINABILITY DISCLOSURE STANDARDS © IFRS Foundation 7",
    "new_id": 374
  },
  {
    "id": 25283,
    "question": "When an entity cross-references information in its sustainability-related financial disclosures, which condition must be satisfied to ensure compliance with IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards while maintaining the understandability of the complete set of disclosures, as outlined in IFRS S1?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The cross-referenced information must be available on the same terms and at the same time as the sustainability-related financial disclosures, and it must not reduce the understandability of the complete set of disclosures.",
      "A": "The cross-referenced information must be disclosed in a separate standalone report that is published after the sustainability-related financial disclosures.",
      "B": "The cross-referenced information must be available on different terms and at a later time than the sustainability-related financial disclosures to ensure relevance.",
      "D": "The cross-referenced information must only include data related to workforce restructuring and exclude all other types of sustainability-related risks or opportunities.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "35",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S1.pdf",
    "source_text": "and local communities, and the effect of such a closure on the useful lives of its assets and on impairment assessments. (b) a description of the alternatives that an entity evaluated in setting its strategy in response to its sustainability-related risks and opportunities, including a description of the trade-offs between those risks and opportunities that the entity considered (see paragraph 33(c)). For example, an entity might need to explain the potential effects of its decision to restructure its operations in response to a sustainability- related risk on the future size and composition of the entity ’s workforce. Information included by cross-reference (paragraph 63) Information required by an IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standard might be available in another report published by the entity. For example, the required information could be disclosed in the related financial statements. Material information can be included in an entity ’s sustainability-related financial disclosures by cross-reference, provided that: (a) the cross-referenced information is available on the same terms and at the same time as the sustainability-related financial disclosures; and (b) the complete set of sustainability-related financial disclosures is not made less understandable by including information by cross-reference. Information included by cross-reference becomes part of the complete set of sustainability-related financial disclosures and shall comply with the requirements of IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards. For example, it needs to be relevant, representationally faithful, comparable, verifiable, timely and understandable. The body(s) or individual(s) that authorises the general purpose financial reports takes the same responsibility for the information included by cross-reference as it does for the information included directly. If information required by an IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standard is included by cross-reference: (a) the sustainability-related financial disclosures shall clearly identify the report within which that information is located and explain how to access that report; and (b) the cross-reference shall be to a precisely specified part of that report. Interim reporting (paragraph 69) In the interest of timeliness and cost considerations, and to avoid repetition of information previously reported, an entity may be required or choose to provide less information at interim dates than it provides in its annual sustainability-related financial disclosures. Interim sustainability-related financial disclosures are intended to provide an update on the latest complete set of annual disclosures of sustainability-related financial information. These disclosures focus on new information, events and circumstances and do not duplicate information previously reported. Although the informationB45 B46 B47 B48IFRS S1 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR DISCLOSURE OF SUSTAINABILITY- RELATED FINANCIAL INFORMATION —JUNE 2023 34 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 375
  },
  {
    "id": 25284,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the relationship between primary users' expectations about returns and their assessment of an entity's stewardship, according to IFRS S1?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Expectations about returns depend on both the assessment of future net cash inflows and the perceived effectiveness of management in utilizing economic resources, which together shape views on stewardship.",
      "A": "Primary users' expectations about returns are solely based on dividends and interest payments, which directly determine their views on the entity's stewardship.",
      "B": "Assessments of stewardship by primary users rely exclusively on market price increases, with no consideration for future net cash inflows or other factors.",
      "C": "Primary users disregard stewardship entirely when forming expectations about returns, focusing only on sustainability-related financial disclosures.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "29",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S1.pdf",
    "source_text": "general purpose financial reports, which provide information about a specific reporting entity. The decisions of primary users relate to providing resources to the entity and involve decisions about: (a) buying, selling or holding equity and debt instruments; (b) providing or selling loans and other forms of credit; or (c) exercising rights to vote on, or otherwise influence, the entity ’s management ’s actions that affect the use of the entity ’s economic resources. The decisions described in paragraph B14 depend on primary users ’ expectations about returns, for example, dividends, principal and interest payments or market price increases. Those expectations depend on primary users’ assessment of the amount, timing and uncertainty of future net cash inflows to the entity and on their assessment of stewardship of the entity ’s economic resources by the entity ’s management and its governing body(s) or individual(s). Assessing whether information could reasonably be expected to influence the decisions made by primary users requires consideration of the characteristics of those users and of the entity ’s own circumstances. Sustainability-related financial disclosures are prepared for primary users who have reasonable knowledge of business and economic activities and who review and analyse information diligently. At times, even well-informed and diligent users may need to seek the aid of an adviser to understand sustainability-related financial information. Individual primary users may have different, and sometimes even conflicting, information needs and desires. Information needs of primary users may also evolve over time. Sustainability-related financial disclosures are intended to meet common information needs of primary users. Identifying material information Materiality judgements are specific to an entity. Consequently, this Standard does not specify any thresholds for materiality or predetermine what would be material in a particular situation. To identify material information about a sustainability-related risk or opportunity, an entity shall apply, as the starting point, the requirements of the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standard that specifically applies to that sustainability-related risk or opportunity. In the absence of an IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standard that specifically applies to a sustainability- related risk or opportunity, the entity shall apply the requirements on sources of guidance specified in paragraphs 57 –58. Those sources specify information, including metrics, that may be relevant to a particular sustainability-related risk or opportunity, to a particular industry or in specified circumstances.B14 B15 B16 B17 B18 B19 B20IFRS S1 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR DISCLOSURE OF SUSTAINABILITY- RELATED FINANCIAL INFORMATION —JUNE 2023 28 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 376
  },
  {
    "id": 25728,
    "question": "Which scenario demonstrates a contradiction between projected habitat changes for species in Iran, based on the provided climate change impacts in the Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Working Group II Contribution to the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The Persian leopard is expected to lose habitat due to climate change, while the Mesopotamian spiny-tailed lizard will see an increase in suitable habitat.",
      "B": "Both the Persian leopard and Daphne mucronata are projected to experience significant habitat loss under future climate conditions.",
      "C": "Daphne mucronata will expand its range in response to climate change, contrasting with most other plant and animal species in Iran.",
      "D": "Climate change will equally reduce biodiversity across all studied species in Iran, including both native plants and invasive species.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "1488",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 WGII.pdf",
    "source_text": "10 1476Chapter 10 Asia A1B by 2080: for the seven northernmost snow leopard range states (Afghanistan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan, Russia and Mongolia) the suitable habitat area will increase, while habitat loss is expected on the southern slope of the Himalaya and the southeast Tibetan Plateau (Farrington and Li, 2016). Climate change projected under four RCP scenarios will not affect the distribution patterns of Turkestan Rock Agama Paralaudakia lehmanni (Nikolsky 1896; Sancholi, 2018). In Iran, among 37 studied species of plants and animals, the ranges of 30 species are expected to shrink and ranges of 7 species are expected to increase between 2030 and 2099 under climate-change stress (Yousefi et al., 2019). Future climate change would cause biodiversity and habitat loss in many parts of Asia using modelling approaches (high confidence). Warren et al. (2018) projected that extirpation risks to terrestrial taxa (plants, amphibians, reptiles, birds and mammals) from 2°C to 4.5°C global warming in 12 ‘priority places’ in Asia, under the assumption of no adaptation (i.e., dispersal) by the 2080s, is from 12.2–26.4% to 29– 56% (Table 10.1; Figure 10.4). Under different scenarios, future climate change could reduce the extent of a suitable habitat for giant pandas (Fan et al., 2014), moose (Alces alces) (Huang et al., 2016), black muntjac (Muntiacus crinifrons) (Lei et al., 2016) and the Sichuan snub-nosed monkey (Rhinopithecus roxellana) (Zhang et al., 2019d) in China; the Persian leopard (Panthera pardus saxicolor) in Iran (Ashrafzadeh et al., 2019a); the Bengal tiger (Mukul et al., 2019) in India; and four tree- snail species (Amphidromus) in Thailand (Klorvuttimontara et al., 2017). However, climate change would have little impact on the habitats of the Asian elephant, but would cause extinction of the Hoolock gibbon in Bangladesh by 2070 (Alamgir et al., 2015). Climate change would increase the distribution of the Mesopotamian spiny-tailed lizard (Saara loricate) in Iran (Kafash et al., 2016). Future climate change would reduce the suitable habitat of certain protected plants (Zhang et al., 2014) including Polygala tenuifolia Wild (Lei et al., 2016); relict species in East Asia (Tang et al., 2018); tree Abies (Ran et al., 2018) in China; two threatened medicinal plants (Fritillaria cirrhosa and Lilium nepalense) in Nepal (Rana et al., 2017); a medicinal and vulnerable plant species Daphne mucronata (Abolmaali et al., 2018) and Bromus tomentellus in Iran (Sangoony et al., 2016); a valuable threatened tree species, Dysoxylum binectariferum, in Bangladesh (Sohel et al., 2016); and plant diversity in Republic of Korea (Lim et al., 2018). The impact of future climate change on invasive species may be species- or region specific (medium confidence). Climate change would promote invasion of a highly invasive aquatic plant Eichhornia crassipes (You et al., 2014), Ambrosia artemisiifolia (Qin et al., 2014), alligator weed (Alternanthera philoxeroides) (Wu et al., 2016), invasive alien plant Solidago canadensis (Xu et al., 2014), three invasive woody oil-plant species (Jatropha curcas, Ricinus communis and Aleurites moluccana) (Dai et al., 2018), and 90 of ~150 poisonous plant species (Zhang et al., 2017a) in China; six mostly highly invasive species (Ageratum houstonianum Mill., Chromolaena odorata (L.) R.M. King & H. Rob., Hyptis suaveolens (L.) Poit., Lantana camara L., Mikania micrantha Kunth and Parthenium hysterophorus L.) in Nepal (Shrestha et al. 2018); 11 invasive plant species in the western Himalaya (Thapa et al., 2018); alien plants in Georgia (Slodowicz et al., 2018); the invasive green anole (Anolis carolinensis) in Japan (Suzuki-Ohno et al., 2017); the Giant African Snail Figure 10.4 | Location of ‘priority places’ in Asia. (Modified from Warren et al., 2018).",
    "new_id": 377
  },
  {
    "id": 25868,
    "question": "Which factor, if unaddressed, poses the greatest risk to upper-montane forest species that cannot disperse quickly enough in response to climate change, according to the Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Working Group II Contribution to the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report?",
    "options": {
      "B": "If treelines fail to shift uphill, those species of the upper-montane forest that experience range contraction at their lower range limit do not have a suitable habitat to expand into beyond their upper range limit.",
      "A": "The failure of treelines to shift downhill as temperatures increase.",
      "C": "The rapid upward movement of vegetation zones outpacing species migration.",
      "D": "The desynchronisation of mutualistic relationships such as pollination.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "2306",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 WGII.pdf",
    "source_text": "CCP5 2294Cross-Chapter Paper 5 Mountains Large-scale and transformative interventions can reduce the high-end impacts of changing water resources and in particular the risks of water scarcity (Section CCP5.4.1). These interventions have long lead times, are costly and may face institutional constraints (Section 4.7), resulting in adaptation shortfalls. Therefore, high-risk to very high-risk levels cannot be excluded in regions where other key risk characteristics, such as magnitude, timing and likelihood, are assessed as high due to potential losses (e.g., in many Asian regions) (Figure CC5.6, SMCCP5.4 and Table SMCCP5.16). CCP5.3.2.3 KR3: Risks of Ecosystem Change and Species Extinction Risks to mountain ecosystems and the services they provide to people are varied in magnitude, timing, likelihood and potential to adapt and place specific. However, many mountain ecosystems are already showing impacts of climate change (CCP5.3.1), reflecting the strong influence climate exerts in many situations and indicating that risks are significant and immediate and will likely increase in the near as well as long term. There is robust evidence (high agreement) of vegetation zones and individual species shifting to higher elevations (CCP5.2.1 and Section 2.4), and projections indicate that current trends will continue and accelerate at higher rates of warming (medium evidence, high agreement) (Section 2.5). Many mountain species are at risk of range contraction and ultimately extinction if dispersal at the upper range limit is slower than losses due to mortality at the lower range limit (observed for trees in the neotropics (Feeley et al., 2013; Duque et al., 2015) or if mountains are not high enough to allow species to move to higher elevations. Ramirez-Villegas et al. (2014) modelled 11,012 species of birds and vascular plants in the Andes and found large decreases by 2050 (SRES-A2 scenario); in the absence of dispersal, 10% of species could become extinct. Even assuming unlimited dispersal, most of the Andean endemics would become severely threatened. Other modelling studies have also projected declines in a range of communities and species, including rare endemics (Zomer et al., 2014a; Rashid et al., 2015; Bitencourt et al., 2016; Li et al., 2017; Rehnus et al., 2018; Ashrafzadeh et al., 2019; Zhang et al., 2019b; Cuesta et al., 2020; Hoffmann et al., 2020). Many treelines will continue to shift to higher elevations with increasing temperatures (Chhetri and Cairns, 2018), although very few are changing as fast as the climate (Liang et al., 2016; Hansson et al., 2021) and some are not moving or even shifting to lower elevations (CCP5.2.1). If treelines fail to shift uphill, this will pose a risk for species of the upper-montane forest that experience range contraction at their lower range limit but lack a suitable habitat to expand into beyond their upper range limit (Rehm and Feeley, 2015). Changes in phenology can also pose risks to species and ecosystems (Chapter 2), including a potential desynchronisation of mutualistic relationships like pollination and increased freezing damage due to premature emergence from winter dormancy. In European broadleaf trees, for example, the upper elevational limits of different species involve a trade-off between maximising growing season length and Risks to livelihoods and the economy from changing mountain water resources between 1.5°C and 2°C Global Warming Level in AR6 WGI reference regions WSAFCAFWAFSAH NEAF SEAFARPEASESB TIB SAS SEAWCAEEUWCE MED SAUNES SESNWS SWSCNA NCAWNANWN High Medium Low ConfidenceRisk Very high Moderate LowHigh Mountain regions AR6 WGI reference regions Dotted border between TIB and SAS is due to discrepancies between studies referring to the Southern Himalaya as part of SAS, and the new AR6 WGI reference region delineations which include most of the Southern Himalaya in TIB. Figure CCP5.6 | Risk levels assessed per AR6 WGI reference region (AR6 WGI Atlas (Gutiérrez et al., 2021)). The majority of studies assessed focus on impacts up to mid-century (2030–2060) and for RCP-2.6, RCP-4.5 and RCP-6.0, which was converted into the corresponding warming level range 1.5°C–2.0°C GWL (Cross-Chapter Box CLIMATE in Chapter 1). Methodological details are provided in Section SMCCP5.4, Figure SMCCP5.1, Table SMCCP5.17 and SMCCP5.19. Due to the limited evidence available to determine risks against high GWLs and the relatively high uncertainty associated with future irrigation ",
    "new_id": 378
  },
  {
    "id": 25924,
    "question": "Which factor is most directly implicated in the exacerbation of both undernutrition and obesity due to climate change, according to the relationships described in the Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Working Group II Contribution to the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Increasing temperatures could contribute to obesity through reduced physical activity, increased prices of produce or shifts in eating patterns of populations towards more processed foods.",
      "A": "Increased exposure to extreme weather events causing disruptions in food supply chains.",
      "B": "Decreased access to nutrient-dense foods resulting from economic instability caused by climate variability.",
      "D": "Climate-induced food insecurity driving populations to adopt monotonous diets low in diversity.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "1087",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 WGII.pdf",
    "source_text": "7 1075Health, Wellbeing and the Changing Structure of Communities Chapter 7 There is clear evidence of climate sensitivity for multiple injuries from floods, fires and storms, but there is a need for additional evidence regarding the current injury burden attributable to climate change. It is as likely as not that climate change has increased the current burden of disease from injuries related to extreme weather, particularly in low- income settings (low confidence). Approximately 120 million people are exposed to coastal flooding annually (Nicholls et al., 2007), causing an estimated 12,000 deaths (Shultz et al., 2005), and there is significant concern for worsening flooding associated with climate change (Shultz et al., 2018a; Shultz et al., 2018b; Woodward and Samet, 2018) but very limited quantification of attributable burden. A range of adverse health outcomes has been identified in a study of fires in sub-zero temperatures that are thought to be increasing in frequency due to climate change (Metallinou and Log, 2017). 7.2.4.3 Observed Impacts on Maternal, Foetal and Neonatal Health Maternal and neonatal disorders accounted for 3.7% of total global deaths and 7.8% of global DALYs in 2019 (Vos et al., 2020). Children and pregnant women have potentially higher rates of vulnerability and/or exposure to climatic hazards, extreme weather events and undernutrition (Garcia and Sheehan, 2016; Sorensen et al., 2018; Chersich et al., 2018). Available evidence suggests that heat is associated with higher rates of pre-term birth (Wang et al., 2020), low birthweight, stillbirth, neonatal stress (Cil and Cameron, 2017; Kuehn and McCormick, 2017) and adverse child health (Kuehn and McCormick, 2017). Extreme weather events are associated with reduced access to prenatal care, unattended deliveries (Abdullah et al., 2019) and decreased paediatric healthcare access (Haque et al., 2019). 7.2.4.4 Observed Impacts on Malnutrition Climate variability and change contribute to food insecurity that can lead to malnutrition, including undernutrition, overweight and obesity, and to disease susceptibility, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (high confidence) . Since AR5, analyses of the links between climate change and food expanded beyond undernutrition to include the impacts of climate change on a wider set of diet- and weight- related risk factors and their impacts on NCDs, along with the role of dietary choices for GHG emissions (IPCC, 2019b) including dietary inadequacy (deficiencies, excesses or imbalances in energy, protein and micronutrients), infections and sociocultural factors (Global Nutrition Report 2020). Undernutrition exists when a combination of insufficient food intake, health, and care conditions results in one or more of the following: underweight for age, short for age (stunted), thin for height (wasted), or functionally deficient in vitamins and/ or minerals (micronutrient malnutrition or ‘hidden hunger’). Food insecurity and poor access to nutrient-dense food contribute not only to undernutrition but also to obesity and susceptibility to NCDs in low- and middle-income countries (FAO et al., 2018; Swinburn et al., 2019). Globally, more than 690 million people are undernourished, 144 million children are stunted (chronic undernutrition), 47 million children are wasted (acute undernutrition), and more than 2 billion people have micronutrient deficiencies (FAO, 2020). More than 135 million people across 55 countries experienced acute hunger requiring urgent food, nutrition and livelihood assistance in 2019 (FSIN/GNAFC, 2020). The COVID-19 pandemic is projected to increase the number of acutely food insecure people to 270 million people (FSIN, 2020) and worsen malnutrition levels (FAO et al., 2020; Rippin et al., 2020). The relationships between climate change and obesity vary based on geography, population sub-groups and/or stages of economic growth and population growth (An et al., 2017). Increasing temperatures could contribute to obesity through reduced physical activity, increased prices of produce or shifts in eating patterns of populations towards more processed foods (An et al., 2018). In the largest global study to date exploring the connections between child diet diversity and recent climate, data from 19 countries in six regions (Asia, Central America, South America, north Africa, southeast Africa and west Africa) indicated significant reductions in diet diversity associated with higher temperature",
    "new_id": 379
  },
  {
    "id": 26016,
    "question": "Which governance approach is most directly associated with fostering trust-building, policy experimentation, and learning through the active steering of actors at multiple levels and decision-making scales, according to the Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Working Group II Contribution to the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Polycentric governance, as it emphasizes interactions across local, regional, national, and international actors to achieve collective goals.",
      "A": "Adaptive governance, due to its reliance on formal and informal social networks and nested institutions.",
      "B": "Collaborative governance, because it prioritizes community-based initiatives in addressing climate change.",
      "C": "Multi-level governance, since it focuses exclusively on vertical integration of policies across administrative tiers.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "1258",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 WGII.pdf",
    "source_text": "8 1246Chapter 8 Poverty, Livelihoods and Sustainable Development and adaptation policies objectives and policies), external coherence (climate change and development objectives), vertical integration (mainstream climate change into sectoral policies) and horizontal integration (overarching governance structures for cross-sectoral coordination). Progress of policy integration varies from the global to local level. Progress in mainstreaming and coherence is emerging globally and has slowly made it down to the national level (Di Gregorio et al., 2017). Adaptation and mitigation should be mainstreamed into planning and implementation on food security programmes, and cross-cutting oversights are required to integrate land restoration, climate policy, food security and disaster risk management into a coherent policy framework (Woolf et al., 2015). There has been an increase in the literature examining adaptation and mitigation synergy in the Nationally Determined Contributions submitted by countries to the UNFCCC. Agriculture and energy are the two priority sectors for which there have been significant pledges and commitments from countries, with, to some extent, good alignment between adaptation and mitigation. This alignment can provide good opportunities to integrate both into national sectoral policies (Antwi-Agyei et al., 2018a). This suggests that inclusive and sustainable economic and social development can be achieved if national governments focus on developing coherent, cross-sector approaches that deliver potential triple wins of mitigation, adaptation and development. Different governance approaches, such as polycentric governance, adaptive governance, multi-level governance, collaborative governance or network governance, are increasingly utilised to understand the processes of transitioning towards CRD. The potential of polycentric governance approaches for promoting both climate mitigation and adaptation is well established (Cole, 2015; Abbott, 2017; Morrison et al., 2017a; Warner et al., 2018). Polycentric governance deals with active steering of local, regional, national and international actors, and instigates learning from experience across multiple actors, levels of decision making and temporal scales (Ostrom, 2010). It is the source of power to achieve collective goals. Polycentric actors have the framing power, power by design and pragmatic power (Morrison et al., 2017b). Polycentric governance offers new opportunities for climate action through more opportunities for communication, trust-building, policy experimentation and learning (Cole, 2015). Adaptive governance is understood as various interactions between actors, networks, organisations and institutions towards achieving a desired state of social-ecological systems (Chaffin et al., 2014). It requires a structure of nested institutions, diversity at different levels, connected by formal and informal social networks (Dietz et al., 2003). As Brunner and Lynch (2010) observe, the emergence of community-based initiatives in addressing climate change marks the emergence of adaptive governance. 8.6.2.2 The Water–Energy–Food–Nexus Approach Increasing demands for water, energy, food and materials are putting pressure on resource supply, and hence the nexus approach can inform transition pathways for interlinked resource systems (Johnson et al., 2019). The nexus approach, especially the water–energy–food nexus, is used to examine synergies and trade-offs between adaptation and mitigation (Howells and Rogner, 2014). As reviewed by Wiegleb and Bruns (2018), early use of the concept was by the World Economic Forum in 2008 where it was emphasised that issues of economic growth need to be considered within water, energy and food resource systems. This was later published as Water Security: The Water–Food– Energy–Climate Nexus. Another key activity was the Bonn2011 Nexus conference. Then, in 2015, The Nexus Dialogue Programme was held by the UN and EU Commissions as an approach to implement the SDGs. UN Water underscores the water–energy–food nexus as central to development (Newell et al., 2019). It notes that demand for water, food and energy are rising due to a growing population, rapid urbanisation, changing diets and economic growth, and in most cases, the lack of knowledge on the water–energy–food nexus has often led to mismatches in prioritisation and decision making which hinders sustainable development (Mitra et al., 2020). However, the benefits of nexu",
    "new_id": 380
  },
  {
    "id": 26018,
    "question": "Which factor is both a significant barrier to adaptation in low-income countries and explicitly linked to challenges in governance and institutional capacity, based on the interdependent components of an enabling environment in the Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Working Group II Contribution to the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The presence of corruption and governance failure in managing pre-existing vulnerabilities.",
      "B": "The absence of diversified livelihood portfolios among vulnerable households.",
      "C": "Poor vertical interplay and lack of citizen participation in climate governance.",
      "D": "Higher inequalities in income distribution and limited access to financial assets.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "1242",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 WGII.pdf",
    "source_text": "8 1230Chapter 8 Poverty, Livelihoods and Sustainable Development addressed during planning, adaptations may fail to achieve the desired outcomes. This is increasingly seen at a political level within efforts to implement the Paris Agreement, in relation to the principle of ‘common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capacities’ (CBDR-RC) (Box 8.7). The scale of analysis, baseline conditions prior to adaptation and scale of action matter too when assessing the key components of an enabling environment for adaptation. At a national scale, it is well established that low-income countries are less well positioned to manage climate change impacts, being variously attributed to a lack of institutional, economic or financial capacity to adapt effectively (Tol and Yohe, 2007; Barr et al., 2010). It can be particularly difficult to adapt to drought, for example, when it occurs in the pre-conditions of poor water supplies and sanitation (see Box 8.5; Section 8.3.2), and in a context of corruption, governance failure and a lack of accountability. Adaptation productivity in higher-income countries is further supported by better infrastructure and stronger institutions—low adaptation efficiency is linked to lower government spending, higher inequalities in income distribution and poor governance (Fankhauser and McDermott, 2014). At smaller scales, even within a single socioeconomic setting, different groups require different kinds of adaptation support and exhibit different vulnerabilities to climate change impacts. Huynh and Stringer (2018) found that households vulnerable to climate change impacts linked to sea level rise and flooding in Da Nang City and Ngu Hanh Son district, Vietnam, had limited access to human, natural, physical, financial and social assets, and lacked a diversified livelihood portfolio. An enabling environment for household-level adaptation would need to address these factors in this context. However, the same authors found that at district scale, different challenges persisted, including obstacles to multidirectional flows of climate information, poor vertical interplay both upward and downward, and a lack of citizen participation in the governance of climate change. Acknowledging that context and scale matter, it is nevertheless possible to set out the core components of a generic enabling environment (Figure 8.12), linking them to the literature on climate change and recognising how they can support adaptation in different socioeconomic and environmental settings in which different emphases are required. This broad set of enablers requires different emphases according to the specific context, yet the interdependence between them is universally applicable. The specific political economy of each country and its underpinning philosophies shape the national political context in which public policy supporting adaptation is developed and implemented. It further shapes the context for private adaptation. Public policy targeting climate change seeks to address market failures, amend policy distortions and offer incentives for private adaptation, as well as provide climate- resilient public goods, climate services and safety nets for the poor and vulnerable (Fankhauser, 2017). In some countries that have a more stable institutional context, such policies are more straightforward to develop and implement; while in countries with weaker institutions (e.g., those emerging from conflict), a larger role may be needed for regional economic commissions and transnational networks to support the governance of ‘borderless climate risks’ (Benzie and Persson, 2019), particularly where these countries also are most vulnerable to climate change (see also Figure 8.6). To support enabling conditions in highly vulnerable countries that are also characterised by state fragility (see Figure 8.8), funding and projects designed to support adaptation may need to be modified to effectively promote regional cooperation and transboundary adaptation. Nevertheless, such interventions can also reinforce particularly powerful agendas and fail to assist and empower those with the greatest need to adapt (Biermann et al., 2010; Burch et al., 2019) neglecting community voices and sovereignty (Schlosberg and Collins, 2014). It is therefore important that the relevance of people and community empowerment to effectively achieve vulnerability reduction and climate change adaptation is recognised. It is also insufficient to consider co",
    "new_id": 381
  },
  {
    "id": 26021,
    "question": "Which factor is both explicitly identified as exacerbating the impacts of water-related disasters and implied to have a compounding relationship with climate change in driving vulnerability, according to the Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Working Group II Contribution to the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Anthropogenic land use changes intensifying the intensity, frequency and spatial extent of disasters.",
      "A": "Increased urbanisation increasing exposure to floods and droughts.",
      "C": "Population growth leading to higher demand for water resources.",
      "D": "Psychological trauma from prolonged periods of drought.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "674",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 WGII.pdf",
    "source_text": "4Chapter 4 Water 662Observed changes in mean river flows from 1971–201 0 % -change decade-1 ≤-20 -10 01 0≥ 20 % -change decade -1 ≤-20 -10 0 10 ≥20 Increasing river flowsDecreasing river flows Figure FAQ4.2.2 | Observed changes in mean river flows from 1971 to 2010 Some of these changes are starting to have impacts on society. For example, increasing rainfall in the USA has led to increased crop yields. Heavy rainfall and long periods of rainfall lead to flooding, causing deaths, injuries, infrastructural damage, spread of disease, disruptions to employment and education, psychological trauma and territorial displacement. The weather conditions associated with many recent major flooding events were made more likely by climate change, although non-climatic factors remain the dominant driver of increased flooding. Drier soils have made heatwaves more severe. A drying of the landscape has increased the length of the fire season across much of the world, contributing to unprecedented severity of wildfires in recent years. In recent years, several major drought events with impacts on agriculture were made more likely by climate change. Overall, the general picture is of increased average precipitation and/or longer periods of precipitation in the mid and high latitudes, but decreased precipitation and/or longer times between precipitation across much of the tropics and subtropics. Where heavy precipitation is changing, this is mostly towards increasing intensity. Societal impacts and increased risks from both wetter and drier conditions are starting to emerge. Frequently Asked Questions FAQ 4.3 | How will climate change impact the severity of water-related disasters, such as droughts and floods? Climate change will lead to populations becoming more vulnerable to floods and droughts due to an increase in the frequency, magnitude and total area affected by water-related disasters. Floods and droughts will also affect more people in the course of this century as a result of population growth and increased urbanisation, especially if warming cannot be limited to 1.5°C. The impact of floods and droughts are expected to increase across all economic sectors, resulting in negative outcomes for the global production of goods and services, industry output, employment, trade and household consumption. Floods will pose additional risks to people’s lives and health through inundation, facilitating the further spread of waterborne diseases. At the same time, droughts can have adverse health impacts due to the limited availability of food and water for drinking and hygienic purposes. All losses, both in terms of lives and in economic terms, will be more limited in a 1.5°C than in a 3°C warmer world. Anthropogenic land use changes and climate change will exacerbate the intensity, frequency and spatial extent of floods and droughts, leading to populations becoming more vulnerable. According to projections, these increases FAQ 4.2 (continued)",
    "new_id": 382
  },
  {
    "id": 26153,
    "question": "Which of the following most accurately reflects a logical consequence or relationship implied in the Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Working Group II Contribution to the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report regarding the interaction between climate change and ecosystem services?",
    "options": {
      "C": "While climate change will disrupt pollinator activity and species distribution, it may also indirectly elevate the costs of controlling pests and diseases due to increased biotic stress.",
      "A": "Climate change will uniformly reduce all forms of agricultural productivity, with no regional variation or potential short-term gains.",
      "B": "The decline in marine fisheries and aquaculture productivity is primarily driven by overfishing rather than warming and acidification.",
      "D": "Adaptation measures such as switching crop varieties and altering farm activities are projected to fully offset the impacts of climate change on food systems.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "730",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 WGII.pdf",
    "source_text": "5 718Chapter 5 Food, Fibre and Other Ecosystem Products under SSP5-8.5. Meat and milk productivity will be reduced (medium confidence). {5.5.3.4; 5.12.4} Climate change will further increase pressures on terrestrial ecosystem services supporting global food systems (high confidence). Climate change will reduce the effectiveness of pollinator agents as species are lost from certain areas, or the coordination of pollinator activity and flower receptiveness is disrupted in some regions (high confidence). Greenhouse-gas emissions will negatively impact air, soil and water quality, exacerbating direct climatic impacts on yields (high confidence). {5.4.3, Box 5.3, Box 5.4, 5.5.3.4; 5.7.1, 5.7.4, 5.10.3} Climate change will significantly alter aquatic food provisioning services and water security with regional variances (high confidence). Climate change will reduce marine fisheries and aquaculture productivity, altering the species that will be fished or cultured, and reducing aquaculture habitat in tropical and subtropical areas (high confidence). Global ocean animal biomass will decrease by 5–17% under RCP2.6 and 8.5, respectively, from 1970 to 2100 with an average decline of 5% for every 1°C of warming, affecting food provisioning, revenue value and distribution (medium confidence). Global marine aquaculture will decline under warming and acidification from 2020 to 2100, with potential short-term gains for temperate finfish and overall negative impacts on bivalve aquaculture from habitat reduction (50–100% for some countries in the Northern Hemisphere) (medium confidence). Changes in precipitation, sea level, temperature and extreme climate events will affect food provisioning from inland and coastal aquatic systems (high confidence). Sea level rise and altered precipitation will increase coastal inundation and water conflicts between water-dependent sectors, such as rice production, direct human use and hydropower (medium confidence). {5.8.3, 5.9.3, 5.13, Cross-Chapter Box SLR in Chapter 3} The occurrence and distribution of pests, weeds and diseases, including zoonoses, in agricultural, forest and food systems (terrestrial and aquatic) will be altered, and their control will become costlier (medium confidence). Changes in the rates of reproduction and distribution of weeds, insect pests, pathogens and disease vectors will increase biotic stress on crops, forests and livestock, and will increase the risk of biodiversity loss and ecosystem degradation (medium evidence, high agreement). Risks will increase for climate- driven emerging zoonoses (medium evidence, high agreement). {5.4.1.3, 5.9.4, Cross-Chapter Box MOVING PLATE this chapter} Forest production systems will have variable responses to climate change across regions, with negative effects being more predominant in tropical forests (high confidence). In temperate and boreal regions, some productivity gains are projected, but tree mortality will increase in some areas (high confidence). In tropical forests, change in species composition and forest structure will lower production (medium confidence). Some models project a possible increase in global wood supply and lowering of average wood prices, but they do not account for the negative impacts of extreme events and thus possibly overestimate the wood supply (medium confidence). {5.6.2} Climate change will negatively impact food safety (high con- fidence). Higher temperatures and humidity will favour toxigenic fungi, plant and animal-based pathogens, and harmful algal blooms (HABs) (high confidence). More frequent and intense flood events and in- creased melting of snow and ice will increase food contamination (high confidence). Incidence and severity of HABs and water-borne diseases will increase, as will indirect effects from infrastructure damage during extreme events (high confidence). {5.4.3, 5.5.2.3, 5.8.1, 5.8.2, 5.8.3, 5.9.1, 5.11.1, 5.11.3, 5.12.3; Cross-Chapter Box ILLNESS in Chapter 2} Adaptation Many autonomous adaptation options have been implemented in both terrestrial and aquatic systems, but on-farm adaptations are insufficient to meet Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 2 (high confidence). Autonomous responses include livestock and farm management, switching varieties/species and altered timing of key farm activities such as planting or stocking (high confidence). However, because of limited adaptive capacities and non-climatic compounding drivers of food insecurity, SDG2 will not be met (high conf",
    "new_id": 383
  },
  {
    "id": 26156,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why the association between Campylobacteriosis and climate may be considered indirect, based on the information provided in the Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Working Group II Contribution to the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Because weather conditions that encourage outdoor food preparation and recreational activities may influence infection rates.",
      "A": "Because temperature increases directly cause a rise in Campylobacter infections without any mediating factors.",
      "B": "Because Campylobacter infections are solely driven by high rainfall, which is unrelated to climate variability.",
      "C": "Because Campylobacteriosis outbreaks have been shown to decline immediately after all extreme weather events.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "1078",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 WGII.pdf",
    "source_text": "7 1066Chapter 7 Health, Wellbeing and the Changing Structure of Communities (e.g., enteric viruses, Campylobacter spp., Shiga toxin-producing E. coli strains, Mycobacterium avium, tuberculosis complexes, parasitic protozoa and Salmonella) (Lake, 2018; Lake, 2017; Lake and Barker, 2018; Smith and Fazil, 2019; European Food Safety Authority 2020; Semenza and Paz, 2021). Priority risks include marine biotoxins, mycotoxins, salmonellosis, vibriosis, transfer of contaminants due to extreme precipitation, floods, increased use of chemicals in the food chain (plant protection products, fertilizers, veterinary drugs) and potential residues in food (European Food Safety Authority 2020; World Health Organization 2018b). There is a strong association observed between the increase in average ambient temperature and increases in Salmonella infections (high confidence). Most types of Salmonella infections lead to salmonellosis, while some other types (Salmonella Typhi and Salmonella Paratyphi) can lead to typhoid fever or paratyphoid fever. The transmission to humans of the non-typhoidal Salmonella infection, one of the most widespread FBDs, usually occurs through eating foods contaminated with animal faeces. Studies conducted in Australia (Milazzo et al., 2016), New Zealand (Lal et al., 2016), the UK (Lake, 2017), South Korea (Park et al., 2018a; Park et al., 2018c; Park et al., 2018a), Singapore (Aik et al., 2018) and Hong Kong, SAR of China (Wang et al., 2018a; Wang et al., 2018b), have shown that Salmonella outbreaks are strongly associated with temperature increases. Significant associations exist between FBDs due to Campylobacter, precipitation and temperature (medium confidence). The timing of heat-associated Campylobacteriosis events varies across countries, with infection rates in the UK appearing to decline immediately after periods of high rainfall (Djennad et al., 2019; Lake et al., 2019; Rosenberg et al., 2018; Yun et al., 2016; Weisent et al., 2014). This suggests the association with climate may be indirect and due to weather conditions that encourage outdoor food preparation and recreational activities (Lake, 2017; Semenza and Paz, 2021). Outbreaks of human and animal Cryptococcus have been reported as being associated with a combination of climatic factors and shifts in host and vector populations (Chang and Chen, 2015; Rickerts, 2019). The prevalence of childhood cryptosporidiosis, which is the second leading cause of moderate to severe diarrhoea among infants in the tropics and subtropics, shows associations with population density and rainfall, with contamination due to Cryptosporidium spp. being 2.61 times higher during and after heavy rain (Lal et al., 2019; Young et al., 2015; Khalil et al., 2018). Studies from Ghana, Guinea Bissau, Tanzania, Kenya and Zambia show a higher prevalence of Cryptosporidium during high rainfall seasons, with some peaks observed before, at the onset or at the end of the rainy season (Squire and Ryan, 2017). 7.2.2.4 Respiratory Tract Infections Climatic risk factors for respiratory tract infections (RTIs) due to multiple pathogens (bacteria, viruses and fungi) include temperature and humidity extremes, dust storms, extreme precipitation events and increased climate variability. Amongst a range of RTIs, pneumonia and influenza represent a significant disease burden (Ferreira-Coimbra et al., 2020; Lafond et al., 2021; McAllister et al., 2019; Wang et al., 2020c). The drivers of pneumonia incidence are complex and include a range of possible non-climate as well as climate factors. For example, chronic diseases (e.g., lung disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and asthma), other comorbidities, a weak immune system, age, gender, community, passive smoking, air pollution and childhood immunisation may confound the climate pneumonia relationship (Miyayo et al., 2021). In temperate regions, the incidence of pneumonia is higher in winter months, but the exact causes of this seasonality remain debated (Mirsaeidi et al., 2016). With regards to temperature, various J-shaped, U-shaped or V-shaped temperature–pneumonia relationships have been reported in the literature (Huang et al., 2018; Kim et al., 2016; Liu et al., 2014; Qiu et al., 2016; Sohn et al., 2019) with such relationships dependent on location. Humidity also appears important but, like temperature, its effect is not consistent across studies – low temperatures and low humidity (Davis et al., 2016), high temperatures ",
    "new_id": 384
  },
  {
    "id": 26159,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the implicit relationship between the focus on current climate impacts and the broader objectives of climate-resilient development pathways, as discussed in the Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Working Group II Contribution to the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The increasing visibility of current climate impacts has shifted emphasis toward understanding risks across all timescales, directly informing the design of sustainable development pathways.",
      "B": "Current climate impacts are treated as isolated events, with little bearing on long-term strategies for climate-resilient development.",
      "C": "Climate-resilient development pathways prioritize economic recovery over addressing current climate impacts, which are considered less significant.",
      "D": "The assessment of current climate impacts is primarily intended to support legal frameworks rather than contribute to adaptation or disaster risk reduction efforts.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "2430",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 WGII.pdf",
    "source_text": "16 2418Chapter 16 Key Risks across Sectors and Regions 16.1 Introduction and Framing 16.1.1 Objective of the Chapter Anthropogenic climate change poses risks to many human and ecological systems. These risks are increasingly visible in our day-to- day lives, including a growing number of disasters that already bear a fingerprint of climate change. There is increasing concern about how these risks will shape the future of our planet—our ecosystems, our well-being and development opportunities. Policymakers are asking what is known about the risks, and what can be done about them. Many people, especially youth, around the world are calling for urgency, ambition and action. Companies are wondering how to manage new threats to their bottom line, or how to grasp new opportunities. On top of this growing concern about climate change, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has exposed vulnerabilities to shocks, significantly aggravated climate-related risks, and posed new questions about how to achieve a green, resilient and inclusive recovery (see Cross-Chapter Box COVID in Chapter 7). The three synthesis chapters of this report (Chapters 16, 17 and 18) aim to address these concerns. They synthesise information from across all thematic and regional chapters of the Working Group II (WGII) IPCC Sixth Assessment Report (AR6) and the recent IPCC Special Reports on Global Warming of 1.5°C, on Climate Change and Land, and on Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate (SR15 (IPCC, 2018a), SRCCL (IPCC, 2019a) and SROCC (IPCC, 2019b)), but also include an independent assessment of the literature, especially literature that cuts across sectors and regions. Chapter 16 lays the groundwork by synthesising the state of knowledge on the observed impacts of climate change (Section 16.2) and ongoing adaptation responses (Section 16.3), the limits to adaptation (Section 16.4), and the key risks we should be concerned about, how these risks evolve with global temperature change, and also how they depend on future development and adaptation efforts (Sections 16.5, 16.6). It thus brings together elements that were assessed in different chapters in previous assessments, especially the Third, Fourth and Fifth Assessment Reports (TAR, AR4 and AR5, respectively). Background on specific methodological aspects of this chapter is provided in Supplementary Material (SM). The strong link between risks, adaptation and development connects this chapter closely to Chapters 17 and 18. Chapter 17 assesses decision -making: what do we know about the ways to manage risks in a warming climate (including in the context of the key risks and limits to adaptation identified in this chapter)? Chapter 18 puts all of this information into the perspective of climate resilient development pathways: how can we achieve sustainable development given the additional challenges posed by climate change? 16.1.2 Risk Framing In the IPCC AR6, ‘risk’ is defined as the potential for adverse conse- quences for human or ecological systems, recognising the diversity of values and objectives associated with such systems. Relevant adverse consequences include those on lives, livelihoods, health and well-being, economic, social and cultural assets and investments, infrastructure, ser - vices (including ecosystem services), ecosystems and species (Chapter 1 this volume, SR15 (IPCC, 2018a)). The AR6 definition explicitly notes that ‘risks can arise from potential impacts of climate change as well as human responses to climate change.’ The main risks assessed here relate to the potential impacts of climate change. In recent years, the growing visibility of current climate impacts has resulted in a stronger focus on understanding and managing such risk across time scales, rather than just for the longer-term future. Examples include the rapid growth in attribution of specific extreme weather events, the use of scientific evidence of climate change impacts in legal cases, and the context of the Paris Agreement’s Article 8 on ‘averting, minimising and addressing loss and damage’ associated with climate change, but also the stronger links between adaptation and disaster risk reduction, including early- warning systems, wider discussions on how to build resilience in the face of a more volatile climate, and attention for limits to adaptation that are already being reached. Of course, the scale of these risks is also determined by the responses to climate change, mainly in how they red",
    "new_id": 385
  },
  {
    "id": 26161,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why subtropical regions less influenced by moisture from the Gulf of Mexico are projected to experience increased aridity despite rising temperatures, according to the Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Working Group II Contribution to the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Decreased total precipitation and higher evaporative demand combine to create drier surface conditions.",
      "A": "Higher temperatures lead to reduced snowpack, which decreases water availability for these regions.",
      "C": "Increased frequency of tropical cyclones results in more rapid evaporation and soil desiccation.",
      "D": "Slower-moving land-falling storms cause prolonged dry periods between precipitation events.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "1950",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 WGII.pdf",
    "source_text": "14 1938Chapter 14 North America High-humidity hazards are projected to increase (medium confidence) in regions around the Gulf of Mexico and southeast North America (US-SE, US-SP , MX-NE, MX-SE) (Zhao et al., 2015). In subtropical regions that are less influenced by moisture from the Gulf of Mexico (including US-SW, US-SP , MX-NW and MX-N), the combination of higher temperature and less total precipitation leads to projections of increased aridity: drier surface conditions, higher evaporative demand by plants and more intense droughts (Ranasinghe et al., 2021; Jones and Gutzler, 2016; Easterling et al., 2017; Escalante-Sandoval and Nuñez-Garcia, 2017). As temperatures rise, snow extent, duration of snow cover and accumulated snowpack are virtually certain to decline in subarctic regions of North America (Gutierrez et al., 2021a; McCrary and Mearns, 2019; Mudryk et al., 2021), with corresponding effects on snow- related hydrological changes (high confidence). These changes include declines in snowmelt runoff (Li et al., 2017), increased evaporative losses during snow ablation (Foster et al., 2016; Milly and Dunne, 2020), as well as increases in the frequency of rain-on-snow events (Jeong and Sushama, 2018a) and consecutive snow drought years in western North America (Marshall et al., 2019a). Climate change is projected to magnify the impact of tropical cyclones in US-NE, MX-NE, US-SP , and US-SE by increasing rainfall (Patricola and Wehner, 2018) and extreme wind speed (high confidence) and slowing the speed of land-falling storms (limited evidence, low confidence) (Seneviratne et al., 2021; Kossin, 2018). The coastal region at severe risk from tropical storms is projected to expand northward within US- NE (medium confidence) (Kossin et al., 2017).Additional reduction in polar sea ice is virtually certain (Ranasinghe et al., 2021; Mudryk et al., 2021), with the North American Arctic projected to be seasonally ice free at least once per decade under 2°C of global warming (high confidence) (IPCC, 2019b; Mioduszewski et al., 2019; Mudryk et al., 2018). Duration of freshwater lake ice across the northern USA and southern Canada is projected to diminish (high confidence) (Ranasinghe et al., 2021; Dibike et al., 2012; Mudryk et al., 2018; Sharma et al., 2019). Ocean surface temperature is very likely to increase in future decades in waters around North America (Jewett and Romanou, 2017; Greenan et al., 2018), but at a slower rate than air temperature over the continent. Rates of change are projected to be relatively higher in northern latitudes, with most rapid warming in summer in the Arctic and Bering Sea (US-AK, CA-NW) (Wang and Overland, 2015; Wang et al., 2018a; Hermann et al., 2019). Sea level rise is virtually certain to continue along North American coastlines except for parts of US-AK and around Hudson Bay (HB) with geographically variable rates of rise (Fox-Kemper et al., 2021; Ranasinghe et al., 2021; see Box 14.4). Relatively greater SLR is projected along the US-SE and MX-SW coastlines and relatively less along CA-BC and US-NW (Fox-Kemper et al., 2021; Ranasinghe et al., 2021; see Box 14.4) (Fasullo and Nerem, 2018; Greenan et al., 2018 IPCC, 2019b). Ocean acidification (OA) along North American coastlines is projected to increase (very high confidence) (Jewett and Romanou, 2017). The frequency and extent of oxygen minimum and hypoxic zones are Frequently Asked Questions FAQ 14.1 | How has climate change contributed to recent extreme events in North America and their impacts? Multiple lines of evidence indicate that climate change is already contributing to more intense and more frequent extreme events across North America. The impacts resulting from extreme events represent a huge challenge for adapting to future climate change. Extreme events are a fundamental part of how we experience weather and climate. Exceptionally hot days, torrential rainfall and other extreme weather events have a direct impact on people, communities and ecosystems. Extreme weather can lead to other impactful events such as droughts, floods or wildfires. In a changing climate, people frequently ask whether extreme events are generally becoming more severe or more frequent, and whether an actual extreme event was caused by climate change. Because really extreme events occur rarely (by definition), it can be very difficult to assess whether the overall severity or frequency of such events has been affected by changing climate. Neverthel",
    "new_id": 386
  },
  {
    "id": 26162,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the implications of combining SSP scenarios with computational models for assessing future vulnerability and adaptation pathways, according to the Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Working Group II Contribution to the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report?",
    "options": {
      "C": "They generate robust projections about risk profiles in possible futures, helping assess the relative influence of different drivers of change.",
      "A": "They provide definitive predictions of future socioeconomic conditions, enabling precise policy formulation.",
      "B": "Their primary function is to eliminate uncertainty in long-term climate projections by focusing on historical data.",
      "D": "They ensure that emergent challenges, such as pandemics, are fully anticipated and integrated into scenario planning.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "1225",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 WGII.pdf",
    "source_text": "8 1213Poverty, Livelihoods and Sustainable Development Chapter 8 8.4 Future Vulnerabilities, Risks and Livelihood Challenges and Consequences for Equity and Sustainability Future climate vulnerability and risks to livelihood security are significantly influenced by present and past development trends, equity and sustainability. Consequently, observed impacts covered in previous sections provide essential insight for enhancing future adaptation and risk reduction. Since the AR5, new research approaches incorporate past lessons to project and assess climate change vulnerability and socioeconomic conditions into the future. Scenario tools and methods are a powerful approach for integrated assessments of emissions pathways, associated warming and development contexts, helpful in guiding analysis of adaptation policy and planning (Berkhout et al., 2014; Birkmann et al., 2021a). Both quantitative and qualitative scenario approaches that assess future vulnerability and risks, as well as livelihood challenges at global, national and local scales, allow experts, planners, decision makers and affected people to articulate and visualise development futures. These approaches can complement emissions pathway scenarios. 8.4.1 Future Exposure, Climate Change Vulnerability and Poverty at the Global Scale The SSPs scenarios orient climate models around possible development pathways that produce future exposure patterns, risk probabilities and vulnerability for future populations (O’Neill et al., 2014; O’Neill et al., 2017a). While the likelihood of any given scenario actually occurring is highly uncertain, they have the advantage of pairing with computational models to generate robust projections about risk profiles in possible futures, and therefore assess the relative influence of different drivers of change. In this way, scenario tools generate pictures of future vulnerability and adaptation pathways, and often have both an analytic and normative function. The decision-making context will determine which specific scenario approach is most appropriate (Rozenberg et al., 2014). Scenarios are limited by stakeholders’ imaginations and, as such, new emergent challenges, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, are difficult to anticipate in scenario planning. Nevertheless, recent studies and forecasts of the impact of COVID-19 on poverty conclude that in the near- and medium-term future major portions of the newly poor will emerge in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia (Laborde et al., 2020b; Sumner et al., 2020). Since these countries are already characterised by high levels of absolute poverty and vulnerability to climate change, it is likely that these regions will face more severe challenges in overcoming vulnerability and will be confronted with a growing adaptation gap. Thus, the implication for scenario planning is that single crises or events, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, might not significantly alter existing vulnerabilities, but rather reinforce them. 8.4.1.1 Exposure and Vulnerability under Different Scenarios and Alternative Development Pathways At the international and national level, the SSPs (O’Neill et al., 2017a) have been developed to outline various development pathways, associated emissions and levels of warming, but also different possible development profiles (i.e., levels of economic growth, poverty, inequality, demographic change, etc.) that are highly relevant for adaptation. Studies using the SSPs to understand multidimensional poverty are few but growing, and underscore that the impacts of climate change on poverty are extremely sensitive to different levels of warming (Byers et al., 2018). Multi-sector risks approximately double between 1.5°C and 2°C global mean temperature (GMT) change, and double again in a +3°C world. Comparing a +1.5°C world pursuing sustainable development (SSP1) to a high-poverty and high-inequality +3°C world (SSP3), Byers et al. (2018) project substantial increases in populations exposed to drought, water stress, heat stress and habitat degradation (see in detail Byers et al., 2018). While in a +1.5°C world exposed populations increase by 7–17%, the increase within a +3°C plus world is 27–51% (Byers et al., 2018; Frame et al., 2018). Populations in Asia and Africa account for more than 80% of the global population of governance (Ziervogel, 2019a), including the adoption of a ‘whole-of-society’ approach that recognises the contributions of non-state actors as adopted in the Cape Town Resilience",
    "new_id": 387
  },
  {
    "id": 26163,
    "question": "Which statement accurately captures the relationship between global warming levels and the projected economic impacts, as implied by the Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Working Group II Contribution to the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The aggregate net economic damages increase non-linearly with warming levels, with disproportionate impacts on developing countries' per capita income.",
      "A": "Economic damages are expected to decrease linearly with higher global warming levels, particularly in developed regions.",
      "B": "Higher global warming is projected to reduce economic damages in developing countries due to increased adaptive capacity over time.",
      "C": "Aggregate economic damages show little variation across regions, with all areas experiencing similar proportional losses relative to income.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "27",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 WGII.pdf",
    "source_text": "15SPM Summary for PolicymakersB.4.4 Climate change and related extreme events will significantly increase ill health and premature deaths from the near- to long-term (high confidence). Globally, population exposure to heatwaves will continue to increase with additional warming, with strong geographical differences in heat-related mortality without additional adaptation (very high confidence). Climate-sensitive food-borne, water-borne, and vector-borne disease risks are projected to increase under all levels of warming without additional adaptation (high confidence). In particular, dengue risk will increase with longer seasons and a wider geographic distribution in Asia, Europe, Central and South America and sub-Saharan Africa, potentially putting additional billions of people at risk by the end of the century (high confidence). Mental health challenges, including anxiety and stress, are expected to increase under further global warming in all assessed regions, particularly for children, adolescents, elderly, and those with underlying health conditions (very high confidence). {4.5, 5.12, Box 5.10, 7.3, Figure 7.9, 8.4, 9.10, Figure 9.32, Figure 9.35, 10.4, Figure 10.11, 11.3, 12.3, Figure 12.5, Figure 12.6, 13.7, Figure 13.23, Figure 13.24, 14.5, 15.3, CCP6.2} B.4.5 Climate change risks to cities, settlements and key infrastructure will rise rapidly in the mid- and long-term with further global warming, especially in places already exposed to high temperatures, along coastlines, or with high vulnerabilities (high confidence). Globally, population change in low-lying cities and settlements will lead to approximately a billion people projected to be at risk from coastal-specific climate hazards in the mid-term under all scenarios, including in Small Islands (high confidence). The population potentially exposed to a 100-year coastal flood is projected to increase by about 20% if global mean sea level rises by 0.15 m relative to 2020 levels; this exposed population doubles at a 0.75 m rise in mean sea level and triples at 1.4 m without population change and additional adaptation (medium confidence). Sea level rise poses an existential threat for some Small Islands and some low-lying coasts (medium confidence). By 2100 the value of global assets within the future 1-in-100 year coastal floodplains is projected to be between US$7.9 and US$12.7 trillion (2011 value) under RCP4.5, rising to between US$8.8 and US$14.2 trillion under RCP8.5 (medium confidence). Costs for maintenance and reconstruction of urban infrastructure, including building, transportation, and energy will increase with global warming level (medium confidence), the associated functional disruptions are projected to be substantial particularly for cities, settlements and infrastructure located on permafrost in cold regions and on coasts (high confidence). {6.2, 9.9, 10.4, 13.6, 13.10, 15.3, 16.5, CCP2.1, CCP2.2, CCP5.3, CCP6.2, CCB SLR, SROCC 2.3, SROCC CCB9} B.4.6 Projected estimates of global aggregate net economic damages generally increase non-linearly with global warming levels (high confidence).35 The wide range of global estimates, and the lack of comparability between methodologies, does not allow for identification of a robust range of estimates (high confidence). The existence of higher estimates than assessed in AR5 indicates that global aggregate economic impacts could be higher than previous estimates (low confidence).36 Significant regional variation in aggregate economic damages from climate change is projected (high confidence) with estimated economic damages per capita for developing countries often higher as a fraction of income (high confidence). Economic damages, including both those represented and those not represented in economic markets, are projected to be lower at 1.5°C than at 3°C or higher global warming levels (high confidence). {4.4, 9.11, 11.5, 13.10, Box 14.6, 16.5, CWGB ECONOMIC} B.4.7 In the mid- to long-term, displacement will increase with intensification of heavy precipitation and associated flooding, tropical cyclones, drought and, increasingly, sea level rise (high confidence). At progressive levels of warming, involuntary migration from regions with high exposure and low adaptive capacity would occur (medium confidence). Compared to other socioeconomic factors the influence of climate on conflict is assessed as relatively weak (high confidence). Along long-term socioeconomic pathways that reduce non-climatic drivers, ri",
    "new_id": 388
  },
  {
    "id": 26166,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the nuanced relationship between financial instruments and their capacity to deliver adaptation benefits, as implied in the Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Working Group II Contribution to the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Debt instruments, when coupled with capacity-building measures such as technical assistance, are more likely to deliver adaptation benefits.",
      "B": "Equity-based instruments inherently provide higher adaptation benefits due to their alignment with business-related risks.",
      "C": "Insurance policies are considered the most effective financial instrument for delivering adaptation benefits because they directly compensate for all types of climate-related losses.",
      "D": "Grants are the only financial instruments capable of delivering adaptation benefits without any associated risk or repayment obligations.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "838",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 WGII.pdf",
    "source_text": "5 826Chapter 5 Food, Fibre and Other Ecosystem Products Table 5.27 | Major types of financial instruments suitable to adaptation finance in agriculture, fisheries, aquaculture and forestry sectors (adapted from Havemann et al., 2020). Financial instrument Description Equity: Ownership stake in a company (e.g., agricultural technology company; processing company) or collective investment vehicle (e.g., agriculture fund; Timber Investment Management Organization; commodity index fund) providing returns (via dividends and/or sale of equity shares) corresponding to business-related risk (e.g., higher return for higher risk and/or lower liquidity) Listed equities Ownership of shares in a company listed in a public market Private equity Ownership of shares in a company or other assets Junior or risk-absorbing equity Ownership of lower-tier shares in a company (e.g., common stock) or collective investment vehicle (e.g., first-loss tranche) Debt: Capital provided directly or indirectly (via banks or other third-party institutions) to users with defined repayment terms (i.e., timeframe, interest rate); more likely to deliver adaptation benefits when coupled with capacity building (e.g., technical assistance, education, analytics) (Woodard et al., 2019) Loan, bond, note, credit lineDirect or indirect provision of capital (e.g., operating loans; dedicated credit line for agricultural trade); concessionary loans may allow for below-market interest rates Soft loan Direct interest-free loan (e.g., funds provided in advance of good/service delivery) Emergency loanLending in response to climate risks or impacts with repayment terms (e.g., return period) that consider necessary relief, recovery and reconstruction Catastrophe bondRisk transfer instrument in which insurers or reinsurers provide high interest payments to investors in exchange for a payout (and repayment deferment or forgiveness) activated by specific events (e.g., extreme weather) Impact bond Subsidised investment providing capital upfront or based on defined outcomes Subordinated loanConcessionary capital with a junior position (i.e., accepting higher risk of non-repayment and / or lower rate of return on investment) relative to other investors Securitised investments Aggregation of equity or debt to offer marketable securities to a wider pool of investors with different risk–return appetites Guarantees: Commercial and concessionary guarantees that provide compensation for losses due to specified risks (e.g., political risk, performance risk); more likely to deliver adaptation benefits when linked to robust underwriting standards and verification protocols (Woodard et al., 2019) Credit guarantee Compensation for specified losses incurred by agricultural lenders Payment, performance, surety bondsDe-risking mechanism for transactions between providers and buyers of goods/services; may be used in trade finance and other forms of intermediation Insurance: Policies and other financial instruments that provide compensation for losses based on defined terms and conditions. Production insuranceCompensation for specified losses related to production (e.g., insurance indexed to specific weather events) or supply chains (e.g., shipping insurance) Market and price insurance Compensation for specified market-related losses (e.g., price or currency fluctuation) Grants: Concessionary funding provided by public or philanthropic entities to support climate adaptation costs or outcomes (no expectation of repayment) Direct supportFunding for provision of goods (e.g., fertilizer, seeds, nursery stock) or services (e.g., technical assistance, product storage) to producers, local companies or intermediaries (e.g., for agronomic or business management expertise); can reduce credit risk when part of blended finance arrangements Performance-based grantsGrants or other concessionary funding contingent on achievement of defined adaptation outcomes (with possible third-party verification requirement); may support development and testing of new approaches (i.e., design funding; challenges/prizes) Governmental instruments Policy incentivesPublic policies designed to stimulate adaptation action among targeted groups (e.g., producers, consumers, agri-businesses, financiers) including direct or indirect subsidies (e.g., producer payments, tax breaks, health insurance), procurement policies (e.g., low carbon and sustainability criteria; nutrition-sensitive school feeding programmes) and other fiscal me",
    "new_id": 389
  },
  {
    "id": 26167,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the limitations and feasibility of implementing nature-based measures in coastal areas, as described in the Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Working Group II Contribution to the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Feasibility of nature-based measures depends on specific local conditions, including physical, ecological, institutional, and socioeconomic factors, and may be constrained by land-use conflicts or lack of space.",
      "A": "Nature-based measures are universally applicable in all coastal regions regardless of urbanization levels or sediment availability.",
      "C": "Successful implementation of nature-based measures requires only general knowledge of coastal ecosystems and basic monitoring practices.",
      "D": "The combination of nature-based measures with hard protection strategies is less effective than using either approach independently due to technical limits in low-lying areas.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "2185",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 WGII.pdf",
    "source_text": "CCP2 2173Cities and Settlements by the Sea Cross-Chapter Paper 2 in Chapter 2; Section 2.2.4; Narayan et al., 2016; Depietri and McPhearson, 2017; Morris et al., 2018; Reguero et al., 2018; Chausson et al., 2020; Du et al., 2020; NIES and ISME, 2020; Reguero et al., 2020; Sudmeier-Rieux et al., 2021). Nature-based measures can reduce inland propagation of extreme sea levels (high tides, storm surges; high agreement; Godfroy et al., 2019; James et al., 2020; Zhu et al., 2020b), with vertical reduction in water levels ranging from 5 to 50 cm/km behind large mangroves and marshes (Stark et al., 2015; Van Coppenolle and Temmerman, 2020). They also attenuate wind-driven waves and reduce shoreline erosion (high agreement), and this can be by as much as 90% over stretches of 10–100 m for dense mangrove and marsh vegetation (medium evidence; Li et al., 2014; Möller et al., 2014; Vuik et al., 2016; Vuik et al., 2018; Godfroy et al., 2019; Zhu et al., 2020a) and up to 40% for dunes (Feagin et al., 2019). Coral reefs on average reduce wave energy by 97% (Ferrario et al., 2014). Seagrass meadows attenuate wind waves to a lesser extent, and are only effective in water <0.2 m deep (Ondiviela et al., 2014; Narayan et al., 2016; Morris et al., 2019). Within limits, coastal ecosystems can respond to RSL through sediment accretion and lateral inland movement (Kirwan et al., 2016; Schuerch et al., 2018). Nature-based measures have the greatest potential in coastal deltas and estuaries, where human populations are exposed, but large ecosystems, like mangroves and marshes, can be conserved and restored (Menéndez et al., 2020; Van Coppenolle and Temmerman, 2020). Their feasibility depends on physical, ecological, institutional and socioeconomic conditions that are typically locality dependent (Temmerman and Kirwan, 2015; Arkema et al., 2017); space may not be available in certain places (e.g., intensive urbanization on the shoreline), or these measures may conflict with other human demands for scarce land (Tian et al., 2016). Successful nature-based measures require site-specific knowledge and science-based design, pilot monitoring and adaptive upscaling (Evans et al., 2017; Nesshöver et al., 2017), as well as a more rigorous understanding of long-term performance, maintenance and costs (Kumar et al., 2021). Nature-based measures are increasingly implemented in combination with hard protection measures (Hu et al., 2019; Schoonees et al., 2019; Morris et al., 2020; Oanh et al., 2020). They can reduce dike failure and increase design life where sediment accretion allows wetlands to respond to SLR (Jongman, 2018; Vuik et al., 2019; Zhu et al., 2020a). There is high agreement that a hybrid strategy combining hard and soft protection strategies is more effective and less costly under many circumstances, and there is limited evidence that technical limits will be encountered with such a strategy for low-lying C&S built on soft or permeable soil or with high exposure to monsoons and river discharges (Spalding et al., 2014; Sutton-Grier et al., 2015; Pontee et al., 2016; Morris et al., 2018; Reguero et al., 2018; Du et al., 2020; Morris et al., 2020; Seddon et al., 2020; Waryszak et al., 2021). CCP2.3.3 Accommodation of the Built Environment The most effective solution for limiting the growth of climate risks in C&S by the sea is to avoid new development in coastal locations prone to major flooding and/or SLR impacts (very high confidence; Cross-Chapter Box SLR in Chapter 3; Oppenheimer et al., 2019; Doberstein et al., 2019). For existing C&S, accommodation includes biophysical and institutional responses to reduce exposure and/or vulnerability of coastal residents, human activities, ecosystems and the built environment, enabling continued habitation of coastal C&S (Oppenheimer et al., 2019). Next to hard protection, accommodation is the most widely used adaptation strategy across all archetypes to date (high confidence; Sayers et al., 2015; Olazabal et al., 2019; Le, 2020). Measures include elevation or flood proofing of houses and other infrastructure (Garschagen, 2015; Aerts et al., 2018; Buchori et al., 2018; Jamero et al., 2018; Tamura et al., 2019), spatial planning (e.g., Duy et al., 2018), amphibious building designs (Nilubon et al., 2016), increasing water storage and/or drainage capacity within C&S (Chan et al., 2018), early warning systems and disaster responses (Hissel et al., 2014) and slum upgrading (Jain et al., 2017; Olthuis et al",
    "new_id": 390
  },
  {
    "id": 28960,
    "question": "Which scenario would most likely lead to a monetary loss that falls outside the scope of the disclosure requirements outlined in the Tobacco – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Legal fees incurred while defending against allegations of deceptive advertising practices.",
      "A": "A settlement reached with regulators over misleading health claims on tobacco packaging.",
      "B": "A criminal penalty imposed for violating laws related to tobacco sponsorship at public events.",
      "D": "A fine resulting from non-compliance with mandatory warning label regulations enforced by a jurisdictional authority.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "9",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Tobacco.pdf",
    "source_text": "Marketing Practices Topic Summary Tobacco product labelling and marketing is regulated heavily internationally. The World Health Organization ’s Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (WHO FCTC) has encouraged many countries to introduce new, stricter regulatory approaches to prevent people from using tobacco at an early age through transparent advertising about tobacco’s health risks. The industry has faced costly legal battles related to the marketing and advertising of its products. Marketing for combustible and new non-combustible products must balance regulatory requirements with the need to reach new markets. Failing to effectively manage negative social externalities may result in further unfavourable regulation and may impair the industry ’s social licence to operate. Entities that effectively manage this issue may avoid extraordinary expenses, preserve market share and decrease contingent liabilities. Metrics FB-TB-270a.1. Total amount of monetary losses as a result of legal proceedings associated with marketing, labelling, or advertising practices 1The entity shall disclose the total amount of monetary losses incurred during the reporting period resulting from legal proceedings associated with marketing or labelling practices, such as those related to enforcement of laws and regulations on nutrient content claims, health claims, other unfair or deceptive claims, or misbranded labelling. 2The legal proceedings shall include any adjudicative proceeding involving the entity, whether before a court, a regulator, an arbitrator or otherwise. 3The losses shall include all monetary liabilities to the opposing party or to others (whether as the result of settlement, verdict after trial or otherwise), including fines and other monetary liabilities incurred during the reporting period as a result of civil actions (for example, civil judgements or settlements), regulatory proceedings (for example, penalties, disgorgement or restitution) and criminal actions (for example, criminal judgements, penalties or restitution) brought by any entity (for example, governmental, business or individual). 4The scope of monetary losses shall exclude legal and other fees and expenses incurred by the entity in its defence. 5The scope of the disclosure shall include legal proceedings associated with the enforcement of applicable jurisdictional laws or regulations. Note to FB-TB-270a.1 1The entity shall briefly describe the nature (for example, judgement or order issued after trial, settlement, guilty plea, deferred prosecution agreement or non-prosecution agreement) and context (for example, related to warning labels, advertising bans, promotion or sponsorship) of all monetary losses resulting from legal proceedings. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |TOBACCO |9",
    "new_id": 391
  },
  {
    "id": 29582,
    "question": "Which scenario would disqualify an entity from counting certain biomass-derived energy sources as renewable energy under the outlined framework in the Construction Materials – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The biomass comes from agricultural waste such as rice, peanut shells, and coffee husks without additional certification.",
      "A": "The biomass is sourced from materials certified by the Forest Stewardship Council.",
      "B": "The biomass qualifies under an applicable jurisdictional renewable portfolio standard but lacks third-party certification.",
      "C": "The biomass is eligible according to the Green-e Framework but was not explicitly paired with renewable energy certificates (RECs) or Guarantees of Origin (GOs).",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "15",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Construction Materials.pdf",
    "source_text": "3.1 Alternative sources of energy include used tyres, spent solvents and waste oils, processed municipal solid waste, household wastes, agricultural wastes such as rice, peanut shells and coffee husks, animal meal and sewage sludge. 4 The entity shall disclose (4) the percentage of energy it consumed that was renewable energy. 4.1 Renewable energy is defined as energy from sources that are replenished at a rate greater than or equal to their rate of depletion, such as geothermal, wind, solar, hydro and biomass. 4.2 The percentage shall be calculated as renewable energy consumption divided by total energy consumption. 4.3 The scope of renewable energy includes renewable fuel the entity consumed, renewable energy the entity directly produced and renewable energy the entity purchased, if purchased through a renewable power purchase agreement (PPA) that explicitly includes renewable energy certificates (RECs) or Guarantees of Origin (GOs), a Green ‐e Energy Certified utility or supplier programme, or other green power products that explicitly include RECs or GOs, or for which Green ‐e Energy Certified RECs are paired with grid electricity. 4.3.1 For any renewable electricity generated on-site, any RECs and GOs shall be retained (not sold) and retired or cancelled on behalf of the entity for the entity to claim them as renewable energy. 4.3.2 For renewable PPAs and green power products, the agreement shall explicitly include and convey that RECs and GOs be retained or replaced and retired or cancelled on behalf of the entity for the entity to claim them as renewable energy. 4.3.3 The renewable portion of the electricity grid mix that is outside of the control or influence of the entity is excluded from the scope of renewable energy. 4.4 For the purposes of this disclosure, the scope of renewable energy from biomass sources is limited to materials certified to a third-party standard (for example, Forest Stewardship Council, Sustainable Forest Initiative, Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification or American Tree Farm System), materials considered eligible sources of supply according to the Green-e Framework for Renewable Energy Certification, Version 1.0 (2017) or Green-e regional standards, or materials eligible for an applicable jurisdictional renewable portfolio standard. 5The entity shall apply conversion factors consistently for all data reported under this disclosure, such as the use of HHVs for fuel usage (including biofuels) and conversion of kilowatt hours (kWh) to GJ (for energy data including electricity from solar or wind energy). SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS |15",
    "new_id": 392
  },
  {
    "id": 29590,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the conditions under which an entity must disclose water-related metrics in locations with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress, as described in the Construction Materials – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The entity must disclose both water withdrawn and water consumed as percentages of their respective totals in such locations.",
      "B": "The entity must disclose water consumed as a percentage of total water withdrawn in such locations.",
      "C": "The entity is required to disclose only water withdrawn, without considering water consumption, in such locations.",
      "D": "The entity must calculate water stress levels independently, without relying on the WRI’s Aqueduct tool classifications.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "17-18",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Construction Materials.pdf",
    "source_text": "4The entity shall analyse all its operations for water risks and identify activities that withdraw and consume water in locations with High (40 –80%) or Extremely High (>80%) Baseline Water Stress as classified by the World Resources Institute ’s (WRI) Water Risk Atlas tool, Aqueduct. 5The entity shall disclose water withdrawn in locations with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress as a percentage of the total water withdrawn. 6The entity shall disclose water consumed in locations with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress as a percentage of the total water consumed. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS |17\n\n[Page 18]\nWaste Management Topic Summary Construction materials production recycling rates are high. However, waste from production processes, pollution control devices and from hazardous waste management activities present a regulatory risk and can increase operating costs. Cement kiln dust (CKD) —consisting of fine-grained, solid, highly alkaline waste removed from cement kiln exhaust gas by air pollution control devices —is the most significant waste category in the industry. Regulatory risk remains high from evolving environmental laws. Entities that reduce waste streams —hazardous waste streams in particular —and recycle by-products, can reduce regulatory and litigation risks and costs. Metrics EM-CM-150a.1. Amount of waste generated, percentage hazardous and percentage recycled 1 The entity shall disclose the amount of waste generated in metric tonnes. 1.1 Waste is defined as anything for which the entity has no further use, and which is discarded or released to the environment. 1.2 The scope includes slags, dusts, sludges, used oil and other solid wastes that meet the above definition. 1.3 The scope excludes gaseous waste. 2The entity shall disclose the percentage of waste generated that was hazardous. 2.1 The percentage of hazardous waste shall be calculated as the weight hazardous waste as defined in accordance with the applicable jurisdictional, legal or regulatory framework where the waste was generated divided by the total weight of waste material. 2.2 Hazardous waste generally displays the following characteristics: ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity or toxicity. 2.3 The entity may use United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal for the purposes of defining hazardous waste for operations located in jurisdictions that lack applicable legal or regulatory definitions. 3 The entity shall disclose the percentage of waste generated that was recycled. 3.1 The percentage recycled shall be calculated as the weight of waste material reused, plus the weight recycled or remanufactured (through treatment or processing) by the entity, plus the amount sent externally for further recycling, divided by the total weight of waste material. 3.1.1 Reused materials are defined as those recovered products or components of products used for the same purpose for which they were conceived. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS |18",
    "new_id": 393
  },
  {
    "id": 29591,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the implications of using alternative fuels in construction materials production, as described in the Construction Materials – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Proper management of alternative fuels can lower both energy costs and greenhouse gas emissions, though entities must minimize associated harmful air pollutant releases.",
      "A": "Alternative fuels like scrap tyres and waste oil are primarily used to reduce reliance on grid electricity, even if they increase greenhouse gas emissions.",
      "C": "The use of alternative fuels is discouraged due to unavoidable releases of harmful air pollutants that outweigh potential energy cost savings.",
      "D": "Alternative fuels eliminate the need for purchased electricity, thereby addressing all Scope 2 emissions linked to energy consumption.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "14",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Construction Materials.pdf",
    "source_text": "Energy Management Topic Summary The production of construction materials requires significant energy, sourced primarily from direct fossil fuel combustion as well as from purchased electricity. Energy-intense production has implications for climate change, and electricity purchases from the grid can create indirect Scope 2 emissions. Construction materials entities also use alternative fuels for kilns, such as scrap tyres and waste oil —often waste generated by other industries. If properly managed, these can lower energy costs and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. However, potentially negative impacts could occur, such as releases of harmful air pollutants that entities need to minimise to obtain net benefits from using such fuels. Decisions about use of alternative fuels, renewable energy and on-site generation of electricity (versus purchases from the grid) can be important in influencing both the costs and reliability of energy supply. Affordable, easily accessible and reliable energy is an important competitive factor in this industry, with purchased fuels and electricity accounting for a significant proportion of total production costs. How a construction materials entity manages energy efficiency, reliance on different types of energy and associated sustainability risks, and access to alternative sources of energy may influence its profitability. Metrics EM-CM-130a.1. (1) Total energy consumed, (2) percentage grid electricity, (3) percentage alternative and (4) percentage renewable 1The entity shall disclose (1) the total amount of energy it consumed as an aggregate figure, in gigajoules (GJ). 1.1 The scope of energy consumption includes energy from all sources, including energy purchased from external sources and energy produced by the entity itself (self-generated). For example, direct fuel usage, purchased electricity, and heating, cooling and steam energy are all included within the scope of energy consumption. 1.2 The scope of energy consumption includes only energy directly consumed by the entity during the reporting period. 1.3 In calculating energy consumption from fuels and biofuels, the entity shall use higher heating values (HHV), also known as gross calorific values (GCV), which are measured directly or taken from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2 The entity shall disclose (2) the percentage of energy it consumed that was supplied from grid electricity. 2.1 The percentage shall be calculated as purchased grid electricity consumption divided by total energy consumption. 3The entity shall disclose (3) the percentage of energy it consumed from alternative sources, in terms of its energy content. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS |14",
    "new_id": 394
  },
  {
    "id": 31781,
    "question": "Which scenario would most likely necessitate a company to recognize a new provision or revise an existing one due to climate-related legislative changes, as discussed in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures – 2023 Status Report?",
    "options": {
      "C": "A company anticipates that new laws will require earlier decommissioning of long-lived assets, but the exact cost implications remain undefined as the legislation is still in draft form.",
      "A": "A carbon tax is introduced, prompting companies to retire GHG-emitting assets sooner than planned, despite no legal obligation to do so.",
      "B": "The development of lower-carbon technologies leads a company to replace its production-related assets earlier than expected, without any direct legal mandate.",
      "D": "A jurisdiction passes a law accelerating the decommissioning timeline for coal plants, and the associated future cash flows can now be reliably estimated.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "64",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Status 2023.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures A. State of Climate-Related Financial Disclosures B. Financial Statement Considerations C. Case Studies on Scope 3 GHG Emissions D. TCFD-Aligned Requirements and Related Initiatives E. Types of Financial Impact and Associated Drivers F. Insights Gained and View on Future Work Appendicesrequirements in IAS 36.35.78 If extending the forecast period is not possible, adjusting the cash flows and the long-term growth rate in the terminal value formula to reflect the impact of climate-related matters can be challenging when different growth rates and/or profit margins are expected in future periods. Asset Useful Lives As various jurisdictions work towards transitioning to low-carbon economies, companies’ use of certain assets may be affected. The development or emergence of new, lower-carbon technologies may lead to companies replacing their production-related assets earlier than originally expected. In addition, the introduction of laws and regulations to limit companies’ GHG emissions — such as a carbon tax — may lead companies to retire GHG emissions producing assets sooner than planned to avoid higher costs. These and other events related to climate change could affect the useful lives of companies’ assets, which they may need to consider when reviewing the useful lives of their assets at each annual reporting date (or more frequently). Companies in carbon intensive industries such as oil and gas, utilities, coal, and metals and mining likely face a higher risk of the useful lives assigned to some of their assets being significantly shortened, resulting in an acceleration of the depreciation/amortization charged to the income statement. An asset’s useful life is defined as the period of time over which a company expects to use the asset or the number of production or similar units that it expects to obtain from the asset.79 Provisions and Contingent Liabilities Another section in the financial statements that involves developing estimates with measurement uncertainty and could be affected by climate- related issues is provisions and contingent 78 IAS 36.35 states that detailed, explicit, and reliable financial budgets/forecasts of future cash flows for periods longer than five years are generally not available. For this reason, management’s estimates of future cash flows are based on the most recent budgets/forecasts for a maximum of five years. Management may use cash flow projections based on financial budgets/forecasts over a period longer than five years if it is confident that these projections are reliable and it can demonstrate its ability, based on past experience, to forecast cash flows accurately over that longer period. IFRS, IAS 36 Impairment of Assets , May 2013. 79 IFRS, IAS 16 Property, Plant and Equipment , May 2020 (paragraph 16.6) and IFRS, IAS 38 Intangible Assets , May 2014 (paragraph 38.8). 80 A provision is a liability of uncertain timing or amount. IFRS, IAS 37 Provisions, Contingent Liabilities and Contingent Assets, May 2020 (paragraph 37.10). 81 A decommissioning or asset retirement obligation may need to be recognized for an obligation associated with the decommissioning or retirement of a tangible long-lived asset (such as coal, oil and gas, and chemicals and cement plants) to the extent that the company is obliged to rectify damage already caused, as per IAS 37.19. IFRS, IAS 37 Provisions, Contingent Liabilities and Contingent Assets, May 2020. 82 IFRS, IAS 37 Provisions, Contingent Liabilities and Contingent Assets, May 2020 (paragraph 37.50). 83 IFRS, IAS 37 Provisions, Contingent Liabilities and Contingent Assets, May 2020 (paragraph 37.10). 84 IFRS, “ Connectivity in Practice: The IASB’s New Project On Climate-Related Risks in the Financial Statements ,” March 23, 2023. liabilities.80 As jurisdictions take actions to address climate change, they may pass new laws that could result in new or changed provisions or require disclosure of a contingent liability by affected companies. For example, a law passed to accelerate the timing for the decommissioning of long-lived assets such as those related to coal or oil and gas could lead to companies needing to revise existing decommissioning provisions based on the impact of discounting future cash flows.81 Where the details of a proposed new law have yet to be finalized, the cost that will be required to meet the legislation is not required to be recognized until the proposed legislation i",
    "new_id": 395
  },
  {
    "id": 31796,
    "question": "Which individual's role most directly bridges the gap between regulatory oversight and practical implementation of climate-related financial disclosures, as discussed in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures – 2023 Status Report?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Mary Schapiro, acting as Vice Chair for Global Public Policy at Bloomberg LP.",
      "A": "Martin Skancke, as Chair of the Risk Committee at Storebrand.",
      "B": "Rupert Thorne, serving as Deputy to the Secretary General of the Financial Stability Board.",
      "C": "Russell Picot, providing advisory support as the former Group Chief Accounting Officer of HSBC.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "129-130",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Status 2023.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures A. State of Climate-Related Financial Disclosures B. Financial Statement Considerations C. Case Studies on Scope 3 GHG Emissions D. TCFD-Aligned Requirements and Related Initiatives E. Types of Financial Impact and Associated Drivers F. Insights Gained and View on Future Work AppendicesAppendix 1: Task Force Members CHAIRMAN AND VICE CHAIRS Michael Bloomberg Chair Founder Bloomberg LP and Bloomberg Philanthropies Denise Pavarina Vice Chair Board Member Banco Bradesco S.A. Yeo Lian Sim Vice Chair Special Advisor, Diversity Singapore Exchange Graeme Pitkethly Vice Chair Chief Financial Officer Unilever MEMBERS Jane Ambachtsheer Global Head of Sustainability BNP Paribas Asset Management Richard Cantor Vice Chair Moody’s Investors Service Rosanna Fusco Head of Climate Change Strategy and Positioning Eni Imre Guba Director and Corporate Reporting Specialist S&P Global Ratings Geraldine Leegwater Chief Investment Management and Member of the Executive Committee PGGM Ruixia Liu Chief Expert of Task Force of Climate Risk Management Industrial and Commercial Bank of China Masaaki Nagamura Fellow, International Initiatives Tokio Marine Holdings, Inc. Catherine Saire Partner, Sustainability Services DeloitteDavid Blood Senior Partner Generation Investment Management Koushik Chatterjee Group Executive Director, Finance and Corporate Tata Steel Limited Alan X. Gómez Hernández Co-founder Mexico TCFD Consortium Thomas Kusterer Chief Financial Officer EnBW Energie Baden-Wurttemberg AG Mark Lewis Head of Climate Research Andurand Capital Management Richard Manley Managing Director, Head of Sustainable Investing Global Leadership Team CPP Investments Mathew Nelson Partner, Oceania Chief Sustainability Officer EY Ashley Schulten Head of ESG Investment, Global Fixed Income BlackRock 120\n\n[Page 130]\nThe Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures A. State of Climate-Related Financial Disclosures B. Financial Statement Considerations C. Case Studies on Scope 3 GHG Emissions D. TCFD-Aligned Requirements and Related Initiatives E. Types of Financial Impact and Associated Drivers F. Insights Gained and View on Future Work AppendicesMartin Skancke Chair, Risk Committee Storebrand Lucy Thomas Head of Sustainable Investing and Impact UBS Asset Management Steve Waygood Chief Responsible Investment Officer Aviva Investors Martin Weymann Head Group Sustainability Swiss Re Jon Williams Partner, Sustainability and Climate Change PwC (Until June 2023)Roslyn Stein Group Head of Climate and Biodiversity AXA (Until August 2023) Sylvain Vanston Executive Director, Climate Investment Research MSCI Simon Weaver Partner, Co-Head of Climate Risk and Strategy KPMG Fiona Wild Group Climate and Sustainability Officer BHP SPECIAL ADVISOR Russell Picot Chair, Trustee Board HSBC Bank (U.K.) Pension Scheme Former Group Chief Accounting Officer, HSBC Deputy Chair, Chair of Investment Committee Universities Superannuation Scheme Limited SECRETARIAT Mary Schapiro Vice Chair for Global Public Policy and Special Advisor to the Founder and Chair Bloomberg LP Mara Childress Director, Global Public Policy Bloomberg LP Stacy Coleman TCFD Secretariat Curtis Ravenel TCFD Secretariat FINANCIAL STABILITY BOARD OBSERVERS Rupert Thorne Deputy to the Secretary General Jürgen Kirchhof Secretariat Member This report was developed with the support of Bloomberg LP’s Tom Coleman and Boston Consulting Group’s Roy Choudhury, Veronica Chau, Lorenzo Fantini, Jesper Nielsen, Arjun Nath, Mahmoud Raya, Giovanni Covazzi, Alexander Puutio, Sofia Wiklund, Maria Vittoria Maranzano, Roni Grader, Kristin John, Em Cruz, and Kieran Anderson. 121",
    "new_id": 396
  },
  {
    "id": 31808,
    "question": "Which inference regarding the implementation of mandatory reporting requirements across jurisdictions is most strongly supported by the text, as discussed in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures – 2023 Status Report?",
    "options": {
      "A": "In the United Kingdom, occupational pension schemes with assets exceeding £1 billion were required to comply one year later than those with assets exceeding £5 billion.",
      "B": "Mandatory reporting was uniformly applied to all industries in Switzerland starting in 2021.",
      "C": "The phased approach for implementing reporting requirements in Singapore excludes financial institutions from initial compliance.",
      "D": "New Zealand’s disclosure requirements for banks and insurers were introduced simultaneously due to their shared regulatory framework.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "93",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Status 2023.pdf",
    "source_text": "A. State of Climate-Related Financial Disclosures B. Financial Statement Considerations C. Case Studies on Scope 3 GHG Emissions D. TCFD-Aligned Requirements and Related Initiatives E. Types of Financial Impact and Associated Drivers F. Insights Gained and View on Future Work Appendices The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures(footnotes)145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 The Task Force reviewed whether these final and proposed 145 TCFD-aligned reporting requirements apply to “Main Market” listed issuers, which are defined in the Main Market Listing Requirements . 146 All issuers were required to report on a “comply or explain” basis beginning with their 2019 annual reports; and mandatory reporting became effective three years later, with 2022 annual reports. 147 All issuers are required to report on a “comply or explain” basis for the year beginning on January 1, 2022. See SGX Group, Practice Note 7.6 Sustainability Reporting Guide , June 20, 2016. Issuers in the financial; agriculture, food, and forest products; and energy industries were subject to mandatory reporting beginning on January 1, 2023. 148 Issuers in the transportation and materials and buildings industries are subject to mandatory reporting beginning on January 1, 2024. 149 See the press releases for “ Guidelines for Domestic Banks’ Climate Risk Financial Disclosure ” and “ Guidelines on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures of Insurance Companies .” 150 See The Companies Regulations 2022 and The Limited Liability Partnerships Regulations 2022 . 151 See p. 6 of the proposed requirements for a summary of the types of large listed and unlisted companies and financial institutions in scope. 152 See Proposed National Instrument 51-107 Disclosure of Climate-Related Matters , October 18, 2021 (pp. 6-11). 153 See pp. 15-16 of the consultation paper for a summary of the phase in for listed companies and large non-listed companies. 154 See p. 290 of the proposed rule for a summary of the phase-in for specific types of registrants. Table D1 TCFD-Aligned Disclosure Requirements in Select Jurisdictions (continued) Final Requirements Jurisdiction: Authority Scope ThresholdTime FrameReport Type Malaysia: Bursa Malaysia Stock Exchange Specific listed issuers145FY 2025 Mauritius: Central Bank of Mauritius Licensed banks and deposit taking non-banks FY 2022 New Zealand: New Zealand Government Issuers: securities >NZ$60M FY 2023 Banks: assets >NZ$1B FY 2023 Asset managers: AUM >NZ$1B FY 2023 Insurers with premium income >NZ$250M FY 2023 Philippines: Securities and Exchange CommissionAll registrants146 FY 2022 Singapore: Singapore Exchange Specific industries147FY 2023 Specific industries148FY 2024 Switzerland: Federal Council Employees ≥500 and assets >₣20M or revenues >₣40MFY 2024 Switzerland: Financial Market Supervisory AuthorityAssets >₣100B or AUM >₣500B FY 2021 Taiwan: Financial Supervisory Commission Banks and insurance companies149FY 2023 Thailand: Central Bank of Thailand All financial institutions FY 2023 United Kingdom: Financial Conduct Authority Issuers of standard-listed shares and GDR FY 2022 Asset managers: AUM >£50B Asset owners: AUM >£25BFY 2022 Asset managers and asset owners: AUM >£5B FY 2023 United Kingdom: U.K. Parliament Specific U.K. companies and LLPs >500 employees150 FY 2022 Occupational pension schemes: assets >£5B FY 2022 Occupational pension schemes: assets >£1B FY 2023 Proposed Requirements Jurisdiction: Authority Scope ThresholdTime FrameReport Type Australia: Treasury Large entities151 Phased Canada: Canadian Securities Administrators Regulated issuers152 Phased Hong Kong: Hong Kong Stock Exchange All issuers FY 2024 Singapore: The Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority and Singapore Exchange All issuers and large non-listed companies153Phased United States: Securities and Exchange CommissionAll registrants154Phased LEGEND Scope Report Type Listed Companies Financial Filing/Annual Report Listed and Private Companies Other Financial Institutions Sustainability Report Other 84",
    "new_id": 397
  },
  {
    "id": 31813,
    "question": "Which inference is most strongly supported regarding the relationship between challenges in reporting and the types of investments involved, as discussed in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures – 2023 Status Report?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Over three-quarters of asset owners identifying insufficient information as a challenge attribute it primarily to public companies rather than private investments or other sources.",
      "A": "Insufficient information from investee companies disproportionately affects reporting on private investments compared to public companies.",
      "C": "The challenge of insufficient information is equally distributed across public companies, private investments, and other sources.",
      "D": "Private investments are cited as the predominant source of insufficient information by asset owners facing challenges in reporting metrics and targets.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "45",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Status 2023.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures A. State of Climate-Related Financial Disclosures B. Financial Statement Considerations C. Case Studies on Scope 3 GHG Emissions D. TCFD-Aligned Requirements and Related Initiatives E. Types of Financial Impact and Associated Drivers F. Insights Gained and View on Future Work Appendicesthe percent of asset owners that indicated they currently report on each of the seven metrics to their beneficiaries. Over 60% of the asset owners indicated they report on the GHG emissions associated with their assets under management (under Metrics and Targets b ). This was the most often reported metric, followed by climate- related targets related to GHG emissions. In addition to asking respondents about the types of climate-related information they report to their beneficiaries, the survey asked about challenges they face in reporting information aligned with each of the Task Force’s four recommendations — Governance, Strategy, Risk Management, and Metrics and Targets. Figure A44 lists the challenges identified along with the overall results as well as by recommendation. Consistent with a similar survey conducted by the Task Force last year, a lack of methodologies and insufficient information were the two most frequently cited challenges by asset owners. Over 75% of asset owner respondents indicated insufficient information from investee companies as a challenge for their reporting in general and especially for reporting on metrics and targets. In anticipation that insufficient information would be identified as a significant challenge again this year, the survey asked respondents to indicate whether the issue of insufficient information related to public companies, private investments, sources other than these two, or some combination of the three options. Of those identifying this challenge, 78% indicated Figure A43 Asset Owners: Currently Report on Select Metrics and Targets Figure A44 Asset Owners: Challenges Reporting Climate-Related Information Percent of RespondentsMetrics and Targets Percent Responding1 43% 50% 48%64% 60%38% 38% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%a) Alignment with <2°C Scenario: AUM Alignment with <2°C Scenario: Products and Strategies2 Other Metrics b) GHG Emissions of AUM WACI: Funds and Investment Strategies c) Targets Related to GHG Emissions Other Targets 1. The percentages for Metrics and Targets a), b), and c) in Figure A42 (p. 35) , are higher than the percentages for specific metrics associated with Metrics and Targets a), b), and c) in this figure because respondents were identified as currently reporting if they indicated reporting at least one of the metrics listed. 2. Alignment with <2°C Scenario: Funds and Investment Strategies. Challenge Governance Strategy Risk Mgmt.Metrics and Targets Overall Insufficient Information from Companies 21% 33% 36% 71% 76% Lack of Methodologies 12% 36% 33% 45% 57% Lack of Resources 19% 19% 29% 31% 45% Lack of Expertise and/or Capabilities 21% 21% 24% 26% 38% Concern about Negative Scrutiny 14% 19% 19% 31% 38% Lack of Board / Senior Management Support 14% 14% 7% 12% 19% Base size: 42 Legend: Low to high percentage of respondentsBase size: 42 36",
    "new_id": 398
  },
  {
    "id": 31822,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects a comparative trend between technology/media and consumer goods companies regarding their alignment with TCFD recommendations in 2022, as discussed in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures – 2023 Status Report?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Consumer goods companies showed higher disclosure rates for Metrics and Targets c) compared to any other category, while technology and media companies reported the least on this aspect.",
      "A": "Technology and media companies disclosed more on Risk Management c) than consumer goods companies, despite a decline in reporting.",
      "B": "Both industries experienced an increase in Governance disclosures from 2020 to 2022, but technology and media companies outperformed consumer goods companies in overall average disclosures.",
      "D": "The most significant decrease in reporting among all categories occurred in Strategy b) for consumer goods companies, which directly contributed to their lower mean disclosure rate.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "141-142",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Status 2023.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures A. State of Climate-Related Financial Disclosures B. Financial Statement Considerations C. Case Studies on Scope 3 GHG Emissions D. TCFD-Aligned Requirements and Related Initiatives E. Types of Financial Impact and Associated Drivers F. Insights Gained and View on Future Work AppendicesTechnology and Media The AI technology reviewed reports from 91 technology and media companies in two categories: interactive media and services and technology hardware and equipment. The 91 technology and media companies ranged in size from about $733 million to $394 billion in annual revenue, with a mean annual revenue of $22 billion. The AI review results for these companies are shown in Figure A3-7 . In 2022, reporting on Risk Management c) decreased by 6%, making the disclosure the second least reported across all recommended disclosures at 7%. In 2022, technology and media companies, on average, reported on fewer recommended disclosures (3.7) than any of the other industries reviewed (see Figure A3 , p. 6 ). Figure A3-7 Technology and Media Review Results RecommendationRecommended DisclosurePt. Change 2020–2022 Percent of Companies Disclosing Governance a) Board Oversight 32 b) Management’s Role 25 Strategy a) Risks and Opportunities 20 b) Impact on Organization 12 c) Resilience of Strategy 4 Risk Managementa) Risk ID and Assessment Processes12 b) Risk Manageme nt Processes 13 c) Integration into Overall Risk Management5 Metrics and Targetsa) Climate-Related Metrics 26 b) Scope 1,2,3 GHG Emissions 30 c) Climate-Related Targets 32 Legend: FY 2020 FY 2021 F Y 20220% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%11% 43% 29% 38% 2% 2%14% 35%8%32%40% 5%2%7% 15%26% 18% 7%1% 24% 56%44%56% 65%13%26% 27% 41% 56% 67%7% 18% 20% Base size: 91 132\n\n[Page 142]\nThe Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures A. State of Climate-Related Financial Disclosures B. Financial Statement Considerations C. Case Studies on Scope 3 GHG Emissions D. TCFD-Aligned Requirements and Related Initiatives E. Types of Financial Impact and Associated Drivers F. Insights Gained and View on Future Work AppendicesConsumer Goods The AI technology reviewed reports from 131 consumer goods companies in two categories: consumer retailing and textiles and apparel. The 131 consumer goods companies ranged in size from $599 million to $611 billion in annual revenue, with a mean annual revenue of more than $26 billion. The AI review results for these companies are shown in Figure A3-8 . In 2022, consumer goods companies most often disclosed information aligned with Metrics and Targets c) at 63%. Figure A3-8 Consumer Goods Review Results RecommendationRecommended DisclosurePt. Change 2020–2022Percent of Companies Disclosing Governance a) Board Oversight 34 b) Management’s Role 19 Strategy a) Risks and Opportunities 23 b) Impact on Organization 10 c) Resilien ce of Strategy 5 Risk Managementa) Risk ID and Assessment Processes14 b) Risk Manageme nt Processes 17 c) Integration into Overall Risk Management8 Metrics and Targetsa) Climate-Related Metrics 15 b) Scope 1,2,3 GHG Emissions 14 c) Climate-Related Targets 24 Legend: FY 2020 FY 2021 F Y 20220% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%24% 58% 46% 46% 8% 22% 40%18%32%51% 8%5%13% 18%28% 23% 11%3% 3% 39% 63%54%52% 54%9%27% 28% 47% 59% 62%12% 24% 29% Base size: 131 133",
    "new_id": 399
  },
  {
    "id": 31823,
    "question": "Which statement accurately captures the relationship between the types of TCFD-aligned disclosures and their reporting trends between 2020 and 2022, as discussed in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures – 2023 Status Report?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The most significant growth in disclosure pertained to descriptions of climate-related risks or opportunities, overshadowing all other categories.",
      "A": "Reporting on climate-related metrics saw the largest percentage point increase because it was disclosed by over 70% of companies in 2022.",
      "B": "Disclosures on governance, particularly board oversight, experienced a larger increase than those on strategy impact but were less frequently reported overall.",
      "C": "Companies were equally likely to report on greenhouse gas emissions and climate-related targets due to regulatory pressures driving these disclosures.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "14",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Status 2023.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures A. State of Climate-Related Financial Disclosures B. Financial Statement Considerations C. Case Studies on Scope 3 GHG Emissions D. TCFD-Aligned Requirements and Related Initiatives E. Types of Financial Impact and Associated Drivers F. Insights Gained and View on Future Work AppendicesCompanies’ disclosure of their climate-related risks and opportunities grew more than any other recommended disclosure between 2020 and 2022. While the percentage of disclosure for each of the Task Force’s 11 recommended disclosures increased between 2020 and 2022, as shown in Figure A2 , the largest increase in reporting — at 26 percentage points — was on companies’ descriptions of their climate- related risks or opportunities (climate-related issues). This was followed closely by companies’ reporting on their boards’ oversight of climate- related issues at 25 percentage points. Reporting on climate-related metrics was higher than any other recommended disclosure. Just over 70% of the companies reviewed disclosed the metrics they use to assess their climate-related risks and opportunities ( Metrics and Targets a ), followed by reporting on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and climate-related targets — both at 66%. Notably, the percent of companies reporting on their climate-related targets increased by 24 percentage points between 2020 and 2022. Companies disclosed TCFD-aligned information primarily in sustainability and annual reports. While companies disclosed information in multiple types of reports (e.g., financial filings, annual reports, integrated reports, and sustainability reports), they were four times more likely to disclose TCFD-aligned information in sustainability and annual reports based on fiscal year 2022 reporting. Notably, however, there was a significant increase in companies including TCFD-aligned information in their financial filings over the three years reviewed. Specifically, companies on average were eight times more likely to disclose TCFD-Recommendation Recommended DisclosurePt. Change 2020–2022 Percent of Companies Disclosing Governance a) Board Oversight 25 b) Management’s Role 21 Strategy a) Risks and Opportunities 26 b) Impact on Organization 17 c) Resilience of Strategy 7 Risk Management a) Risk ID and Assessment Processes22 b) Risk Management Processes 20 c) Integration into Overall Risk Management14 Metrics and Targets a) Climate-Related Metrics 13 b) Scope 1,2,3 GHG Emissions 16 c) Climate-Related Targets 24 Legend: FY 2020 FY 2021 FY 202239% 64% 14% 36%26%44%56% 23% 37% 11% 25% 42% 66% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%59%50% 60% 66%21%26% 37% 43% 58% 66% 71%19% 33% 39%36% 55% 62% Base size: 1,365Figure A2 TCFD-Aligned Disclosures by Fiscal Year for 2020–2022 9% 11%4% 5",
    "new_id": 400
  },
  {
    "id": 31824,
    "question": "Which conclusion can be drawn about the alignment between asset managers' reporting practices and the TCFD's recommended disclosures based on the nuanced differences in reporting levels across categories, as discussed in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures – 2023 Status Report?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Operational targets are reported more frequently than GHG emissions targets for AUM because they are perceived as more actionable and within direct control.",
      "B": "Asset managers prioritize reporting on governance-related disclosures because they are easier to quantify than metrics and targets.",
      "C": "The low reporting rate for Strategy c) suggests that asset managers generally avoid scenario analysis due to its complexity and resource intensity.",
      "D": "The higher reporting for Metrics and Targets a) reflects asset managers’ overwhelming preference for disclosing financial over non-financial data.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "43",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Status 2023.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures A. State of Climate-Related Financial Disclosures B. Financial Statement Considerations C. Case Studies on Scope 3 GHG Emissions D. TCFD-Aligned Requirements and Related Initiatives E. Types of Financial Impact and Associated Drivers F. Insights Gained and View on Future Work AppendicesRecommendation Recommended Disclosure Percent of Organizations Reporting Governance a) Board Oversight b) Management’s Role Strategy a) Risks and Opportunities b) Impact on Organization c) Resilience of Strategy Risk Management a) Risk ID and Assessment Processes b) Risk Management Processes c) Integration into Overall Risk Management Metrics and Targets a) Climate-Related Metrics b) Scope 1,2,3 GHG Emissions c) Climate-Related TargetsAs mentioned previously, the Task Force also reviewed the largest asset managers and asset owners’ publicly available reports to better understand their reporting practices to a broader group of stakeholders. The Task Force’s findings from the review of the top 50 asset managers by AUM are described in Box A10. Notably, 68% of the top 50 asset managers reported climate-related information in line with at least five of the 11 recommended disclosures — which is generally consistent with the survey findings, but only 2% reported in line with all 11. Box A10 Top 50 Asset Managers: TCFD-Aligned Reporting1 Reporting Aligned with the 11 Recommended Disclosures The highest level of reporting for the top 50 asset managers was for Metrics and Targets a) at 70%, followed by a tie between Governance a) and Governance b) at 64%, as shown in the figure below. The lowest level of reporting was on the resilience of asset managers’ strategies under different climate-related scenarios — Strategy c) — at 24%, which is consistent with results from the survey respondents and previous years’ analyses. Reporting on Specific Metrics and Targets For climate-related metrics and targets, the Task Force was most interested in those associated with asset managers’ AUM versus other types (referred to as operational).2 As shown on the right, the highest level of reporting on climate-related metrics was on WACI of AUM at 30%, followed by WACI on products and investment strategies at 22%. For climate-related targets, 56% of asset managers reported on their operational targets vs. 44% on their GHG emission targets for AUM. Directional Comparison with Survey Results Recognizing these results are not directly comparable to the survey results discussed above since survey respondents varied in size and were subject to self-selection bias, the Task Force instead compared the most and least disclosed recommended disclosures from the two groups. The groups were aligned on the least reported recommended disclosure — Strategy c) . They were also aligned on the most reported recommended disclosure — Metrics and Targets a); however, the survey results showed a tie between Metrics and Targets a) and Strategy a) for the most reported recommended disclosure. 1. The base size for the chart and table in this figure is 50. 2. Operational targets include those related to the organization’s own carbon footprint, including but not limited to carbon neutrality, energy efficiency, etc. Metrics and Targets <2°C Alignment: AUM 8% <2°C Alignment: Products and Investment Strategies 16% GHG Emissions of AUM 20% WACI: AUM 30% WACI: Products and Investment Strategies 22% Targets: GHG Emissions of AUM 44% Targets: Operational 56%Percent0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%64% 64% 60% 56% 52% 46% 46%70%60%40% 24% 34",
    "new_id": 401
  },
  {
    "id": 31826,
    "question": "Which inference best explains the observed variation in disclosure levels across industries for the 'Resilience of Strategy' recommendation, given the challenges companies face, as discussed in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures – 2023 Status Report?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Companies find disclosing strategy resilience difficult due to its reliance on speculative scenario analysis, but energy companies overcome this challenge due to their advanced data collection systems.",
      "A": "Energy companies disclose more on strategy resilience because they are less affected by climate-related risks compared to other industries.",
      "C": "The low disclosure rates for strategy resilience across industries suggest that companies prioritize immediate operational risks over long-term strategic planning.",
      "D": "High disclosure rates in the energy sector for strategy resilience reflect regulatory pressures unique to that industry, rather than a general ease of implementation.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "15",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Status 2023.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures A. State of Climate-Related Financial Disclosures B. Financial Statement Considerations C. Case Studies on Scope 3 GHG Emissions D. TCFD-Aligned Requirements and Related Initiatives E. Types of Financial Impact and Associated Drivers F. Insights Gained and View on Future Work Appendicesaligned information in their sustainability and annual reports than in their financial filings for fiscal year 2020 reporting. In addition, across the 11 recommended disclosures, companies were more likely to include the metrics they use to assess climate-related risks and opportunities in line with their strategy and risk management process ( Metrics and Targets a) in sustainability and annual reports than in financial filings. The resilience of companies’ strategies under different climate-related scenarios had the lowest level of disclosure in all three years reviewed. Only 11% of the companies reviewed reported in line with this recommended disclosure (Strategy c ) for fiscal year 2022. Based on a survey conducted last year of over 200 companies, nearly 90% of them rated this recommended disclosure as somewhat difficult or very difficult to implement, which may help explain why its disclosure is low.23 Energy companies disclosed more information than companies in the other seven industries. Energy companies, on average, reported on 6.3 of the 11 recommended disclosures in 2022, followed by materials and buildings companies 23 See TCFD, 2022 Status Report , October 13, 2022 (pp. 57–64). 24 The AI review results for each industry for the past three fiscal years are provided in Appendix 3: AI Review Results by Industry . at 5.8 ( see Figure A3 ). In addition, companies in the energy industry had the highest levels of disclosure on seven of the 11 recommended disclosures ( see Figure A4 ).24 The insurance companies and banks reviewed had the highest levels of reporting on the Risk Management recommendation, which may be attributable to financial regulators’ general emphasis on risk management processes. Figure A3 Average Number of Disclosures per Company Industry Number Energy 6.3 Materials and Buildings 5.8 Insurance 5.2 Agriculture, Food, and Forest Products 5.1 Transportation 5.1 Banking 5.0 Consumer Goods 4.1 Technology and Media 3.7 Figure A4 Disclosure by Industry: 2022 Fiscal Year Reporting Percent of Companies1 Recommendation Recommended Disclosure Governance a) Board Oversight 57% 65% 76% 71% 70% 57% 43% 58% b) Management’s Role 40% 44% 57% 46% 44% 39% 32% 32% Strategy a) Risk and Opportunities 69% 68% 70% 66% 55% 57% 38% 46% b) Impact on Organization 35% 45% 58% 46% 40% 49% 27% 28% c) Resilience of Strategy 9% 13% 16% 12% 6% 17% 5% 8% Risk Management a) Risk ID and Assessment Proc. 40% 44% 42% 40% 30% 36% 14% 22% b) Risk Management Processes 46% 51% 45% 38% 37% 35% 20% 29% c) Integration into Risk Mgmt. 38% 36% 32% 22% 21% 18% 7% 11% Metrics and Targets a) Climate-Related Metrics 61% 56% 81% 81% 70% 71% 67% 62% b) Scope 1,2,3 GHG Emissions 58% 53% 77% 75% 64% 64% 65% 54% c) Climate-Related Targets 47% 50% 80% 77% 73% 69% 56% 63%Technology and Media (91) Insurance (117) Energy (205) Transportation (126) Consumer Goods (131) Materials and Buildings (345) Agriculture, Food, and Forest (115) Legend: Low to high percentage of reporting1. The numbers in parentheses represent the size of the review population.Banking (235) 6",
    "new_id": 402
  },
  {
    "id": 31855,
    "question": "Which inference about the geographic distribution of asset managers and asset owners can be drawn from their respective headquarters locations as described, as discussed in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures – 2023 Status Report?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The lack of representation from Latin America in both asset managers and asset owners suggests these regions prioritize other forms of financial disclosure.",
      "A": "North America's dominance among both asset managers and asset owners indicates that climate-related reporting practices are more advanced in this region than elsewhere.",
      "B": "The absence of Middle East and Africa-based asset managers implies that these regions' regulatory frameworks are less focused on climate-related disclosures compared to North America and Europe.",
      "D": "The disproportionate presence of North American asset managers but not asset owners reflects a structural difference in how these entities manage climate-related risks.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "38",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Status 2023.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures A. State of Climate-Related Financial Disclosures B. Financial Statement Considerations C. Case Studies on Scope 3 GHG Emissions D. TCFD-Aligned Requirements and Related Initiatives E. Types of Financial Impact and Associated Drivers F. Insights Gained and View on Future Work Appendicesor less in AUM compared with 66% of asset owner respondents. Of the asset owner respondents, the vast majority were insurance companies (48%) and corporate or non- corporate pension funds (32%). For asset managers, the survey asked about the types of services they offer and more than one type of service could be selected, with the exception of “execution and advisory services only.” Of the 87% that offered multiple services, 65% indicated they offered fiduciary management or other outsourced discretionary fund allocation, 42% indicated fund of funds, manager of managers, or sub-advised products, 32% indicated wealth management, and the remaining 7% identified other types of services. Scope and Approach: Review of Largest Asset Managers and Asset Owners In addition to the survey — which focused on reporting to clients and beneficiaries, the Task Force also reviewed large asset managers and asset owners’ publicly available reports to better understand their reporting practices to a broader group of stakeholders. The review included the top 50 asset managers and top 50 asset owners globally based on their assets under management. The reports reviewed included the most recent financial filings, annual or integrated reports, and climate or sustainability reports published between March 2021 and March 2023. The purpose of the review was to 38 This approach was not designed to assess the quality or comprehensiveness of the organizations’ climate-related reporting, but rather to provide an indication of the alignment of information in their publicly available reports with the Task Force’s recommendations. 39 All figures are for 2021. The top 50 asset managers’ AUM was sourced from Pensions & Investments, “ The Largest Money Managers ,” December 31, 2021. The top 50 asset owners’ AUM was sourced from the Thinking Ahead Institute, The Asset Owner 100 , November 30, 2022. Asset managers’ total AUM was sourced from Boston Consulting Group, “ Global Asset Management 2022: From Tailwinds to Turbulence ,” May 25, 2022. Asset managers’ AUM includes professionally managed assets, which can include asset owners’ captive AUM when it is delegated to asset managers. Asset owners’ total AUM was sourced from the Preqin database. determine whether the organizations reported information aligned with each of the Task Force’s 11 recommended disclosures.38 As shown in the top two charts in Box A8 , the top 50 asset managers represented 63% or $70 trillion of the total AUM held by asset managers ($112 trillion); and the top 50 asset owners held 35% or $26 trillion of the total AUM held by corporate and non-corporate pensions, insurance companies, endowments, and reserve/sovereign wealth funds ($75 trillion).39 The bottom two charts show the geographic distribution of the survey respondents. The majority of the top 50 asset managers were headquartered in North America (82%), followed by Europe (12%), and then Asia Pacific (6%). There was no representation from Latin America or the Middle East and Africa. Among asset owners, a plurality were headquartered in North America (40%), followed by Asia Pacific (26%), Europe (18%), and the Middle East and Africa (16%). Similar to asset managers, there was no representation from Latin America. Summary of TCFD-Aligned Reporting The Task Force’s survey asked asset managers and asset owners whether they currently report, plan to report, or do not plan to report climate-related information to their clients and beneficiaries, respectively. As shown in the top charts in Box A9 (p. 30), the majority of Box A8 Composition of Top 50 Asset Managers and Top 50 Asset Owners Percent of Total Global Assets Under Management of Top 50 Distribution of Top 50 by RegionAsset Managers Asset Owners Top 50 All OtherTop 50 All Other63% ($70T)37% ($42T)65% ($49T)35% ($26T) Asset Managers Asset Owners North America Europe Asia PacificNorth America Asia Pacific Europe Middle East and Africa82% 40% 12% 26% 6% 18% 16% 29",
    "new_id": 403
  },
  {
    "id": 31857,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why the Task Force chose to analyze responses from the CDP Climate Change 2022 Questionnaire rather than individual company reports, as discussed in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures – 2023 Status Report?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Reviewing thousands of individual company reports would have been too time-consuming, while the CDP dataset provided an efficient way to access comprehensive information.",
      "A": "The CDP questionnaire provided a standardized format that ensured consistency in reporting climate-related risks and opportunities across companies.",
      "B": "Individual company reports were deemed unreliable due to their lack of transparency regarding financial assumptions and uncertainties.",
      "C": "Responses to the CDP questionnaire offered richer qualitative insights into financial impacts compared to the quantitative data found in individual reports.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "100",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Status 2023.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures A. State of Climate-Related Financial Disclosures B. Financial Statement Considerations C. Case Studies on Scope 3 GHG Emissions D. TCFD-Aligned Requirements and Related Initiatives E. Types of Financial Impact and Associated Drivers F. Insights Gained and View on Future Work Appendicesrelated risks and opportunities have affected its business and strategy.161 In addition, in a 2021 survey, the Task Force asked users about the usefulness of several types of climate-related metrics, including the impact of climate-related issues on a company’s financial performance and financial position. Of the 106 users responding, over 70% indicated a company’s disclosure of the impact on its financial performance (75%) and financial position (73%) is very useful.162 Of the ten metrics rated, the only two that were higher were Scope 1 and Scope 2 GHG emissions at 91% and Scope 3 GHG emissions at 80%.163 Given users’ views on the usefulness of information associated with the Task Force’s Strategy recommendation — especially information on financial performance and financial position — and the relatively low level of disclosure of such information, the Task Force sought to provide companies with information and insights on the types of financial impacts associated with specific climate-related risks and opportunities that other companies have identified. This section 161 TCFD, 2020 Status Report , October 29, 2020 (pp. 29–31). 162 TCFD, Guidance on Metrics, Targets, and Transition Plans , October 14, 2021 (p. 16). 163 Ibid (p. 14). 164 The Task Force wishes to thank CDP for sharing select reporting results from the CDP Climate Change 2022 Questionnaire (CDP, “ CDP Climate Change 2022 Questionnaire ,” Accessed May 1, 2023). The reporting results provided a standardized source of information on climate-related risks and opportunities and associated potential financial impacts identified by thousands of companies. Collecting information similar to that provided by CDP would entail reviewing individual companies’ reports, which would take thousands of hours and would not be feasible for the Task Force. 165 Of the approximately 5,000 companies, around 3,600 made their responses public. Only public responses are available on the CDP website. describes common types of financial impact and associated drivers and includes case studies from companies on their experiences in implementing aspects of the Strategy recommendation. The Task Force believes such information may be useful to companies beginning to implement Strategy b) and c) (see Figure E1 , p. 90) and, ultimately, disclosing in line with those recommended disclosures. 1. SCOPE AND APPROACH To gather information on the types and associated drivers of financial impact that companies have identified, the Task Force used companies’ responses to the CDP Climate Change 2022 Questionnaire (2022 questionnaire).164 The Task Force’s analysis focused on the approximately 5,000 companies that provided public or non-public responses to the 2022 questionnaire based on investor requests made through CDP.165 While the 2022 questionnaire included nearly 300 questions, the Task Force reviewed responses to a set Key Takeaways Of the over 4,000 companies that identified climate-related issues with potential substantive impact, 68% provided estimates of the potential financial impact — either as single amounts or as ranges. The most common type of financial impact estimated for climate-related risks was increased indirect operating costs. For climate-related opportunities, it was increased revenues from increased demand. There are inherent uncertainties in estimating potential financial impact from climate-related issues. Transparency — particularly on assumptions made — is important to highlight these uncertainties to investors and other stakeholders. Estimating potential financial impact from climate change requires expertise from different functions within a company. As a result, it may be useful to set up a cross-functional team for such efforts. 91",
    "new_id": 404
  },
  {
    "id": 31864,
    "question": "Which statement accurately captures the implications of the IASB's tentative decision regarding the inclusion of future capital investments related to climate-related commitments in value in use cash flow projections, as discussed in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures – 2023 Status Report?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The tentative decision allows companies to include cash flows from investments that improve an asset’s performance, provided they align with management’s best estimate of future economic conditions.",
      "B": "Companies are now required to exclude all future capital expenditures aimed at reducing GHG emissions when estimating value in use, as these are considered enhancements rather than maintenance.",
      "C": "Future capital investments related to climate-related targets must be excluded unless they are deemed necessary to maintain the current condition of the asset for continued operation.",
      "D": "The IASB has definitively prohibited the inclusion of any cash flows associated with reducing GHG emissions, as these are categorized as external regulatory compliance costs.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "63",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Status 2023.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures A. State of Climate-Related Financial Disclosures B. Financial Statement Considerations C. Case Studies on Scope 3 GHG Emissions D. TCFD-Aligned Requirements and Related Initiatives E. Types of Financial Impact and Associated Drivers F. Insights Gained and View on Future Work Appendicesimpaired.70,71 An impairment arises when the carrying amount of an asset or a cash- generating unit exceeds its recoverable amount.72 Climate-related issues may give rise to indications that an asset is impaired. For example, a decline in the demand for diesel- based products of a manufacturing company could indicate that its production equipment may be impaired. Significant changes in the environment in which the company operates — such as new regulations that limit the amount of GHG emissions that can be produced — may also be an indication that a GHG emissions producing asset could be impaired. Determining Cash Flows Included . Where the “value in use” method, which is the present value of future cash flows expected to be derived from an asset or cash-generating unit, is used in determining the recoverable amount, a company is required to make an estimate of future cash flows. IAS 36 places certain constraints on the future cash flows that can be incorporated when calculating the value in use and requires 1) the cash flows to be estimated for the asset (i.e., single asset or group of assets) in its current condition and 2) future capital expenditure that would improve the asset’s performance and the related benefits to be excluded.73 This has raised practical questions on the extent to which future capital investments related to climate-related commitments or targets can be included in the value in use cash flow projections (that is, whether the expenditure incurred to reduce the GHG emissions associated with an asset represents future cash outflow to enhance the asset or to maintain the asset to continue operating). As part of its Business Combinations: Goodwill and Impairment project, the IASB indicated in March 2023 that it tentatively decided to propose removing the existing constraint on cash flows used to estimate value in use in IAS 36.74,75 70 Cash-generating unit is the smallest identifiable group of assets that generates cash inflows that are largely independent of cash inflows from other assets or groups of assets. IFRS, IAS 36 Impairment of Assets , May 2013 (paragraph 36.6). 71 Irrespective of any indicator of impairment, IAS 36 requires goodwill and intangible assets with indefinite useful lives and intangible assets that are not yet available for use to be tested for impairment annually. 72 The carrying amount is the amount at which an asset is recognized after deducting any accumulated depreciation (amortization) and accumulated impairment losses thereon, and the recoverable amount of an asset or a cash-generating unit is the higher of its fair value less costs of disposal and its value in use. IFRS, IAS 36 Impairment of Assets , May 2013 (paragraph 36.6). 73 The effects of upcoming climate-related regulation or legislation may be included in the measurement of the value in use if management’s best estimate is that there will be an effect on the entity’s future cash flows. See Deloitte, A Closer Look—IAS 36 Impairment of Non-Financial Assets— Reminders and Hot Topics , May 3, 2023. 74 IFRS, “ Business Combinations—Disclosures, Goodwill and Impairment ,” Accessed July 12, 2023. 75 IFRS, “ IASB Update March 2023 ,” March 20, 2023. 76 IFRS, “ IFRS Foundation Work Plan ,” Accessed July 12, 2023. 77 IAS 36.33 requires that when measuring value in use, a company must base cash flow projections on reasonable and supportable assumptions that represent management’s best estimate of the range of economic conditions that will exist over the remaining useful life of the asset and greater weight should be given to external evidence. IAS 36.33 also requires a company to use a steady or declining growth rate to estimate cash flow projections beyond the period covered by the most recent budget unless an increasing rate can be justified. IFRS, IAS 36 Impairment of Assets , May 2013. More specifically, the IASB has tentatively decided to retain the requirement that future cash flows shall be estimated for an asset in its current condition. Therefore, companies would not be prohibited from including cash flows arising from improving or enhancing an asset’s performance as long as t",
    "new_id": 405
  },
  {
    "id": 31891,
    "question": "Which conclusion can be drawn regarding the relationship between company size and disclosure rates for climate-related metrics in the consumer goods sector, as discussed in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures – 2023 Status Report?",
    "options": {
      "B": "The variability in revenue among companies had no discernible impact on specific disclosure categories, as indicated by aggregated AI review results.",
      "A": "Larger companies consistently disclosed more across all categories due to stricter regulatory scrutiny.",
      "C": "Disclosure rates for Metrics and Targets c) were highest because smaller companies disproportionately focused on this category.",
      "D": "Smaller companies showed greater improvement in disclosure rates from 2020 to 2022 compared to larger firms.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "142",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Status 2023.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures A. State of Climate-Related Financial Disclosures B. Financial Statement Considerations C. Case Studies on Scope 3 GHG Emissions D. TCFD-Aligned Requirements and Related Initiatives E. Types of Financial Impact and Associated Drivers F. Insights Gained and View on Future Work AppendicesConsumer Goods The AI technology reviewed reports from 131 consumer goods companies in two categories: consumer retailing and textiles and apparel. The 131 consumer goods companies ranged in size from $599 million to $611 billion in annual revenue, with a mean annual revenue of more than $26 billion. The AI review results for these companies are shown in Figure A3-8 . In 2022, consumer goods companies most often disclosed information aligned with Metrics and Targets c) at 63%. Figure A3-8 Consumer Goods Review Results RecommendationRecommended DisclosurePt. Change 2020–2022Percent of Companies Disclosing Governance a) Board Oversight 34 b) Management’s Role 19 Strategy a) Risks and Opportunities 23 b) Impact on Organization 10 c) Resilien ce of Strategy 5 Risk Managementa) Risk ID and Assessment Processes14 b) Risk Manageme nt Processes 17 c) Integration into Overall Risk Management8 Metrics and Targetsa) Climate-Related Metrics 15 b) Scope 1,2,3 GHG Emissions 14 c) Climate-Related Targets 24 Legend: FY 2020 FY 2021 F Y 20220% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%24% 58% 46% 46% 8% 22% 40%18%32%51% 8%5%13% 18%28% 23% 11%3% 3% 39% 63%54%52% 54%9%27% 28% 47% 59% 62%12% 24% 29% Base size: 131 133",
    "new_id": 406
  },
  {
    "id": 31892,
    "question": "Which challenge in estimating Scope 3 GHG emissions is explicitly highlighted as a shared concern across both company-specific case studies and broader industry surveys, yet is not directly addressed by the Task Force's recommendations, as discussed in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures – 2023 Status Report?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The high costs associated with obtaining supplier- or customer-specific emissions data.",
      "A": "The lack of standardized methodologies for calculating downstream emissions.",
      "B": "The difficulty in avoiding double counting of emissions within complex value chains.",
      "D": "The absence of regulatory mandates requiring disclosure of Scope 3 GHG emissions.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "73",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Status 2023.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures A. State of Climate-Related Financial Disclosures B. Financial Statement Considerations C. Case Studies on Scope 3 GHG Emissions D. TCFD-Aligned Requirements and Related Initiatives E. Types of Financial Impact and Associated Drivers F. Insights Gained and View on Future Work AppendicesC. Case Studies on Scope 3 GHG Emissions In October 2021, the Task Force published guidance on metrics, targets, and transition plans in which it encouraged all companies to report their Scope 3 GHG emissions (see Box C1).101 The Task Force noted growing demand for 101 TCFD, Guidance on Metrics, Targets, and Transition Plans , October 14, 2021. 102 In a 2022 TCFD survey, 71% of companies indicated disclosing Scope 3 GHG emissions was difficult, with data collection in the value chain noted as a challenge (TCFD, 2022 Status Report , October 13, 2022). Similarly, in a survey conducted by the SBTi, 85% of respondents that estimated Scope 3 GHG emissions highlighted data access as a challenge (SBTi, Catalyzing Value Chain Decarbonization , February 2023). 103 There is also a case study in Section A.3. TCFD-Aligned Reporting by Asset Managers and Asset Owners that covers Scope 3 GHG emissions.Scope 3 GHG emissions by investors and other users for financial decision-making but also recognized there are challenges associated with disclosing this information — including data and methodological challenges.102 103 1. As part of its efforts to support companies in implementing its recommendations, the Task Force worked with five companies to develop case studies describing their respective approaches to estimating and disclosing Scope 3 GHG emissions, including the challenges they face.103 In the case studies that follow, the companies highlight challenges related to the limited availability of supplier- or customer-specific GHG emissions data, costs associated with making GHG emissions estimates, double counting of GHG emissions, and accuracy of assumptions related to downstream processing and end-of-life of products. The Task Force believes the case studies offer insights that may be useful to other companies as they face similar challenges in estimating and disclosing Scope 3 GHG emissions. Key Takeaways Scope 3 GHG emissions are often a significant portion of companies’ GHG emissions inventories and represent an important driver of climate-related issues. Box C1 Scope 3 GHG Emissions Categories Adapted from World Resources Institute and World Business Council for Sustainable Development, The Corporate Value Chain (Scope 3) Accounting and Reporting Standard , April 16, 2013 Note: Some content was reformatted in order to fit the page. purchased electricity, st eam, heating & c ooling for o wn use purchased goods and servicescapital goodsfuel and energy relat ed activities transpo rtation and dist ribut ionwast e generat ed in operationsbusiness traveltransport ation and distributio nprocessing of sold products use of sold productsend- of-life treatment of sold products leased assets franchises emplo yee commutingleased assets investmentscompan y facilities compan y vehiclesScope 3 INDIREC Tpurchased goods and servicescapital goodsfuel and energy relat ed activities trans portation and dist ribut ionwast e generat ed in operationsbusiness travel emplo yee commutingleased assets Investmentscompan y facilities compan y vehiclesCO2 CH 4 SF6 N2O HFCs PFCs purchased electricity, st eam, heating & c ooling for o wn use purchased goods and servicescapital goodsfuel and energy relat ed activities transpo rtatio n and dist ributio nwast e generat ed in operationsbusiness travelTrans portation and Dist ribut ionprocessing of sold products use of sold productsend-of -life treatment of sold pro ducts leased assets franchises emplo yee commutingleased assets investmentscompan y facilities compan y vehiclesCO2 CH 4 SF6 N2O HFCs PFCs purchased electricity, st eam, heating & c ooling for o wn use purchased goods and servicescapital goodsfuel and energy relat ed activities transpo rtation and dist ributio nwast e generat ed in operationsbusiness traveltrans portation and dist ribut ionProcessing of Sold Products use of sold productsend-of -life treatment of sold pro ducts leased assets franchises emplo yee commutingleased assets investmentscompan y facilities compan y vehiclesCO2 CH 4 SF6 N2O HFCs PFCs purchased electricity, st eam, heating & c ooling for o wn use purchased goods and servicescapital goodsfu",
    "new_id": 407
  },
  {
    "id": 31928,
    "question": "Which inference about the reporting behavior of asset managers and asset owners can be drawn from the data provided, as discussed in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures – 2023 Status Report?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Asset managers prioritize tailored reports over publicly available ones when addressing specific client holdings, reflecting a strategic differentiation in communication channels.",
      "A": "Asset managers are more likely than asset owners to cite regulatory requirements as a reason for reporting due to their geographic distribution.",
      "B": "The majority of asset owners who report climate-related information do so because of client requests, aligning closely with the motivations of asset managers.",
      "C": "Asset owners predominantly use regulatory requirements as their sole motivator for reporting, overshadowing other cited reasons such as material risks.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "39",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Status 2023.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures A. State of Climate-Related Financial Disclosures B. Financial Statement Considerations C. Case Studies on Scope 3 GHG Emissions D. TCFD-Aligned Requirements and Related Initiatives E. Types of Financial Impact and Associated Drivers F. Insights Gained and View on Future Work Appendicesrespondents indicated they currently report to their clients or beneficiaries — 70% of asset managers and 84% of asset owners, and most of the remainder indicated they plan to report. Respondents that indicated they do not plan to report climate-related financial information to their clients or beneficiaries — 6% of asset managers (6) and 5% of asset owners (2) — were not asked to complete questions about their reporting practices on information aligned with the Task Force’s 11 recommended disclosures. The charts in the middle of Box A9 show the reasons why asset managers and asset owners report or plan to report climate-related information to their clients and beneficiaries, respectively. The most often cited reason by asset managers for reporting was that climate- related risks are material, followed by requests from clients. For asset owners, the most often cited reason was tied — at 57% — between climate-related risks are material and regulators are or will be requiring such reporting. When reviewing both asset manager and asset owner respondents that indicated one of the reasons for reporting is because of regulatory requirements, the Task Force found 50% were located in Europe, 31% in North America, 18% in Asia Pacific, and the remaining 1% in the Middle East and Africa. The charts at the bottom of Box A9 show two common reporting channels asset managers Box A9 Reporting of Climate-Related Information to Clients and Beneficiaries Percent of Respondents1 and asset owners use to report climate-related information to their clients and beneficiaries, respectively — reports that are publicly available and those that are made available to clients or beneficiaries only. Only respondents indicating they currently report climate-related information to their stakeholders were asked about the reporting channels they use. The Task Force was interested in understanding the extent to which asset managers and asset owners use publicly available reports to communicate climate-related financial information to their stakeholders. The majority of both asset managers (81%) and asset owners (95%) use publicly available reports to communicate this information. In addition, nearly half of the asset managers (46%) indicated they communicate to their clients through reports that are available only to the clients — the vast majority of which are tailored to the clients’ holdings. 1. The numbers in parentheses represent the number of respondents. 2. Respondents could select multiple reasons. 3. Only respondents that indicated they currently report to their clients or beneficiaries received this question.Reasons for Reporting or Planning to Report2Status of Reporting All Respondents (150) Asset Managers (106) Asset Owners (44)74% 84%70%21% 24% 11%5% 5%6% Currently Report Plan to Report Do Not Plan to Report Currently Report Plan to Report Publicly Available Reports Reports Available to Clients or Beneficiaries OnlyReasons Asset Managers (100) Asset Owners (42) Channels for Reporting to Clients and Beneficiaries3 Asset Managers (74) Asset Owners (37)81% 46% 11%95%Climate-Related Risks are Material Requests from Clients or Beneficiaries Senior Management Priority Required by Regulators (or Will Be) Peers Report Information68% 55% 45% 11% 10% 41% 35%8% 7%16% 57% 5% 5% 5% 5%5% 57%40% 48%52% 30",
    "new_id": 408
  },
  {
    "id": 31949,
    "question": "Which factor most plausibly explains the variation in climate-related financial disclosure levels between industries, assuming consistency in regional and size-related effects, as discussed in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures – 2023 Status Report?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The late inclusion of consumer goods and technology industries in the AI review process compared to other industries.",
      "B": "The inherent resistance of consumer goods and technology companies to adopt TCFD-aligned practices due to cost constraints.",
      "C": "The prioritization of Scope 3 GHG emissions reporting by European regulatory frameworks over other industries.",
      "D": "The higher exposure of non-financial industries to physical climate risks driving their increased disclosure rates.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "16",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Status 2023.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures A. State of Climate-Related Financial Disclosures B. Financial Statement Considerations C. Case Studies on Scope 3 GHG Emissions D. TCFD-Aligned Requirements and Related Initiatives E. Types of Financial Impact and Associated Drivers F. Insights Gained and View on Future Work AppendicesCompanies in the consumer goods and technology and media industries disclosed less than companies in other industries. As noted previously, these two industries were added to the AI review to incorporate other large companies that may be exposed to climate-related risks whereas the other four non-financial industries were included because they are most likely to be affected by climate change. This may explain why companies in these two industries, on average, have the lowest levels of disclosure. Companies in Europe had the highest level of reporting for each of the 11 recommended disclosures. The European companies reviewed, on average, reported on 7.2 of the 11 recommended disclosures ( see Figure A5). Notably, 92% of European companies disclosed their climate-related targets ( Metrics and Targets c ) — which is 35 percentage points higher than companies in Asia Pacific and 32 percentage points higher than companies in North America ( see Figure A6 ). Please see Section A.2. TCFD-Aligned Reporting by Public Companies by Region for results at an industry level for each region. Larger companies are more likely to disclose TCFD-aligned information than smaller ones . On average, companies with a market capitalization of at least $12.3 billion reported on 6.7 of the 11 recommended disclosures in fiscal year 2022 (see Figure A7 , p. 8 ), while smaller companies on average — those with less than $3.2 billion in market capitalization — reported on 3.9 recommended disclosures. The Task Force notes that this finding has been consistent in all six of its status reports. The highest level of reporting by larger companies was on climate-related targets — at 85%, followed closely by climate-related metrics at 83% (see Figure A8 , p. 8). Notably, medium-sized companies (market capitalization between $3.2 billion and $12.3 billion) and smaller companies (market capitalization less than $3.2 billion) reported most frequently on climate-related metrics — at 72% and 59%, respectively. Their reporting on climate-related targets was at least seven percentage points Figure A5 Average Number of Disclosures per Company Region Number Europe 7.2 Asia Pacific 5.0 North America 4.6 Latin America 4.2 Middle East and Africa 3.8 Recommendation Recommended DisclosureAsia Pacific (279)Europe (324)Latin America (38)Middle East and Africa (65)North America (659) Governance a) Board Oversight 62% 71% 53% 45% 65% b) Management’s Role 33% 60% 34% 22% 42% Strategy a) Risk and Opportunities 53% 76% 61% 38% 61% b) Impact on Organization 41% 59% 39% 29% 37% c) Resilience of Strategy 11% 24% 3% 6% 6% Risk Management a) Risk ID and Assessment Proc. 31% 65% 24% 22% 26% b) Risk Management Processes 41% 56% 34% 28% 32% c) Integration into Risk Mgmt. 20% 35% 26% 20% 22% Metrics and Targets a) Climate-Related Metrics 80% 92% 55% 63% 58% b) Scope 1,2,3 GHG Emissions 73% 88% 50% 58% 54% c) Climate-Related Targets 57% 92% 42% 48% 60% 1. The numbers in parentheses represent the size of the review population. Legend: Low to high percentage of reportingFigure A6 Disclosure by Region: 2022 Fiscal Year Reporting Percent of Companies1 7",
    "new_id": 409
  },
  {
    "id": 31977,
    "question": "Which assertion is most strongly supported by the findings on reporting practices among the top 50 asset owners, as discussed in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures – 2023 Status Report?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Metrics and Targets a) was the most reported category among asset owners, despite being less emphasized by survey respondents who prioritized Governance b).",
      "A": "Sovereign wealth funds demonstrated higher levels of alignment with TCFD recommendations compared to other types of asset owners.",
      "C": "The least reported recommended disclosure, Strategy c), was identified as a priority area for improvement across both asset managers and asset owners.",
      "D": "Operational targets related to carbon neutrality were more commonly disclosed than targets for GHG emissions associated with AUM.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "47",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Status 2023.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures A. State of Climate-Related Financial Disclosures B. Financial Statement Considerations C. Case Studies on Scope 3 GHG Emissions D. TCFD-Aligned Requirements and Related Initiatives E. Types of Financial Impact and Associated Drivers F. Insights Gained and View on Future Work AppendicesAs mentioned previously, the Task Force also reviewed the largest asset managers and asset owners’ publicly available reports to better understand their reporting practices to a broader group of stakeholders. The Task Force’s findings from the review of the top 50 asset owners by AUM — which consisted primarily of non-corporate pension funds, insurance companies, and sovereign wealth funds — are described in Box A11 . Overall, 36% of the top 50 asset managers reported climate-related information in line with at least five of the 11 recommended disclosures, and 8% reported in line with all 11. Notably, the Task Force found sovereign wealth funds had the lowest levels of reporting when compared with non-corporate pension funds and insurance companies. Case Studies This subsection includes two case studies — one from a diversified financial services company that is both an asset owner and asset manager and the other from an asset manager. In the case studies, the organizations describe their respective experiences in implementing the Task Force’s recommendations, which are intended to provide practical insights on and considerations for other asset managers and asset owners implementing the recommendations. Reporting Aligned with the 11 Recommended Disclosures The highest level of reporting for the top 50 asset owners was on Metrics and Targets a) at 44%, followed by Governance a) , Governance b) , and Strategy a) at 36%, as shown below. The lowest levels of reporting were for Strategy c) and Strategy b) at 18% and 20%, respectively. Directional Comparison with Survey Results Recognizing these results are not directly comparable to the survey results discussed above since survey respondents varied in size and were subject to self-selection bias, the Task Force instead compared the most and least disclosed recommended disclosures from the two groups. The groups were aligned on the least reported recommended disclosure — Strategy c) . The groups were not aligned on the most reported recommended disclosure, which survey respondents identified as Governance b) whereas the most reported item for the top 50 was Metrics and Targets a) .Recommendation Recommended Disclosure Percent of Organizations Reporting Governance a) Board Oversight b) Management’s Role Strategy a) Risks and Opportunities b) Impact on Organization c) Resilience of Strategy Risk Management a) Risk ID and Assessment Processes b) Risk Management Processes c) Integration into Overall Risk Management Metrics and Targets a) Climate-Related Metrics b) Scope 1,2,3 GHG Emissions c) Climate-Related Targets 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%36% 36% 36% 44%34%20% 24% 28% 30% 30%18% Reporting on Specific Metrics and Targets For climate-related metrics and targets, the Task Force was most interested in those associated with asset owners’ AUM versus other types (referred to as operational).2 As shown on the right, the highest level of reporting was on targets for GHG emissions of AUM. Notably, this was more commonly reported than operational targets. Reporting on WACI for AUM was the lowest with only 4% of the top 50 reporting on this.Metrics and Targets <2°C Alignment: AUM 12% <2°C Alignment: Funds and Investment Strategies 14% GHG Emissions of AUM 14% WACI: AUM 4% WACI: Funds and Investment Strategies 14% Targets: GHG Emissions of AUM 30% Targets: Operational 22% 1. The base size for the chart and table in this figure is 50. 2. Operational targets include those related to the organization’s own carbon footprint, including but not limited to carbon neutrality, energy efficiency, etc.Box A11 Top 50 Asset Owners: TCFD-Aligned Reporting1 Percent 38",
    "new_id": 410
  },
  {
    "id": 31981,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why companies may need to provide additional disclosures beyond specific IFRS accounting requirements when addressing climate-related issues, as discussed in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures – 2023 Status Report?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Because qualitative external factors, such as industry context or investor expectations, can make certain risks material and necessitate disclosure even if their numerical impact is negligible.",
      "A": "Because regulatory authorities mandate disclosures in financial filings for all climate-related risks regardless of materiality.",
      "B": "Because sustainability reports are insufficient for communicating the financial planning impacts of climate-related risks to investors.",
      "D": "Because the ISSB standards exclusively require disclosures in general purpose financial reports without exceptions.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "60",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Status 2023.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures A. State of Climate-Related Financial Disclosures B. Financial Statement Considerations C. Case Studies on Scope 3 GHG Emissions D. TCFD-Aligned Requirements and Related Initiatives E. Types of Financial Impact and Associated Drivers F. Insights Gained and View on Future Work AppendicesWhen the Task Force published its final recommendations in June 2017, it recommended companies include climate-related financial information in their public annual financial filings (see Figure B1 ).53 As part of its efforts to monitor companies’ progress in disclosing information aligned with its recommendations over the past several years, the Task Force has found that companies are more likely to disclose such information in their sustainability reports than in their annual financial filings.54 While the Task Force recognizes the amount of climate-related financial information included in financial filings has increased over the years, it believes more progress is needed — especially on reporting the impact of climate-related issues on companies’ businesses, strategies, and financial planning, including the impact on financial statements (e.g., balance sheets, income statements), as appropriate.55 Notably, the ISSB’s reporting standards published earlier this year require material climate-related information to be disclosed in “general purpose financial reports” (e.g., financial filings) and were built on the concepts underpinning the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS).56 In November 2019, a member of the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) published an article — which was inspired by a joint bulletin issued by Australian standard setters — providing guidance on the application of materiality as the term is defined under IFRS accounting standards and how it relates to climate-related and other emerging risks.57 The article, which was later followed by educational material from the IFRS Foundation, highlighted that climate-related risks and other emerging risks are predominantly discussed outside the financial statements; however, “qualitative external factors, such as the industry in which [a] company operates, and investor expectations may make some risks ‘material’ and may warrant disclosures in financial statements, regardless of their numerical impact.”58 53 Financial filings refer to the annual reporting packages in which companies are required to deliver their audited financial results under the corporate, compliance, or securities laws of the jurisdictions in which they operate. While reporting requirements differ internationally, financial filings generally contain financial statements and other information such as governance statements and management commentary. 54 TCFD, 2018 Status Report , September 26, 2018 (p. 14); TCFD, 2019 Status Report , June 5, 2019 (p. 9); TCFD, 2020 Status Report , October 29, 2020 (p. 12); and Section A.1. TCFD-Aligned Reporting by Public Companies (p. 2). 55 TCFD, 2022 Status Report , October 13, 2022 (p. 63). 56 IFRS, “ Ten Things to Know about the First ISSB Standards ,” June 27, 2023. 57 The Australian Accounting Standards Board and Auditing and Assurance Standards Board, Climate-Related and Other Emerging Risks Disclosures: Assessing Financial Statement Materiality Using AASB Practice Statement 2 , December 2018 (republished April 2019). 58 Nick Anderson, IFRS Standards and Climate-Related Disclosures , November 2019. 59 IFRS, Educational Material: Effects of Climate-Related Matters on Financial Statements , November 2020 (republished July 2023) (p. 2).In addition, the educational material published by the IFRS Foundation describes specific accounting requirements as well as overarching requirements that could be relevant for companies when considering climate-related matters. As to the latter, companies are required to disclose information not specifically required by IFRS accounting standards and not presented elsewhere in the financial statements but is relevant for understanding the financial statements. In other words, companies need to consider whether to provide additional disclosures when compliance with the specific requirements in the accounting standards is insufficient to enable investors to understand the impact of climate-related issues on their financial positions and financial performance.59 Moreover, regulatory authorities are increasingly focusing on companies’ inclusion of climate-related ",
    "new_id": 411
  },
  {
    "id": 31982,
    "question": "Which of the following accurately reflects a nuanced implication regarding the relationship between TCFD-aligned disclosure requirements and their adoption by jurisdictions or organizations, as discussed in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures – 2023 Status Report?",
    "options": {
      "D": "While the ISSB’s finalized standards build on the TCFD recommendations, their implementation depends on jurisdictional mandates, indicating partial but not universal alignment with TCFD principles.",
      "A": "The TCFD recommendations have been fully adopted into law by all major jurisdictions, making them legally binding worldwide.",
      "B": "Jurisdictions with finalized climate-related disclosure requirements uniformly mandate the inclusion of such disclosures in financial filings or annual reports, reflecting a global consensus on reporting practices.",
      "C": "The European Union's CSRD excludes financial materiality considerations, focusing exclusively on environmental impact to differentiate itself from TCFD-aligned frameworks.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "91",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Status 2023.pdf",
    "source_text": "A. State of Climate-Related Financial Disclosures B. Financial Statement Considerations C. Case Studies on Scope 3 GHG Emissions D. TCFD-Aligned Requirements and Related Initiatives E. Types of Financial Impact and Associated Drivers F. Insights Gained and View on Future Work Appendices The Task Force on Climate-related Financial DisclosuresFigure D1 TCFD Recommendations Support Alignment across Disclosure Regimes Responsible Investment, the Climate Disclosure Standards Board, and CDP.131 More recently, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, the European Parliament, and the ISSB have drawn on the TCFD recommendations in developing proposed climate-related disclosure 131 See Principles for Responsible Investment, “ Meeting the TCFD Recommendations in the 2018 PRI Reporting Framework ,” December 18, 2017; the Climate Disclosure Standards Board (now part of the IFRS Foundation), Framework for Reporting Environmental and Social Information , January 2022; CDP, “ How CDP is aligned to the TCFD ,” Accessed June 21, 2023; and the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (now part of the IFRS Foundation), TCFD Implementation Guide , May 1, 2019. 132 U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, “ Press Release: SEC Proposes Rules to Enhance and Standardize Climate-Related Disclosures for Investors ,” March 21, 2022; European Parliament and Council of the European Union, Directive 2022/2464 as Regards Corporate Sustainability Reporting , December 14, 2022; International Sustainability Standards Board, “ ISSB Issues Inaugural Global Sustainability Disclosure Standards ,” June 26, 2023. requirements or directly incorporated them into their climate-related disclosure requirements and standards.132 Figure D 1 provides a summary of these final and proposed requirements and standards and how they compare to the TCFD recommendations. Framework Standards Laws/Regulations Organization Short Title Recommendations IFRS S1 and S2 ESRS CSRD SEC Proposal Focus Climate Change Sustainability Sustainability Sustainability Climate Change Required1Voluntary Voluntary Required Required Required Materiality2Financial Financial Financial/Impact Financial/Impact Financial Finalized 2017 2023 202232022 Proposed Incorporate or draw from the Task Force’s 11 recommended disclosuresInternational The rest of this section is organized into three subsections, as described below. • The first subsection provides information on jurisdictions that have issued final or proposed climate-related disclosure requirements that incorporate or draw from the TCFD recommendations (referred to as TCFD-aligned disclosure requirements). • The second subsection provides brief descriptions of efforts — occurring since the publication of the last status report in October 2022 — by governments, regulators, stock exchanges, and international and regional standard setters that support the implementation of the TCFD recommendations. • The third subsection provides brief descriptions of efforts — since October 2022 — by private-sector groups that support the implementation of the TCFD recommendations. Key Takeaways The number of TCFD supporters has grown this year to just over 4,850, largely driven by support in the Asia Pacific region. In June 2023, the ISSB finalized its general sustainability-related and climate-related standards, which incorporate and build on the TCFD recommendations. The majority of jurisdictions with final or proposed climate-related disclosure requirements specify that such disclosures be reported in financial filings or annual reports. 1. IFRS S1 and S2 are not required until jurisdictional authorities mandate their use. 2. See Figure D2 (p. 85) for descriptions of materiality. 3. EFRAG delivered final draft standards to the European Commission in late 2022. In July 2023, the European Commission adopted the first set of standards.European Union United States 82",
    "new_id": 412
  },
  {
    "id": 31983,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the Task Force's implied reasoning for emphasizing the need for preparers, users, and other stakeholders to collaboratively refine voluntary disclosure recommendations, as discussed in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures – 2023 Status Report?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The dynamic nature of climate-related issues necessitates a flexible approach where recommendations evolve through practical implementation experiences.",
      "B": "The Task Force believes that jurisdictional frameworks alone are sufficient to ensure consistent reporting across different regions.",
      "C": "Companies require a single global standard to eliminate the complexity of disclosing financial impacts related to biodiversity and social issues.",
      "D": "The ISSB standards are viewed as final and complete, leaving no room for further adjustments or enhancements in the future.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "124",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Status 2023.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures A. State of Climate-Related Financial Disclosures B. Financial Statement Considerations C. Case Studies on Scope 3 GHG Emissions D. TCFD-Aligned Requirements and Related Initiatives E. Types of Financial Impact and Associated Drivers F. Insights Gained and View on Future Work Appendices3. AREAS OF CONTINUED FOCUS OR FURTHER WORK The Task Force also reflected on areas that it believes warrant continued focus or further work by the ISSB or other appropriate bodies, as described below and summarized in Table F2 . Importantly, the Task Force recognizes some of the issues highlighted below are part of the ISSB’s current and planned work over the next two years, including ensuring interoperability of the standards with other sustainability standards; supporting implementation of the standards; and researching targeted enhancements to the standards.200 As the ISSB and other appropriate bodies continue to drive improvements in climate-related financial disclosure and support companies’ efforts to make such disclosures, the Task Force believes it is especially important to recognize the dynamic nature of climate-related (as well as broader sustainability) issues and the need for ongoing assessment and adjustment, as appropriate, as practices continue to evolve. In addition, the Task Force strongly encourages the ISSB and other appropriate bodies to consider the insights gained by the Task Force over the past eight years as they further develop other areas of sustainability reporting. In particular, the Task Force believes an effective model for such work is to create a group of expert practitioners — representing preparers, users, and other stakeholders — supported by a strong Secretariat to develop voluntary disclosure 200 ISSB, Consultation on Agenda Priorities , May 4, 2023. 201 FSB, FSB Roadmap for Addressing Financial Risks from Climate Change: 2023 Progress Report , July 13, 2023.recommendations that are supplemented by implementation guidance and promoted, monitored, and refined based on learning experiences. Interoperability As indicated by the FSB, the ISSB’s publication of general sustainability and climate- related disclosure standards is a substantial achievement and represents a culmination of the Task Force’s work.201 Since the ISSB standards are meant to serve as a global framework for sustainability (and climate-related) disclosures and support consistent reporting by different companies around the world, the Task Force believes ensuring interoperability of the ISSB standards with jurisdictional frameworks is critical. In particular, the Task Force emphasizes the importance of consistent company reporting across jurisdictions and avoiding the need for companies to report through multiple venues. Implementation Guidance As noted previously, the Task Force believes its efforts to continually support preparers in implementing the recommendations — through the development of guidance, case studies, examples of disclosure, and so forth — helped drive greater adoption of the recommendations and better disclosure over time. As such, the Task Force encourages the ISSB and other appropriate bodies to continue this type of work. Table F2 Areas Warranting Continued Focus or Further Work Ensuring interoperability of the ISSB standards with jurisdictional frameworks to support consistent company reporting across jurisdictions and avoid the need for companies to report through multiple venues. Developing implementation guidance on topics such as climate-related physical risk assessment and adaptation planning, climate-related scenario analysis at a sector or industry level, and Scope 3 GHG emissions measurement at a sector or industry level. Continuing to focus on companies’ disclosure of the resilience of their strategies under different climate-related scenarios, including a climate-related scenario aligned with the latest international agreement on climate change. Continuing to focus on decision-useful disclosure on other sustainability topics — such as biodiversity, water, and social issues — and consider the linkages between climate-related and other sustainability issues (for example, in the context of companies’ transition plans). Developing a consistent climate-related financial disclosure framework for use by countries and other sovereign entities. Consistent and comparable reporting by sovereigns would support companies in preparing comprehensive TCFD-aligned",
    "new_id": 413
  },
  {
    "id": 31984,
    "question": "Which of the following statements most accurately reflects the relationship between the challenges faced in estimating GHG emissions and the specific methodologies or data sources used for Brazilian companies, as discussed in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures – 2023 Status Report?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Brazil's unique emissions profile, particularly from land use, required additional data and complex estimations beyond what the PCAF methodology typically provides.",
      "A": "The PCAF methodology was seamlessly adapted to all sectors, including land use, due to its comprehensive global database.",
      "C": "The lack of company disclosures was offset by the robustness of the PCAF database, which provided complete coverage for all sectors analyzed.",
      "D": "Scope 3 emissions for the oil and gas and mining sectors were entirely calculated using client-provided data without reliance on external databases.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "53",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Status 2023.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures A. State of Climate-Related Financial Disclosures B. Financial Statement Considerations C. Case Studies on Scope 3 GHG Emissions D. TCFD-Aligned Requirements and Related Initiatives E. Types of Financial Impact and Associated Drivers F. Insights Gained and View on Future Work AppendicesThe key challenge we have faced is the limited availability of climate-related disclosures, specifically data on GHG emissions from our investee companies. We have also faced obstacles in adapting the PCAF methodology to Brazilian companies given the country’s unique GHG emissions context. While many countries may have a majority of GHG emissions emitted by the energy sector, in Brazil, land use is a particularly significant source. Estimating GHG emissions associated with land use requires additional data and more-complex calculations and estimations. The lack of company disclosures has made it challenging for us to make further advancements in how we calculate our invested emissions. To overcome these challenges, we rely on the support of a technical climate consultancy to assist in estimations. Figure A49 Disclosure of Our Invested Emissions Disclo sure o f Our Inves ted Emissio ns Invested emiss ions For i nvestme nts man aged by Brade sco As set Manag ement, we also calculated inve sted emissions related to fixed income a nd variable income portfo lios for the years 2021 and 2022. For the cal culations of th e invested portfo lio, we used the Unli sted Equity ass et cl ass of the P CAF metho dology. For the oi l and gas and mining sectors, we c alculated s cope 3 us ing client data, w hen available, an d the PCAF datab ase for th e remainde r, resul ting in 3.2 MtCO2 and 130K tCO 2e (2021) and 2.4 Mt CO 2 and 90K tCO 2e (2022) , respectively. EMISSIONS – BRADESC O ASS ET INVESTMENTS – TOTAL Dec/2021 Dec/2022 Value of t he po rtfolio ev aluated ( R$ billion) 92.8 126.5 Financed Emissi ons – Scopes 1 and 2 (millions of t CO 2e) 1.2 1.1 Cover age of fi xed and varia ble inco me portfolios (%) 100 100 EMISSIONS – BRADESC O ASS ET INVESTMENTS – SECTO RAL Total balance c overed (R$ billions) Scop es 1 and 2 Emissio ns (Mt CO 2e) Emissio n Intensity (MtCO 2e/R$) Average A nalysis Quality Score Sector/Year 2021 2022 2021 2022 2021 2022 2021 2022 Agricul ture 0.16 0.16 0.02 0.02 0.10 0.10 1.5 1.5 Alumin um 0.15 0.11 0.02 0.02 0.16 0.16 1.0 1.0 Iron an d Steel 0.60 0.35 0.12 0.07 0.20 0.20 2.9 2.9 Powe r Gene ration 10.43 14.11 0.45 0.56 0.04 0.04 2.2 2.7 Real Estate (commercial/resi denti al) 1.24 1.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.3 3.2 Oil and Ga s 5.44 3.41 0.33 0.21 0.06 0.06 2.2 2.4 Transp ort 2.38 4.31 0.03 0.06 0.01 0.01 1.9 2.3 Mining 2.63 1.82 0.05 0.04 0.02 0.02 2.7 2.4 Others 69.84 101.2 0.13 0.15 - - - - Note: Br adesco Asset was n ot ex posed to t he coal and cement sectors in 2021 an d 2022. Disclo sure o f Our Inves ted Emissio ns Invested emiss ions For i nvestme nts man aged by Brade sco As set Manag ement, we also calculated inve sted emissions related to fixed income a nd variable income portfo lios for the years 2021 and 2022. For the cal culations of th e invested portfo lio, we used the Unli sted Equity ass et cl ass of the P CAF metho dology. For the oi l and gas and mining sectors, we c alculated s cope 3 us ing client data, w hen available, an d the PCAF datab ase for th e remainde r, resul ting in 3.2 MtCO2 and 130K tCO 2e (2021) and 2.4 Mt CO 2 and 90K tCO 2e (2022) , respectively. EMISSIONS – BRADESC O ASS ET INVESTMENTS – TOTAL Dec/2021 Dec/2022 Value of t he po rtfolio ev aluated ( R$ billion) 92.8 126.5 Financed Emissi ons – Scopes 1 and 2 (millions of t CO 2e) 1.2 1.1 Cover age of fi xed and varia ble inco me portfolios (%) 100 100 EMISSIONS – BRADESC O ASS ET INVESTMENTS – SECTO RAL Total balance c overed (R$ billions) Scop es 1 and 2 Emissio ns (Mt CO 2e) Emissio n Intensity (MtCO 2e/R$) Average A nalysis Quality Score Sector/Year 2021 2022 2021 2022 2021 2022 2021 2022 Agricul ture 0.16 0.16 0.02 0.02 0.10 0.10 1.5 1.5 Alumin um 0.15 0.11 0.02 0.02 0.16 0.16 1.0 1.0 Iron an d Steel 0.60 0.35 0.12 0.07 0.20 0.20 2.9 2.9 Powe r Gene ration 10.43 14.11 0.45 0.56 0.04 0.04 2.2 2.7 Real Estate (commercial/resi denti al) 1.24 1.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.3 3.2 Oil and Ga s 5.44 3.41 0.33 0.21 0.06 0.06 2.2 2.4 Transp ort 2.38 4.31 0.03 0.06 0.01 0.01 1.9 2.3 Mining 2.63 1.82 0.05 0.04 0.02 0.02 2.7 2.4 Others 69.84 101.2 0.13 0.15 - - - - Note: Br adesco Asset was n ot ",
    "new_id": 414
  },
  {
    "id": 31986,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why the increase in reporting on Governance a) for transportation companies might have influenced their overall rise in recommended disclosures per company between 2020 and 2022, as discussed in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures – 2023 Status Report?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The emphasis on Governance a) could signal heightened organizational accountability, indirectly encouraging comprehensive improvements in disclosing risks, strategies, and metrics.",
      "A": "Transportation companies likely identified Governance a) as the sole driver for improving all other disclosure categories, leading to uniform growth across recommendations.",
      "B": "Governance a) became mandatory for all transportation companies in 2021, automatically increasing compliance with other disclosure recommendations.",
      "D": "Reporting on Governance a) directly caused Metrics and Targets c) to become the most disclosed category, overshadowing other disclosure types.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "139-140",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Status 2023.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures A. State of Climate-Related Financial Disclosures B. Financial Statement Considerations C. Case Studies on Scope 3 GHG Emissions D. TCFD-Aligned Requirements and Related Initiatives E. Types of Financial Impact and Associated Drivers F. Insights Gained and View on Future Work AppendicesTransportation The AI technology reviewed reports from 126 transportation companies in six categories: air freight, automobiles, maritime transportation, passenger air transportation, rail transportation, and trucking services. The 126 transportation companies ranged in size from $812 million to $294 billion in annual revenue, with a mean annual revenue of over $19 billion. The AI review results are shown in Figure A3-5 . In 2022, transportation companies most often disclosed information aligned with Metrics and Targets c) at 73%. Transportation companies had the largest increase in the average number of recommended disclosures reported per company for any industry, increasing by 2.3 recommended disclosures between 2020 and 2022. In addition, the recommended disclosure with the largest increase in reporting was Governance a) , with an increase of 37 percentage points between 2020 and 2022. Figure A3-5 Transportation Review Results RecommendationRecommended DisclosurePt. Change 2020–2022 Percent of Companies Disclosing Governance a) Board Oversight 37 b) Management’s Role 23 Strategy a) Risks and Opportunities 26 b) Impact on Organization 23 c) Resilience of Strategy 3 Risk Managementa) Risk ID and Assessment Processes20 b) Risk Manageme nt Processes 24 c) Integration into Overall Risk Management9 Metrics and Targetsa) Climate-Related Metrics 16 b) Scope 1,2,3 GHG Emissions 17 c) Climate-Related Targets 31 Legend: FY 2020 FY 2021 F Y 20220% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%33% 70% 48% 55% 10% 30% 47%23%44%52% 6%7%21% 17%40% 29% 12% 21%3% 42% 73%69%58% 64%18%35% 40% 54% 65% 70%13% 25% 37% Base size: 126 130\n\n[Page 140]\nThe Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures A. State of Climate-Related Financial Disclosures B. Financial Statement Considerations C. Case Studies on Scope 3 GHG Emissions D. TCFD-Aligned Requirements and Related Initiatives E. Types of Financial Impact and Associated Drivers F. Insights Gained and View on Future Work AppendicesAgriculture, Food, and Forest Products The AI technology reviewed reports from 115 agriculture, food, and forest products companies in four categories: beverages, packaged foods and meats, agriculture, and paper and forest products. The 115 agriculture, food, and forest products companies ranged in size from about $276 million to $102 billion in annual revenue, with a mean annual revenue of over $12 billion. The AI review results for these companies are shown in Figure A3-6 . In 2022, agriculture, food, and forest products companies most frequently disclosed information on Metrics and Targets a) , at 71%, although reporting on the recommended disclosure decreased by one percentage point between 2021 and 2022. Between 2020 and 2022, the largest increase in disclosure — at 30 percentage points — was for Strategy a) . Figure A3-6 Agriculture, Food, and Forest Products Review Results RecommendationRecommended DisclosurePt. Change 2020–2022 Percent of Companies Disclosing Governance a) Board Oversight 26 b) Management’s Role 23 Strategy a) Risks and Opportunities 30 b) Impact on Organization 22 c) Resilien ce of Strategy 14 Risk Managementa) Risk ID and Assessment Processes26 b) Risk Manageme nt Processes 20 c) Integration into Overall Risk Management11 Metrics and Targetsa) Climate-Related Metrics 10 b) Scope 1,2,3 GHG Emissions 14 c) Climate-Related Targets 20 Legend: FY 2020 FY 2021 F Y 20220% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%31% 57% 50% 57% 10% 36% 50%23%39%49% 17%10%16% 27%23% 27% 7% 18%3% 49% 69%63%62% 64%13%41% 49% 61% 72% 71%15% 30% 35% Base size: 115 131",
    "new_id": 415
  },
  {
    "id": 31991,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why the Task Force adjusted the confidence level for certain regions and industries during their analysis, as discussed in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures – 2023 Status Report?",
    "options": {
      "D": "To compensate for the inability of AI technology to process non-English reports, thereby maintaining statistical significance.",
      "A": "To ensure all companies, regardless of size, were included in the AI review process.",
      "B": "Because the initial confidence level of 95% was deemed unnecessary for smaller industries like Consumer Goods and Technology and Media.",
      "C": "To prioritize North American companies over those in other regions due to their higher reporting standards.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "132",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Status 2023.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures A. State of Climate-Related Financial Disclosures B. Financial Statement Considerations C. Case Studies on Scope 3 GHG Emissions D. TCFD-Aligned Requirements and Related Initiatives E. Types of Financial Impact and Associated Drivers F. Insights Gained and View on Future Work Appendices Figure A2-1 Industry and Sub-Industry of Companies Selected for Review in 2020 Total: 4,446 CompaniesIndustries Sub-Industries Banking 608 CompaniesRegional Banks Large, Diversified BanksInvestment and Asset Management Firms Insurance 246 CompaniesMulti-line Insurance Property and Casualty InsuranceLife and Health Insurance Reinsurance Energy 483 CompaniesOil and Gas CoalUtilities Transportation 456 CompaniesAir Freight Passenger Air Transportation Maritime TransportationRail Transportation Trucking Services Automobiles Materials and Buildings 1,580 CompaniesChemicals Construction Materials Capital GoodsMetals and Mining Real Estate Management and Development Agriculture, Food, & Forest 325 Companies Beverages AgriculturePackaged Foods and Meats Paper and Forest Products Technology and Media 292 CompaniesTechnology Hardware and EquipmentInteractive Media and Services Consumer Goods 456 CompaniesConsumer Retailing Textiles and Apparel The Task Force began with the 1,365 companies used in the review of the past three fiscal years of reporting, which was originally identified using specific size thresholds so that only the largest companies were included. To achieve statistically significant AI review results at an industry level for each region, the Task Force supplemented the AI review population with an additional 1,748 companies, which required including companies of all sizes. In addition, because the AI technology cannot process reports in languages other than English, the number of companies that could be included in the reviews for Asia Pacific, Europe, Latin America, and the Middle East and Africa was smaller than it otherwise would be. 217 The confidence level for Asia Pacific and Europe was 90%, 85% for the Middle East and Africa, 80% for Latin America, and 95% for North America. 218 Analysis was not feasible due to there not being enough companies with reports in English for Consumer Goods and Technology and Media in Latin America.To determine the number of companies needed to achieve statistically significant results in a given region, the Task Force began with a confidence level of 95% and then lowered it for regions where many companies reported in languages other than English.217 The lowest confidence level used was 80%, and, for some industries in Latin America, there were still not enough companies with reports in English to provide AI review results that were statistically significant at this level.218 123",
    "new_id": 416
  },
  {
    "id": 31992,
    "question": "Which scenario would most likely lead to an asset being considered impaired under IAS 36, based on the interplay between climate-related issues and cash flow projections, as discussed in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures – 2023 Status Report?",
    "options": {
      "A": "New regulations are introduced that significantly limit GHG emissions, causing a decline in demand for products tied to the asset's output, thereby reducing its recoverable amount below the carrying amount.",
      "B": "A company decides to invest in upgrading equipment to reduce GHG emissions, but the expenditure is classified as enhancement rather than maintenance.",
      "C": "Future cash flows used in value-in-use calculations include capital expenditures aimed at improving the asset’s performance beyond its current condition.",
      "D": "Management estimates steady growth rates for cash flow projections over the asset’s remaining useful life despite foreseeable climate-related regulatory impacts.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "63",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Status 2023.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures A. State of Climate-Related Financial Disclosures B. Financial Statement Considerations C. Case Studies on Scope 3 GHG Emissions D. TCFD-Aligned Requirements and Related Initiatives E. Types of Financial Impact and Associated Drivers F. Insights Gained and View on Future Work Appendicesimpaired.70,71 An impairment arises when the carrying amount of an asset or a cash- generating unit exceeds its recoverable amount.72 Climate-related issues may give rise to indications that an asset is impaired. For example, a decline in the demand for diesel- based products of a manufacturing company could indicate that its production equipment may be impaired. Significant changes in the environment in which the company operates — such as new regulations that limit the amount of GHG emissions that can be produced — may also be an indication that a GHG emissions producing asset could be impaired. Determining Cash Flows Included . Where the “value in use” method, which is the present value of future cash flows expected to be derived from an asset or cash-generating unit, is used in determining the recoverable amount, a company is required to make an estimate of future cash flows. IAS 36 places certain constraints on the future cash flows that can be incorporated when calculating the value in use and requires 1) the cash flows to be estimated for the asset (i.e., single asset or group of assets) in its current condition and 2) future capital expenditure that would improve the asset’s performance and the related benefits to be excluded.73 This has raised practical questions on the extent to which future capital investments related to climate-related commitments or targets can be included in the value in use cash flow projections (that is, whether the expenditure incurred to reduce the GHG emissions associated with an asset represents future cash outflow to enhance the asset or to maintain the asset to continue operating). As part of its Business Combinations: Goodwill and Impairment project, the IASB indicated in March 2023 that it tentatively decided to propose removing the existing constraint on cash flows used to estimate value in use in IAS 36.74,75 70 Cash-generating unit is the smallest identifiable group of assets that generates cash inflows that are largely independent of cash inflows from other assets or groups of assets. IFRS, IAS 36 Impairment of Assets , May 2013 (paragraph 36.6). 71 Irrespective of any indicator of impairment, IAS 36 requires goodwill and intangible assets with indefinite useful lives and intangible assets that are not yet available for use to be tested for impairment annually. 72 The carrying amount is the amount at which an asset is recognized after deducting any accumulated depreciation (amortization) and accumulated impairment losses thereon, and the recoverable amount of an asset or a cash-generating unit is the higher of its fair value less costs of disposal and its value in use. IFRS, IAS 36 Impairment of Assets , May 2013 (paragraph 36.6). 73 The effects of upcoming climate-related regulation or legislation may be included in the measurement of the value in use if management’s best estimate is that there will be an effect on the entity’s future cash flows. See Deloitte, A Closer Look—IAS 36 Impairment of Non-Financial Assets— Reminders and Hot Topics , May 3, 2023. 74 IFRS, “ Business Combinations—Disclosures, Goodwill and Impairment ,” Accessed July 12, 2023. 75 IFRS, “ IASB Update March 2023 ,” March 20, 2023. 76 IFRS, “ IFRS Foundation Work Plan ,” Accessed July 12, 2023. 77 IAS 36.33 requires that when measuring value in use, a company must base cash flow projections on reasonable and supportable assumptions that represent management’s best estimate of the range of economic conditions that will exist over the remaining useful life of the asset and greater weight should be given to external evidence. IAS 36.33 also requires a company to use a steady or declining growth rate to estimate cash flow projections beyond the period covered by the most recent budget unless an increasing rate can be justified. IFRS, IAS 36 Impairment of Assets , May 2013. More specifically, the IASB has tentatively decided to retain the requirement that future cash flows shall be estimated for an asset in its current condition. Therefore, companies would not be prohibited from including cash flows arising from improving or enhancing an asset’s performance as long as t",
    "new_id": 417
  },
  {
    "id": 31993,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why BHP excludes certain commodities from its Scope 3 GHG emissions calculations despite their inclusion being technically possible, as discussed in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures – 2023 Status Report?",
    "options": {
      "B": "The variety of end uses for these commodities makes applying a meaningful average GHG emission factor too complex.",
      "A": "The excluded commodities contribute negligible volumes and associated emissions, making their inclusion statistically irrelevant.",
      "C": "Industry-average GHG emission factors for these commodities are unavailable, rendering calculation impossible.",
      "D": "Independent assurance reports have flagged these commodities as unreliable for consistent emissions estimation.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "75",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Status 2023.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures A. State of Climate-Related Financial Disclosures B. Financial Statement Considerations C. Case Studies on Scope 3 GHG Emissions D. TCFD-Aligned Requirements and Related Initiatives E. Types of Financial Impact and Associated Drivers F. Insights Gained and View on Future Work AppendicesFigure C1 Breakdown of Our Scope 3 GHG Emissions by Category in FY 2022 Disclosures BHP, Annual Report 2022 , pp. 50–51 Note: Footnotes 1–14 can be found in BHP’s 2022 Annual Report. Scope 3 GHG emissions by category (MtCO 2-e)1 Year ended 30 June 2022 2021 2020 Upstream Purchased goods and services (including capital goods)29.9 10.1 9.8 Fuel and energy related activities 1.0 1.1 1.2 Upstream transportation and distribution34.6 4.8 4.6 Business travel40.1 0.1 0.1 Employee commuting40.3 0.4 0.2 Downstream Downstream transportation and distribution53.2 3.1 2.9 Investments (i.e. our non-operated assets)62.7 2.7 2.7 Processing of sold products7 GHG emissions from steelmaking8305.3 300.5 292.9 – Iron ore processing to crude steel 270.8 260.7 252.8 – Metallurgical coal processing to crude steel934.5 39.8 40.1 Copper processing101.0 1.0 1.0 Nickel processing110.3 Total processing of sold products 306.7 301.5 294.0 Use of sold products Energy coal12,1337.6 38.3 56.4 Natural gas1317.4 19.5 20.6 Crude oil and condensates1315.9 16.8 17.9 Natural gas liquids131.7 1.8 1.9 Total use of sold products 72.6 76.4 96.8 Total Scope 3 GHG emissions 401.2 400.1 412.3 Total Scope 3 GHG emissions (adjusted for divested operations)14364.3 359.7 369.5 Our approach to calculating Scope 3 GHG emissions is aligned with the GHG Protocol. We calculate GHG emissions from Processing of Sold Products by each of our significant commodities. We also make assumptions on the most common process type the significant commodities can go through and the associated industry-average GHG emission factor per input volume of our commodity.110 The commodities not covered have comparably lower volumes — and associated GHG emissions — and the variety of end uses associated with these commodities means applying a meaningful average GHG emission factor is challenging. 110 For example, we use data from the International Energy Agency’s Iron and Steel CCS Study , April 2013 and Iron and Steel Technology Roadmap , October 2020. For details, refer to pages 18 and 19 and Appendix 1 in BHP Scope 1,2 and 3 GHG Emissions Calculation Methodology 2022 , September 6, 2022. 111 WRI and WBCSD, Technical Guidance for Calculating Scope 3 Emissions , April 23, 2013. 112 Refer to Independent Assurance Report in section 7.19 of our Annual Report 2022 for further details.The following paragraphs describe an example of how we calculate GHG emissions from the processing of iron ore to steel. For calculation of Processing of Sold Products, we use the “average-data” method outlined in the Technical Guidance for Calculating Scope 3 Emissions, which involves applying industry average emission factors to production volumes for each commodity to determine a GHG emissions estimate.111 As part of our annual reporting, we obtain independent limited assurance over certain sustainability data and disclosures in our Annual Report, which includes Scope 3 GHG emissions and the calculation approach.112 66",
    "new_id": 418
  },
  {
    "id": 31994,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the nuanced differences in reporting timelines and mandatory requirements across jurisdictions for specific industries or entity types, as discussed in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures – 2023 Status Report?",
    "options": {
      "C": "In Singapore, financial institutions faced earlier mandatory reporting deadlines compared to companies in the transportation and materials and buildings industries due to staggered implementation phases.",
      "A": "All issuers in Mauritius were required to comply with TCFD-aligned reporting beginning in FY 2022, regardless of their industry classification or size.",
      "B": "The United Kingdom mandated all large asset managers and asset owners with assets under management exceeding £5 billion to report by FY 2022, aligning with the phase-in approach for smaller entities.",
      "D": "Switzerland’s regulations applied uniformly to all companies meeting the employee threshold of ≥500 employees without regard to their financial or operational characteristics.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "93",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Status 2023.pdf",
    "source_text": "A. State of Climate-Related Financial Disclosures B. Financial Statement Considerations C. Case Studies on Scope 3 GHG Emissions D. TCFD-Aligned Requirements and Related Initiatives E. Types of Financial Impact and Associated Drivers F. Insights Gained and View on Future Work Appendices The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures(footnotes)145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 The Task Force reviewed whether these final and proposed 145 TCFD-aligned reporting requirements apply to “Main Market” listed issuers, which are defined in the Main Market Listing Requirements . 146 All issuers were required to report on a “comply or explain” basis beginning with their 2019 annual reports; and mandatory reporting became effective three years later, with 2022 annual reports. 147 All issuers are required to report on a “comply or explain” basis for the year beginning on January 1, 2022. See SGX Group, Practice Note 7.6 Sustainability Reporting Guide , June 20, 2016. Issuers in the financial; agriculture, food, and forest products; and energy industries were subject to mandatory reporting beginning on January 1, 2023. 148 Issuers in the transportation and materials and buildings industries are subject to mandatory reporting beginning on January 1, 2024. 149 See the press releases for “ Guidelines for Domestic Banks’ Climate Risk Financial Disclosure ” and “ Guidelines on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures of Insurance Companies .” 150 See The Companies Regulations 2022 and The Limited Liability Partnerships Regulations 2022 . 151 See p. 6 of the proposed requirements for a summary of the types of large listed and unlisted companies and financial institutions in scope. 152 See Proposed National Instrument 51-107 Disclosure of Climate-Related Matters , October 18, 2021 (pp. 6-11). 153 See pp. 15-16 of the consultation paper for a summary of the phase in for listed companies and large non-listed companies. 154 See p. 290 of the proposed rule for a summary of the phase-in for specific types of registrants. Table D1 TCFD-Aligned Disclosure Requirements in Select Jurisdictions (continued) Final Requirements Jurisdiction: Authority Scope ThresholdTime FrameReport Type Malaysia: Bursa Malaysia Stock Exchange Specific listed issuers145FY 2025 Mauritius: Central Bank of Mauritius Licensed banks and deposit taking non-banks FY 2022 New Zealand: New Zealand Government Issuers: securities >NZ$60M FY 2023 Banks: assets >NZ$1B FY 2023 Asset managers: AUM >NZ$1B FY 2023 Insurers with premium income >NZ$250M FY 2023 Philippines: Securities and Exchange CommissionAll registrants146 FY 2022 Singapore: Singapore Exchange Specific industries147FY 2023 Specific industries148FY 2024 Switzerland: Federal Council Employees ≥500 and assets >₣20M or revenues >₣40MFY 2024 Switzerland: Financial Market Supervisory AuthorityAssets >₣100B or AUM >₣500B FY 2021 Taiwan: Financial Supervisory Commission Banks and insurance companies149FY 2023 Thailand: Central Bank of Thailand All financial institutions FY 2023 United Kingdom: Financial Conduct Authority Issuers of standard-listed shares and GDR FY 2022 Asset managers: AUM >£50B Asset owners: AUM >£25BFY 2022 Asset managers and asset owners: AUM >£5B FY 2023 United Kingdom: U.K. Parliament Specific U.K. companies and LLPs >500 employees150 FY 2022 Occupational pension schemes: assets >£5B FY 2022 Occupational pension schemes: assets >£1B FY 2023 Proposed Requirements Jurisdiction: Authority Scope ThresholdTime FrameReport Type Australia: Treasury Large entities151 Phased Canada: Canadian Securities Administrators Regulated issuers152 Phased Hong Kong: Hong Kong Stock Exchange All issuers FY 2024 Singapore: The Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority and Singapore Exchange All issuers and large non-listed companies153Phased United States: Securities and Exchange CommissionAll registrants154Phased LEGEND Scope Report Type Listed Companies Financial Filing/Annual Report Listed and Private Companies Other Financial Institutions Sustainability Report Other 84",
    "new_id": 419
  },
  {
    "id": 31996,
    "question": "Which inference best captures the relationship between the reported reductions in carbon intensity metrics and their implications for portfolio management strategies, as discussed in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures – 2023 Status Report?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The decline in WACI for both equities and credit portfolios indicates that strategic shifts, such as adopting a climate-aware benchmark, played a critical role in achieving year-on-year progress.",
      "A": "The transition to a new climate-aware equity benchmark was primarily responsible for reducing financed emissions across all portfolios.",
      "B": "Reductions in weighted average carbon intensity (WACI) were achieved independently of changes to the equity benchmark, suggesting broader systemic improvements.",
      "C": "Year-on-year reductions in carbon intensity metrics can be attributed solely to improved energy efficiency within underlying investments.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "56-57",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Status 2023.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures A. State of Climate-Related Financial Disclosures B. Financial Statement Considerations C. Case Studies on Scope 3 GHG Emissions D. TCFD-Aligned Requirements and Related Initiatives E. Types of Financial Impact and Associated Drivers F. Insights Gained and View on Future Work AppendicesU.K. Pension Schemes Figure A52 shows a U.K. pension fund’s reporting on the potential impact of three different climate-related scenarios on the fund’s portfolios ( Strategy c ). Figure A52 Resilience of Strategy Universities Superannuation Scheme, Universities Superannuation Scheme TCFD Report 2022 , pp. 16–17 Note: Some content was reformatted in order to fit the page. 47\n\n[Page 57]\nThe Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures A. State of Climate-Related Financial Disclosures B. Financial Statement Considerations C. Case Studies on Scope 3 GHG Emissions D. TCFD-Aligned Requirements and Related Initiatives E. Types of Financial Impact and Associated Drivers F. Insights Gained and View on Future Work AppendicesFigure A53 shows a U.K. pension scheme’s reporting on its financed emissions, financed carbon intensity, and weighted average carbon Figure A53 Portfolio Carbon Footprint Metrics Equities portfolio: carbon intensity metrics The D ecember 2 021 car bon f ootprint analysis f or our list ed Equities aggr egate sho ws subst antial progress fr om our 2 020 footprint analysis, wit h our weight ed a verage car bon int ensit y (W ACI) declining b y 37 per cent y ear-on- year. The WACI of t he Equit y benc hmar k reduced b y over 70 per cent as a r esult of t he tr ansition t o our new c limat e-aware equit y benc hmar k. This had t he dir ect PPF Equities car bon metrics 350 300 250 200 150 50100 0Tonnes CO2e per $million metric carbon emissions (tCO2e/$m invested)carbon intensity (tCO2e/$m revenues)PPF weighted average carbon intensity Benchmark emissions (tCO2e/$m invested)Benchmark intensity (tCO2e/$m revenues)Benchmark weighted average carbon intensity 122 65226 151 154243 30125 70257 83299 December 2020 December 2021 Credit portf olio: car bon int ensit y metrics This is t he second y ear w e have inc luded t he cor porate bonds in our Str ategic Cash, IG Cr edit, EM Debt and Abso lute Return portf olios as an aggr egate. The WACI of our glo bal Cr edit portf olio declined b y 58 per cent o ver the y ear, driven lar gely b y our str ategic cash portf olio. The financed carbon emissions and financed car bon int ensit y remained lar gely unc hanged. PPF Cr edit car bon metrics* 350 300 250 200 150 50100 0Tonnes CO2e per $million metric carbon emissions (tCO2e/$m invested)carbon intensity (tCO2e/$m revenues)PPF weighted average carbon intensity Benchmark emissions (tCO2e/$m invested)Benchmark intensity (tCO2e/$m revenues)Benchmark weighted average carbon intensity 53 50192204 133318 7085193203279 255 December 2020 December 2021 Pension Protection Fund, Pension Protection Fund Climate Change Report 2021/2022, p. 20 intensity as well as benchmarks for each ( Metrics and Targets b ). 48",
    "new_id": 420
  },
  {
    "id": 31997,
    "question": "Which inference can be drawn about the relationship between regulatory emphasis and disclosure patterns across industries, as discussed in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures – 2023 Status Report?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The high level of reporting on Risk Management by insurance companies and banks suggests that financial regulators prioritize this area, influencing disclosure behavior.",
      "B": "Regulatory emphasis on risk management explains why energy companies lead in disclosing climate-related metrics.",
      "C": "Companies in technology and media disclose less because they operate in a sector with fewer regulatory requirements for climate-related risks.",
      "D": "The low disclosure rates on resilience of strategies indicate uniform regulatory neglect across all industries.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "15",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Status 2023.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures A. State of Climate-Related Financial Disclosures B. Financial Statement Considerations C. Case Studies on Scope 3 GHG Emissions D. TCFD-Aligned Requirements and Related Initiatives E. Types of Financial Impact and Associated Drivers F. Insights Gained and View on Future Work Appendicesaligned information in their sustainability and annual reports than in their financial filings for fiscal year 2020 reporting. In addition, across the 11 recommended disclosures, companies were more likely to include the metrics they use to assess climate-related risks and opportunities in line with their strategy and risk management process ( Metrics and Targets a) in sustainability and annual reports than in financial filings. The resilience of companies’ strategies under different climate-related scenarios had the lowest level of disclosure in all three years reviewed. Only 11% of the companies reviewed reported in line with this recommended disclosure (Strategy c ) for fiscal year 2022. Based on a survey conducted last year of over 200 companies, nearly 90% of them rated this recommended disclosure as somewhat difficult or very difficult to implement, which may help explain why its disclosure is low.23 Energy companies disclosed more information than companies in the other seven industries. Energy companies, on average, reported on 6.3 of the 11 recommended disclosures in 2022, followed by materials and buildings companies 23 See TCFD, 2022 Status Report , October 13, 2022 (pp. 57–64). 24 The AI review results for each industry for the past three fiscal years are provided in Appendix 3: AI Review Results by Industry . at 5.8 ( see Figure A3 ). In addition, companies in the energy industry had the highest levels of disclosure on seven of the 11 recommended disclosures ( see Figure A4 ).24 The insurance companies and banks reviewed had the highest levels of reporting on the Risk Management recommendation, which may be attributable to financial regulators’ general emphasis on risk management processes. Figure A3 Average Number of Disclosures per Company Industry Number Energy 6.3 Materials and Buildings 5.8 Insurance 5.2 Agriculture, Food, and Forest Products 5.1 Transportation 5.1 Banking 5.0 Consumer Goods 4.1 Technology and Media 3.7 Figure A4 Disclosure by Industry: 2022 Fiscal Year Reporting Percent of Companies1 Recommendation Recommended Disclosure Governance a) Board Oversight 57% 65% 76% 71% 70% 57% 43% 58% b) Management’s Role 40% 44% 57% 46% 44% 39% 32% 32% Strategy a) Risk and Opportunities 69% 68% 70% 66% 55% 57% 38% 46% b) Impact on Organization 35% 45% 58% 46% 40% 49% 27% 28% c) Resilience of Strategy 9% 13% 16% 12% 6% 17% 5% 8% Risk Management a) Risk ID and Assessment Proc. 40% 44% 42% 40% 30% 36% 14% 22% b) Risk Management Processes 46% 51% 45% 38% 37% 35% 20% 29% c) Integration into Risk Mgmt. 38% 36% 32% 22% 21% 18% 7% 11% Metrics and Targets a) Climate-Related Metrics 61% 56% 81% 81% 70% 71% 67% 62% b) Scope 1,2,3 GHG Emissions 58% 53% 77% 75% 64% 64% 65% 54% c) Climate-Related Targets 47% 50% 80% 77% 73% 69% 56% 63%Technology and Media (91) Insurance (117) Energy (205) Transportation (126) Consumer Goods (131) Materials and Buildings (345) Agriculture, Food, and Forest (115) Legend: Low to high percentage of reporting1. The numbers in parentheses represent the size of the review population.Banking (235) 6",
    "new_id": 421
  },
  {
    "id": 31998,
    "question": "Which statement best captures the primary reason Sanlam's committees elevate climate-related matters to the Board, as discussed in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures – 2023 Status Report?",
    "options": {
      "B": "When the nature of the matter requires higher-level consideration or approval by the Board.",
      "A": "To ensure that all climate-related risks are immediately mitigated without further discussion.",
      "C": "Because the committees lack the authority to address climate-related issues independently.",
      "D": "To delegate the responsibility of monitoring climate-related risks entirely to the Board.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "49",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Status 2023.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures A. State of Climate-Related Financial Disclosures B. Financial Statement Considerations C. Case Studies on Scope 3 GHG Emissions D. TCFD-Aligned Requirements and Related Initiatives E. Types of Financial Impact and Associated Drivers F. Insights Gained and View on Future Work AppendicesThe following two Board committees provide oversight and support to the Board and advise the Board regarding environmental (and climate-related) aspects. • The Risk and Compliance committee advises and assists the Board in overseeing risk governance by setting the direction for how risk management should be approached and addressed at Sanlam. This includes (among others) the identification, mitigation and management of climate-related risks that the Group might be exposed to. The committee meets quarterly and provides feedback at every Board meeting. • The Social, Ethics and Sustainability (SES) committee monitors and advises the Board on all ESG matters, including climate-related risks and opportunities. The Chairs of both committees are independent non- executive directors and have oversight roles in terms of climate change. Depending on the nature of the climate- related matter submitted to either committee, it will note, provide approval, monitor or advise on the matter and relevant related issues that might impact the Group and its material stakeholders. When necessary, these committees elevate climate-related matters to the Board for its consideration and/or approval. Sustainability matters (non-financial and ESG) are considered from a risk, governance, compliance and opportunity perspective and are channelled into Sanlam’s enterprise risk management process. Read more about this process, including management’s role in governing climate-related risk, from page 15.Figure A46 Our Board’s Role in Governance of Climate-Related Risks and Opportunities Sanlam, Climate Change Resilience Report 2021, p. 8 Note: Some content was reformatted in order to fit the page.Disclosures For our inaugural report, we prioritized disclosures on climate-related information that was readily available. For example, we disclosed the board’s role in the governance of climate- related risks and opportunities (see Figure A46 ), detailing how two committees advise the board on identifying and managing climate-related risks and opportunities. We also disclosed our practices on risk management in the same report — as we had already integrated our processes for identifying, assessing, and managing climate-related risks and opportunities across the business through our ORSA process (see Figure A47 , p. 41). We also detailed how climate-related risks impacting our strategy were considered in a top-down manner while those impacting our day-to-day operations were considered in a bottom-up manner. Overcoming Challenges We have encountered and overcome various challenges in our reporting of climate-related information. This includes complex stakeholder management given our multiple business clusters and large number of stakeholders. To meet the need to bring everyone to the table, we established open lines of dialogue and actively engaged with investors, regulators, and our internal teams. We structured the conversations based on the TCFD framework, which provided a common language for discussing the importance of climate-related risks and opportunities. This informed dialogue helped us understand stakeholders’ expectations, which we incorporated into our reporting process. This collective engagement has been instrumental in generating the buy-in necessary to maintain momentum with our TCFD-aligned reporting. Another challenge was our stakeholders’ varying levels of maturity in understanding climate-related information. To ensure that our employees, board, and executives alike are well-equipped to address climate-related risks relevant to our business clusters, we have developed resources and provided training on climate-related risk management. For example, we conducted a webinar on climate-related risk for the board, strengthening board members’ abilities to effectively respond to climate-related challenges and opportunities. We also face a challenge regarding the lack of available climate-related data and information, specifically from our investee companies. For example, we are actively working through our Sanlam Investments business to understand the underlying carbon footprint of our portfolios. While obtai",
    "new_id": 422
  },
  {
    "id": 31999,
    "question": "Which of the following best reflects a key challenge companies face when incorporating climate-related issues into financial statements, as implied by the interplay between measurement uncertainty and specific accounting standards discussed in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures – 2023 Status Report?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Measurement uncertainty is exacerbated by events like pandemics or geopolitical conflicts, and climate-related issues similarly demand judgment in areas such as asset impairment and liability valuation.",
      "A": "Companies must rely exclusively on IFRS standards to address climate-related uncertainties, as no other accounting frameworks are considered robust enough for such complex estimations.",
      "B": "The primary difficulty lies in ensuring that all jurisdictions adopt uniform carbon tax policies, which would simplify the valuation of non-financial assets under IAS 36.",
      "D": "Climate-related disclosures are straightforward once companies apply IAS 16 and IAS 37, as these standards provide clear guidance on eliminating measurement uncertainty.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "62",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Status 2023.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures A. State of Climate-Related Financial Disclosures B. Financial Statement Considerations C. Case Studies on Scope 3 GHG Emissions D. TCFD-Aligned Requirements and Related Initiatives E. Types of Financial Impact and Associated Drivers F. Insights Gained and View on Future Work AppendicesGenerally Accepted Accounting Principles (US GAAP).64 The standards that were highlighted in 2017 related to assessing the impairment of assets and accounting for provisions and disclosing contingencies.65,66 Since the 2017 report was published, several organizations have provided guidance on incorporating climate-related issues into the financial statements, as described in Section B.3. Resources on Climate-Related Issues in Financial Statements . The Task Force drew from these in identifying key considerations that may be useful to companies as they assess and incorporate the impact of climate-related issues on their financial statements. One example of such guidance is educational material published by the IFRS Foundation that was developed to help companies determine how to consider climate-related issues when preparing their financial statements according to IFRS accounting standards.67 Some of the standards included were International Accounting Standard (IAS) 36 Impairment of Assets, IAS 16 Property, Plant and Equipment, and IAS 37 Provisions, Contingent Liabilities and Contingent Assets , all of which are described below.68 Prior to the discussion of the accounting standards noted above, it is important to highlight that a core component of financial reporting is developing estimates, including dealing with measurement uncertainty. Developing estimates presents certain challenges, especially as the level of uncertainty increases (see Figure B2 for more information).69 Recent examples of events that introduced significant uncertainty — and associated challenges — for companies in preparing their financial filings relate to the COVID-19 pandemic and the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Climate-related issues present similar challenges in terms of measurement uncertainty and may have implications for both 1) disclosing narrative information, such as that found in governance statements and management commentary, and 2) measuring and valuing assets and liabilities reflected in financial statements and notes to the financial statements. Reporting on the impact of climate-related issues on the financial 64 The Task Force recognizes that there are other accounting frameworks such as those applied in India, China, and other jurisdictions. 65 The Task Force referred to IFRS, IAS 36 Impairment of Assets , May 2013, and Accounting Standards Codification (ASC) 360 “Long-lived Asset Impairment ” as well as ASC 450 “ Contingencies ” and IFRS, IAS 37 Provisions, Contingent Liabilities and Contingent Assets, May 2020. 66 For the sake of simplicity in this report, the Task Force refers only to standards under the IFRS since the majority of jurisdictions use these standards. Based on the IFRS Foundation’s analysis of 168 jurisdictions, which represents 98% of the world’s gross domestic product, 160 of the 168 jurisdictions have a commitment to IFRS Accounting Standards. See IFRS Foundation, “ Analysis of the IFRS Accounting Jurisdiction Profiles ,” Accessed July 24, 2023. 67 IFRS, Effects of Climate-Related Matters on Financial Statements , November 2020 (republished July 2023). 68 The International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) is the independent accounting standard-setting body of the IFRS Foundation. 69 Sources for Figure B2 are Hubbard, Douglas, How to Measure Anything: Finding the Value of Intangibles in Business , John Wiley & Sons, July 2007 and FASB, Statement of Financial Accounting Concepts No. 8 , August 2018. statements can be complex and challenging and often requires companies to exercise judgment on factors that they may not have considered or had to consider in the past. Impairment of Non-Financial Assets One of the issues companies may face is how to take climate-related issues into account in their impairment considerations for non-financial assets. For instance, jurisdictions’ actions (such as imposing a carbon tax) as well as companies’ own actions to address climate-related risks (such as reducing their GHG emissions) could have a significant effect on their future expected cash flows and result in the impairment of certain assets. Some of the potential climate- related issu",
    "new_id": 423
  },
  {
    "id": 32000,
    "question": "What is the most significant implication of the challenges described in obtaining granular building data for assessing climate-related financial risks, as discussed in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures – 2023 Status Report?",
    "options": {
      "D": "It limits the ability to generate asset-specific results and refine physical risk assessments.",
      "A": "It undermines the reliability of average annual loss calculations for hail events.",
      "B": "It prevents the precise modeling of country-specific risk distributions for windstorms.",
      "C": "It leads to an overestimation of flood risks as the dominant peril in the portfolio.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "115",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Status 2023.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures A. State of Climate-Related Financial Disclosures B. Financial Statement Considerations C. Case Studies on Scope 3 GHG Emissions D. TCFD-Aligned Requirements and Related Initiatives E. Types of Financial Impact and Associated Drivers F. Insights Gained and View on Future Work Appendicesscenarios. Further, it is important to be transparent about these assumptions and uncertainties, and to properly communicate them. We also faced challenges in gathering data at the required level of granularity. The asset- level data we use to run the analysis currently relies on the geolocation of buildings and their main occupancy: datasets that have limited granularity. We have also been working to improve the process over time to incorporate more detailed information about the physical characteristics of buildings into the model, which can generate more refined and asset- specific results. Currently, such detailed information is not systematically available for the real estate portfolio, but we have started to engage with real estate managers to source granular information about a given building’s structure, year of construction, height and floor levels owned, total value, and insured value. Quantifying the Financial Impacts of Climate Change on Our Real Estate Investments We leverage our in-house risk modelling framework to assess the potential direct financial impact of physical climate-related risks on our real estate portfolio (building damages) following possible extreme whether events in the current climate. In 2022, this assessment covered more than €45 billion in direct property investments and analyzed the financial impact of floods, windstorms, and hail in 20 countries. The results are disclosed as average annual losses and losses from a one-in-a-fifty-year event for the full portfolio. Furthermore, the results are broken down by country and event. Based on our assessment, our portfolio’s highest risk exposure is from flooding (representing 40% of potential average annual losses), followed by windstorms (32%) and hail (28%) (see Figure E 9). Figure E9 Breakdown of Average Annual Losses by Peril and Country AXA, Climate and Biodiversity Report , p. 38 2023 Clim ate and Biod iversity Report Average annual hail loss per country Average annual windstorm loss per countryGerm any 46% United States 47%Austria, Poland, Australia, Belgi um, Denmar k, Finland, France, Ireland, Italy, Luxembour g, Netherla nds, Norway, Portug al, Spain, Sweden <1%Finland, Ireland , Sweden, Denmar k, Poland, Austria, Norway, Italy, Japan, Portug al, Spain <1% United States 24%Switz erland 14%Switzerland 21%Australia 10% France 16%Germa ny 8%Belgium 2%United Kin gdom 7%Japan 2%Luxembour g 1% United Kingdom 1% Netherlands 1% €2m €1.4m Sweden, Australia, Poland, Austria, Norway, Italy, Portug al, Spain <1%Finland 1% Luxembourg 1% Denmar k 1% United States 20%Japan 23% German y 7%Netherla nds 7%Belgi um 6%United Kingdom 6% France 19%Switz erland 5%Ireland 3% €1.6mAverage annual flood loss per country2023 Clim ate and Biod iversity Report Average annual hail loss per country Average annual windstorm loss per countryGerm any 46% United States 47%Austria, Poland, Australia, Belgi um, Denmar k, Finland, France, Ireland, Italy, Luxembour g, Netherla nds, Norway, Portug al, Spain, Sweden <1%Finland, Ireland , Sweden, Denmar k, Poland, Austria, Norway, Italy, Japan, Portug al, Spain <1% United States 24%Switz erland 14%Switzerland 21%Australia 10% France 16%Germa ny 8%Belgium 2%United Kin gdom 7%Japan 2%Luxembour g 1% United Kingdom 1% Netherlands 1% €2m €1.4m Sweden, Australia, Poland, Austria, Norway, Italy, Portug al, Spain <1%Finland 1% Luxembourg 1% Denmar k 1% United States 20%Japan 23% German y 7%Netherla nds 7%Belgi um 6%United Kingdom 6% France 19%Switz erland 5%Ireland 3% €1.6mAverage annual flood loss per country2023 Clim ate and Biod iversity Report Average annual hail loss per country Average annual windstorm loss per countryGerm any 46% United States 47%Austria, Poland, Australia, Belgi um, Denmar k, Finland, France, Ireland, Italy, Luxembour g, Netherla nds, Norway, Portug al, Spain, Sweden <1%Finland, Ireland , Sweden, Denmar k, Poland, Austria, Norway, Italy, Japan, Portug al, Spain <1% United States 24%Switz erland 14%Switzerland 21%Australia 10% France 16%Germa ny 8%Belgium 2%United Kin gdom 7%Japan 2%Luxembour g 1% United Kingdom 1% Netherlands 1% €2m €1.4m Sweden, Australia, Poland, Au",
    "new_id": 424
  },
  {
    "id": 32001,
    "question": "Which statement accurately captures the relationship between the methodologies used for Scope 3 GHG emissions and their implications for internal emission reduction planning, as discussed in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures – 2023 Status Report?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The detailed knowledge of category 11 factors, particularly from internal studies, directly informs feedstock substitution decisions to optimize emission reductions.",
      "B": "The reliance on external auditing primarily ensures complete accuracy in Scope 3 GHG emission estimates, enabling precise targeting of feedstock substitutions.",
      "C": "Detailed combustion emission factors derived internally are critical for improving calculation reliability but do not influence broader emission reduction strategies.",
      "D": "Third-party data sources such as DEFRA and GaBi are primarily used to replace internal data management systems for more accurate lifecycle assessments.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "84",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Status 2023.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures A. State of Climate-Related Financial Disclosures B. Financial Statement Considerations C. Case Studies on Scope 3 GHG Emissions D. TCFD-Aligned Requirements and Related Initiatives E. Types of Financial Impact and Associated Drivers F. Insights Gained and View on Future Work Appendiceslandscape. As such, we augment existing guidance with internal research and expertise, as well as a wide range of external sources most applicable to each category. However, it is important to recognize that Scope 3 GHG emission calculations rely on a variety of assumptions and, therefore, attaining complete accuracy is not always feasible. Examples of Category-Level Methodologies In the case of category 1, Purchased Goods and Services, we use data on the volume of purchased goods and services obtained from our internal data management systems with cradle-to-gate emission factors from a variety of data sources, including Sphera’s Life Cycle Assessment (referred to as GaBi), the U.K. Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) as well as our internal lifecycle inventory database. For our most significant category, Use of Sold Products (category 11), we assume complete combustion of applicable sold products and use emission factors from our internal analysis, augmented by additional details from DEFRA and GaBi as necessary (see Figure C7 , p. 76 ). Having access to these third-party data sources has been helpful in both validating our initial assumptions as well as improving on them. We also leverage external auditing, which has been helpful in confirming that the requisite checks and balances are in place, while working internally to strive towards improved data accuracy.Improving the Reliability of Scope 3 GHG Emission Estimates Over the past few years, we have taken several measures to strengthen the robustness of our Scope 3 GHG emission calculations. Although our Scope 3 GHG emissions program focuses on all 15 categories of emissions (some of which are not relevant to our operations), we have paid particular attention to improving the calculation approach of our largest Scope 3 GHG emissions source, category 11. For example, we conducted extensive internal studies to identify emission sources and refine our internal emission factors. Given our position in the supply chain, we developed detailed factors for combustion emissions, which we use to increase the reliability of our calculations. Although the amount of work needed to arrive at detailed estimates for this category was significant, we have found the results helpful beyond Scope 3 GHG emission calculations. One way our detailed knowledge of category 11 factors is particularly useful is in our internal emission reduction planning. For instance, knowing how feedstock substitutions impact our emissions is extremely useful in targeting our reduction efforts given that our emissions profile is by and large the result of feedstock choice. Figure C6 GHG Emissions per Category Sasol, Climate Change Report 2022 , p. 32Highly Certain Low Certainty Unknown Not applicable Moder ate CertaintyCategory ) ) ) )Accounting accu racy N/A Not measured N/A Baseline under development N/A Total Subjecte d to externa l assur ance. 75",
    "new_id": 425
  },
  {
    "id": 32003,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between Sanlam's enterprise risk management framework and its TCFD-aligned reporting efforts, as discussed in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures – 2023 Status Report?",
    "options": {
      "B": "The ORSA framework served as a foundational tool for quantifying climate-related risks but required diagnostic analysis to identify gaps in TCFD readiness.",
      "A": "Sanlam's ORSA framework was primarily designed to replace traditional financial disclosures with TCFD-aligned metrics.",
      "C": "Sanlam's ORSA framework eliminated the need for external stakeholder engagement during the initial phases of TCFD implementation.",
      "D": "The ORSA framework was deemed irrelevant to TCFD-aligned reporting until the final stage of Sanlam’s five-year roadmap.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "48",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Status 2023.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures A. State of Climate-Related Financial Disclosures B. Financial Statement Considerations C. Case Studies on Scope 3 GHG Emissions D. TCFD-Aligned Requirements and Related Initiatives E. Types of Financial Impact and Associated Drivers F. Insights Gained and View on Future Work AppendicesCase Study by a South African Asset Owner and Asset Manager Sanlam is a South African diversified financial services company that is both an asset owner and an asset manager. We have a significant commercial presence across the African continent and global operations in India and Malaysia. We offer a wide range of services to both retail and institutional clients, including insurance, asset and wealth management, financial planning, retirement, credit, and healthcare solutions. We develop and deliver these services through five business clusters, namely Sanlam Investment Group, Sanlam Life and Savings, Sanlam Emerging Markets, Sanlam Fintech, and Santam. We have been a signatory to CDP since 2007 and were the first South African private-sector asset owner to become a signatory to the UN Principles for Responsible Investing (UN PRI). We recognize that climate change amplifies existing challenges related to health, safety, food security, and socioeconomic development. This is particularly the case in Africa, where we conduct a significant portion of our business. Our clients are already experiencing the impacts of climate change, and we are committed to becoming an African champion supporting climate action. Implementing the recommendations of the TCFD is, in our view, not only about disclosing the potential financial impacts for Sanlam but also a key component of furthering our actions on climate change. This case study shows our journey and the challenges we faced as we first disclosed in line with the TCFD recommendations for our group-wide business, including for our investment portfolios. Our TCFD Journey Sanlam Group began implementing the TCFD recommendations in 2021. This was followed by the publication of our Climate Change Resilience Report in 2022, which disclosed climate-related risks and opportunities in line with the TCFD recommendations.46 In this inaugural report, we provided a comprehensive view of our progress in aligning our internal processes to enable TCFD-aligned disclosures. The report also provided a view of our key priorities for 46 Sanlam, Climate Change Resilience Report 2021 , August 2022. advancing our TCFD-aligned reporting in our integrated annual reporting. Our decision to pursue TCFD-aligned disclosures is based on a joint effort by the sustainability and risks teams combined with a need to quantify the financial impacts of climate-related risks and opportunities, including those in our investment portfolios. We began implementing the TCFD recommendations by analyzing our global financial services peers’ reporting practices. This allowed us to gain insights into the best practices of integrating the TCFD recommendations in our industry and the notable gaps in our processes. We also used our group-wide enterprise risk management framework — Own Risk and Solvency Assessment (ORSA) — to quantify the risks our industry faces. We then commissioned a diagnostic analysis of our readiness for TCFD-aligned reporting, primarily consisting of interviews with internal stakeholders on current practices. The diagnostic report helped guide our efforts and set attainable integration and disclosure goals. The analysis emphasized the importance of raising awareness among board members and executives about climate-related risks and opportunities and highlighted the need to integrate climate-related risk considerations into our business strategy. The analysis further confirmed the importance of incorporating climate-related risk and opportunity assessments into our ORSA processes. We developed a coordinated plan of action in the form of a five-year roadmap to align with the TCFD recommendations and to drive climate action, prioritizing areas where we estimated high levels of potential financial impacts. The first phase of our roadmap was to initiate dialogue on climate change with both our internal business clusters and our external stakeholders. The subsequent phase — which we are currently in — consists of setting up policies and procedures to monitor, quantify, and manage risks. The final stage of our roadmap — which starts in 2024 — will include the ongoing monitori",
    "new_id": 426
  },
  {
    "id": 32037,
    "question": "Which of the following scenarios would most likely lead to an underestimation of a water utility's energy consumption when applying the metrics described in the Water Utilities & Services – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Including only purchased grid electricity while omitting self-generated energy and other sources like biofuels measured using higher heating values.",
      "A": "Excluding energy derived from on-site generation but including purchased grid electricity and heating, cooling, and steam energy.",
      "B": "Using lower heating values (LHV) instead of higher heating values (HHV) for calculating energy consumption from fuels and biofuels.",
      "D": "Calculating renewable energy consumption as a percentage of total energy without accounting for geothermal or biomass sources.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "8-9",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Water Utilities & Services.pdf",
    "source_text": "...continued ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORYUNIT OF MEASURECODE Total water sourced, percentage by source type7QuantitativeCubic metres (m³), Percentage (%)IF-WU-000.B Total water delivered to: (1) residential, (2) commercial, (3) industrial, and (4) all other customers8 QuantitativeThousand cubic metres (m³)IF-WU-000.C Average volume of wastewater treated per day, by (1) sanitary sewer, (2) stormwater, and (3) combined sewerQuantitativeCubic metres (m³) per dayIF-WU-000.D Length of (1) water mains and (2) sewer pipe QuantitativeKilometres (km)IF-WU-000.E 7Note to IF-WU-000.B – Water sourced shall be disclosed by the direct source through which the entity obtains water, as classified by the following water source types: groundwater, surface water, ocean water, recycled water, water purchased from third parties, or other sources. 8Note to IF-WU-000.C – The amount of water delivered includes drinking water, industrial process water and recycled water. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |WATER UTILITIES & SERVICES |8\n\n[Page 9]\nEnergy Management Topic Summary Entities in the Water Utilities & Services industry consume significant amounts of energy for the withdrawal, conveyance, treatment, and distribution or discharge of potable water and wastewater. Typically, an entity ’s largest operating cost after purchased water, chemicals, labour and utility operating costs is energy use. Purchased grid electricity is the most common energy input. In more remote locations, entities may use on-site generation to power equipment. The inefficient use of purchased grid electricity creates environmental externalities, such as increased Scope 2 greenhouse gas emissions. Environmental regulations may affect the future grid energy mix, resulting in price increases. Additionally, climate change is expected to impact grid reliability and affect the availability of water resources. As a result, water utility energy intensity may increase in the future as water resource access becomes more difficult. Alternative water treatment, such as recycling and desalination, also can require more energy. Together with decisions about the use of alternative fuels, renewable energy and on-site electricity generation, energy efficiency can influence both the cost and the reliability of the energy supply. Metrics IF-WU-130a.1. (1) Total energy consumed, (2) percentage grid electricity and (3) percentage renewable 1The entity shall disclose (1) the total amount of energy it consumed as an aggregate figure, in gigajoules (GJ). 1.1 The scope of energy consumption includes energy from all sources, including energy purchased from external sources and energy produced by the entity itself (self-generated). For example, direct fuel usage, purchased electricity, and heating, cooling and steam energy are all included within the scope of energy consumption. 1.2 The scope of energy consumption includes only energy directly consumed by the entity during the reporting period. 1.3 In calculating energy consumption from fuels and biofuels, the entity shall use higher heating values (HHV), also known as gross calorific values (GCV), which are measured directly or taken from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2The entity shall disclose (2) the percentage of energy it consumed that was supplied from grid electricity. 2.1 The percentage shall be calculated as purchased grid electricity consumption divided by total energy consumption. 3 The entity shall disclose (3) the percentage of energy it consumed that was renewable energy. 3.1 Renewable energy is defined as energy from sources that are replenished at a rate greater than or equal to their rate of depletion, such as geothermal, wind, solar, hydro and biomass. 3.2 The percentage shall be calculated as renewable energy consumption divided by total energy consumption. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |WATER UTILITIES & SERVICES |9",
    "new_id": 427
  },
  {
    "id": 32051,
    "question": "What implication arises from the entity's obligation to disclose wastewater treatment capacity in 100-year flood zones and the potential impact of intense precipitation on sewage systems, according to the Water Utilities & Services – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The disclosure highlights the need for strategic planning to address vulnerabilities exacerbated by climate change impacts such as flooding and system overloads.",
      "A": "Entities must prioritize relocating all wastewater facilities outside 100-year flood zones to ensure compliance.",
      "B": "Disclosure requirements aim primarily at eliminating sanitary sewer overflows caused by rising sea levels.",
      "C": "Regulations mandate immediate upgrades to all wastewater infrastructure within flood zones to prevent future overflows.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "28",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Water Utilities & Services.pdf",
    "source_text": "Network Resiliency & Impacts of Climate Change Topic Summary Climate change may create uncertainty for water supply systems and wastewater systems because of potential impacts on infrastructure and operations. Climate change may result in increased water stress, more frequent severe weather events, reduced water quality and rising sea levels that could impair utility assets and operations. Water supply and wastewater disposal are basic services for which maintaining operational continuity is of utmost importance. The increasing frequency and severity of storms challenge water and wastewater treatment facilities, and these factors can affect service continuity. Intense precipitation may result in sewage volumes that exceed treatment facility capacity resulting in the release of untreated effluent. Minimising current and future risks of service disruptions and improving service quality may require additional capital expenditures and operational expenses. As the likelihood of extreme weather events increases, entities that address these risks through redundancies and strategic planning may better serve customers and improve performance. Metrics IF-WU-450a.1. Wastewater treatment capacity located in 100-year flood zones 1The entity shall disclose the capacity, in cubic metres per day, of its wastewater treatment facilities located in 100- year flood zones. 1.1 100-year flood zones are defined as land areas subject to a 1% greater chance of flooding in any given year. Such areas also may be referenced as being subject to the 1% annual chance flood, the 1% annual exceedance probability flood or the 100-year flood. 1.1.1 Examples of 100-year flood zones may include coastal flood plains, flood plains along major rivers and areas subject to flooding from ponding in low-lying areas. 2The scope of disclosure shall include all the entity ’s wastewater treatment facilities located in 100-year flood zones. IF-WU-450a.2. (1) Number and (2) volume of sanitary sewer overflows (SSO) and (3) percentage of volume recovered 1The entity shall disclose the (1) number of sanitary sewer overflows (SSO) originating from sewer systems under the entity ’s operational control. 1.1 SSOs are defined as overflows, spills, releases or diversions of wastewater from a sanitary sewer system. 1.2 If regulations do not require reporting of SSOs, the entity shall disclose the calculation methodology or combination of methodologies used. Relevant methods may include: 1.2.1 Duration and flow rate comparison method 1.2.2 Upstream lateral connections method SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |WATER UTILITIES & SERVICES |28",
    "new_id": 428
  },
  {
    "id": 32052,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the reason why an entity might prioritize low-income residential customers in its disclosures, while still maintaining a broader scope that includes all retail customer categories, as described in the Water Utilities & Services – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Because focusing on low-income residential customers provides insights into affordability challenges that could indirectly affect the financial stability of the entire service territory.",
      "B": "Because low-income residential customers are the only group affected by external factors such as economic conditions and climate change.",
      "C": "To emphasize the financial risks associated with customer non-payment, which is exclusively tied to low-income households.",
      "D": "Since regulations mandate that utilities must isolate low-income customers in their reporting to comply with public policy requirements.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "18",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Water Utilities & Services.pdf",
    "source_text": "IF-WU-240a.4. Discussion of impact of external factors on customer affordability of water, including the economic conditions of the service territory 1The entity shall describe the external factors that cause, or are reasonably likely to cause, a significant change in the affordability of water among the entity ’s retail customers. 1.1 External factors are defined as influences outside the entity ’s direct control. 1.2 The scope of external factors includes factors that directly affect current or future water rates, or factors that affect customers ’ current or future ability to pay water bills (with no direct effect on water rates). 1.3 External factors may include geography, climate, weather, regulations, public policy and public purpose programmes, regardless of whether such factors directly relate to affordability. 1.4 At a minimum, external factors shall include the prevailing economic conditions in the service territory. 1.4.1 The entity may disclose the median household income, poverty rates, employment rates or other quantitative or qualitative data describing the economic conditions of the service territory. 2 For each external factor, in addition to a description, the entity shall briefly describe: 2.1 the frequency and magnitude with which the factor affects water affordability for the entity ’s customers; and 2.2 the trend in how the factor affects water affordability for the entity ’s customers. 3The entity shall describe the risks and opportunities that may arise from the external factors. 3.1 Risks may include customer non-payment of water bills, cost recovery uncertainty, reputational value, and regulations, public policy and public purpose programmes that may generate adverse financial consequences. 3.2 Opportunities may include customer growth, capital investment opportunities, reputational value regulations, public policy and public purpose programmes that may generate positive financial effects. 4The scope of the disclosure includes the affordability of water for all retail customers within the entity ’s service territory, which may include residential, commercial, industrial and agricultural customers. 4.1 The entity may prioritise low-income residential customers in its disclosures. 5The scope of the disclosure is limited to water operations and services (wastewater and stormwater services are excluded). 6The entity may describe how its average rates, average bills or customer disconnections compare to other utilities in the industry. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |WATER UTILITIES & SERVICES |18",
    "new_id": 429
  },
  {
    "id": 32053,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes the primary purpose of revenue decoupled rate structures as outlined in the Water Utilities & Services – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "To align utility economic incentives with environmental goals by financially incentivizing reduced customer water consumption.",
      "A": "To ensure that utilities can increase water sales volumes while maintaining stable revenues.",
      "C": "To allow regulators to directly control the volume of water sold by utilities on a day-to-day basis.",
      "D": "To reduce the overall cost of infrastructure investments for utilities by lowering their fixed cost recovery needs.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "22",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Water Utilities & Services.pdf",
    "source_text": "End-Use Efficiency Topic Summary Consumer level water efficiency and conservation —whether a product of government mandates, environmental consciousness or demographic trends —is increasingly important for long-term resource availability and the financial performance of the water supply segment of the industry. How utilities work with regulators to mitigate revenue declines while increasing end-use resource efficiency may be financially material. Water efficiency mechanisms, including rate decoupling, may ensure that a utility ’s revenue can adequately cover its fixed costs and provide the desired level of returns regardless of sales volume, while incentivising customers to conserve water. Efficiency mechanisms can align utilities ’ economic incentives with environmental and social interests, including improved resource efficiency, lower rates and increased capital investments in infrastructure. Water utilities may manage rate mechanism impacts through positive regulatory relations, forward-looking rate cases that incorporate efficiency and a strong execution of efficiency strategy. Metrics IF-WU-420a.1. Percentage of water utility revenue from rate structures designed to promote conservation and revenue resilience 1The entity shall disclose the percentage of water utility revenue from rate structures designed to promote conservation and revenue resilience. 1.1 The scope of rate structures designed to promote conservation and revenue resilience is limited to rate structures explicitly and intentionally designed to: 1.1.1 Financially incentivise customers to reduce water consumption or improve water efficiency 1.1.2 Improve the revenue resilience of the water utility, primarily in circumstances of declining average customer water use or improving average customer water efficiency 1.2 The scope of rate structures that are designed to promote conservation and revenue resilience includes revenue decoupled rate structures. 1.2.1 Revenue decoupled rate structures are defined as a rate adjustment mechanism that separates the utility’s fixed cost recovery from the volume sold, and the utility ’s revenue is collected based on the regulatory determined revenue requirement. 1.2.2 Revenue decoupled rate structures may also be referred to as ‘revenue regulation ’ or ‘revenue cap regulation ’ in which the regulator sets up an allowed revenue requirement and adjusts collections to achieve allowed, or ‘target’, revenue irrespective of actual sales. 1.2.3 Additional guidance on the scope of revenue decoupled rate structures is contained inAlternative Regulation and Ratemaking Approaches for Water Companies,The Brattle Group, September 23, 2013. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |WATER UTILITIES & SERVICES |22",
    "new_id": 430
  },
  {
    "id": 32778,
    "question": "Which factor, according to the text, most directly undermines global efforts to combat deforestation while simultaneously addressing food security and land rights as outlined in The Sustainable Development Goals Report 2024?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The reliance on small-scale farming as the main cause of agriculture-driven deforestation.",
      "A": "The disproportionate impact of large-scale farming in South America linked to livestock grazing.",
      "B": "The failure to integrate biodiversity values into national accounting systems as a primary driver of forest loss.",
      "D": "The absence of regulatory measures and market incentives to promote sustainable land management globally.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "40",
    "ref_doc": "SDG 2024.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Sustainable Development Goals Report 202438• Global trends underscore persistent challenges to biodiversity and forests, despite their critical roles as planetary life-support systems. Global forest area continues to decline, primarily due to agricultural expansion, despite notable progress in sustainable forest management. Alarmingly, species are silently becoming extinct, the protection of key biodiversity areas has stalled and global illicit wildlife trafficking has steadily increased, posing serious threats to biodiversity and the benefits it provides to people. • Efforts are under way to tackle these challenges, with countries advancing implementation of access and benefit-sharing instruments and integrating biodiversity values into national accounting systems. There’s also a growing global commitment to biodiversity conservation, reflected in increased funding and the adoption of the Kunming- Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. • Urgent action is imperative. Addressing pressing environmental challenges and their underlying drivers and interconnections – including climate change, biodiversity loss, pollution, desertification and deforestation – demands intensified, accelerated efforts, and a comprehensive and integrated approach at local, national and global levels. Life on land Reducing deforestation depends on improving food security, income and land rights Between 2000 and 2020, the proportion of forest cover decreased from 31.9 to 31.2 per cent of total land area, resulting in net forest area losses of nearly 100 million hectares. Agricultural expansion drove almost 90 per cent of global deforestation; cropland accounted for 49.6 per cent and livestock grazing for 38.5 per cent. Globally, small-scale farming caused 68 per cent of agriculture-driven deforestation, while large-scale farming contributed to 32 per cent. In Africa, small-scale farming was responsible for 97 per cent of agriculture-driven deforestation. Forest losses due to large-scale farming were highest in South America at 48 per cent (mainly linked to livestock grazing), followed by Asia at 38 per cent (primarily due to large-scale crop production, particularly for oil palm plantations). These findings suggest that efforts to reduce deforestation must tackle production system weaknesses while addressing critical needs such as food security, income and land tenure rights for local communities. Stemming deforestation also demands a comprehensive approach blending regulatory measures, market incentives and stakeholder collaboration to promote sustainable land management and preserve forest ecosystems. A national park manager surveys tree nursery saplings in a desert area of central Saudi Arabia that is being regreened to combat land degradation, desertification and drought. Two different guide layers for two- and three-line titles. Guides for edge of right-aligned text and bars are uniform (and account for space for other languages). Swatches are of full, 75%, 50% and 25% color. All bars should be 0p6 wide with 0 spacing within country categories and 0p2 spacing between country categories. If World, LDC, LDS or SIDS categories are spaced apart, 0p6 spacing from main regions. Number labels should be inside color bars (ideally) and 0p3 from edge. If outside, left-aligned and 0p3 away. Number line 0p2 below bottom bar. Stroke .25pt. Tick marks 0p3 long. Text 0p1 below tick mark. Legend categories right-aligned, 1p0 apart, 0p3 between color bubble and text. Legend color bubble 0p6. Legend 0p6 below number line labels. Any note 0p6 below legend. Note uses hanging indent. Livestock grazing Other driversCropland expansion Urban and infrastructure development Dam construction and change in water coursesCropland expansion, 49.6 Oil palm, 7.0Livestock grazing, 38.5 Other drivers, 4.0Dam construction and change in water courses, 1.8 Urban and infra-structure develop-ment, 6.2Agriculture, 88.1 Note: “Other drivers” refers to severe degradation affecting natural regeneration whereby forests are transformed into bare soil or other wooded land. Due to rounding, percentages may not add up to 100 per cent.Main drivers of global deforestation, 2000–2018 (percentage) Share of regional agriculture-driven deforestation associated with large-scale and small-scale livestock and cropland, 2000–2018 (percentage) 402868054 283746166 17818238 16273022 WorldNorth and Central AmericaSouth AmericaAfricaAsia Cropland, small-scale0 20 40 60 80 100 Livestock, small-scale",
    "new_id": 431
  },
  {
    "id": 32783,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between renewable energy adoption and regional disparities as indicated in The Sustainable Development Goals Report 2024?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Landlocked developing States have achieved a higher per capita renewable electricity capacity than small island developing countries but still lag significantly behind developing countries overall.",
      "A": "Developing countries are projected to surpass developed countries in per capita renewable electricity capacity within the next decade based on current growth rates.",
      "B": "The disparity in renewable energy capacity between least developed countries (LDCs) and developing countries is expected to close within 15 years if LDCs maintain their current growth trajectory.",
      "C": "The installed renewable electricity capacity in least developed countries (LDCs) grew at a faster compound annual growth rate than in developed countries over the past seven years.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "25",
    "ref_doc": "SDG 2024.pdf",
    "source_text": "23Electricity is at the forefront in the shift to global renewable energy; hurdles remain in heating and transport The share of renewable energy in the world’s total final energy consumption rose from 16.7 per cent in 2015 to 18.7 per cent in 2021. Excluding traditional forms of biomass, the share of modern renewable sources climbed gradually from 10 per cent in 2015 to 12.5 per cent in 2021. T raditional uses of biomass accounted for slightly over a third of total renewable energy consumption. The electricity sector has emerged as a frontrunner in adopting wind and solar technologies due to their declining costs. Renewables constituted over 28.2 per cent of total final energy consumption for electricity in 2021, up from 22.9 per cent in 2015. This signals how the world’s capacity to generate renewable power is expanding at an unprecedented rate, presenting a tangible opportunity to triple global capacity by 2030, as agreed at the twenty-eighth session of the Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in 2023. Y et increases in renewable energy use remain constrained in the heating and transport sectors, which account for four fifths of total final energy consumption. Goal 7 | Affordable and clean energyShare of renewable sources in final energy consumption and by end use, 2015 and 2021 (percentage) 2015 2021 Note: The solid area of each bar represents modern renewable sources, and the striped area represents traditional use of biomass.3.5 T ransport4.4Electricity 28.2 100Heat13.7 9.3 23.0 13.0 10.5 23.5T otal final energy consumption6.7 16.7 6.2 18.7 12.510.0 0 20 40 60 8022.9 Impressive overall average gains in electricity generated with renewables obscure slow progress in some places Globally, per capita installed capacity for generating electricity with renewable energy nearly doubled from 250 watts in 2015 to 424 watts in 2022. The past five years saw an all-time high compound annual growth rate of 8.1 per cent. Developing countries witnessed substantial expansion from 155 to 293 renewable watts per capita. Developed countries saw a milder rise from 691 to 1,073 watts per capita, even as they have 3.7 times more installed capacity than developing nations. Disparities are more evident for the LDCs, LLDCs and small island developing States, which in 2022 achieved 40, 103 and 101 watts per capita, respectively. At current rates of expansion, LDCs would require nearly 41 years, LLDCs 38 years and small island developing States 11 years to match the 2022 levels in developing countries. This wide divide indicates an urgent need to bridge gaps in achieving equitable access to sustainable energy. WorldSmall island developing StatesLeast developed countries 4241011,073293 25054691155 4027 10386Landlocked developing countriesDeveloped countriesDeveloping countries 1,200 800 600 200 0 400 1,000 2015 2022Installed capacity for renewable electricity generation, 2015 and 2022 (watts per capita) Global investment needs to triple to rectify marginal gains in energy efficiency Global primary energy intensity improved from 4.9 megajoules per dollar (2017 purchasing power parity) in 2015 to 4.6 in 2021. The energy intensity improvement rate for 2021 was only 0.8 per cent, however, influenced by a robust economic recovery after the pandemic and a shift towards energy-intensive industries. The rate has remained under the 1.2 per cent average observed during the last five years. T o meet the Goal 7 energy efficiency target by 2030, annual improvements must now average around 4 per cent. Key actions include switching to more efficient fuels, such as by electrifying final uses and providing universal access to clean cooking. Improving the technical efficiency of equipment and processes and using energy and materials more efficiently are also important. Further, global investment in energy efficiency would need to triple by 2030. High interest rates pose a challenge as financing new projects has become more expensive, particularly in emerging markets and developing economies. International public financial flows for clean energy rebounded in 2022 but remain insufficient In 2022, international public financial flows supporting clean energy in developing countries rebounded to $15.4 billion, an increase of 25 per cent over 2021 yet still around half the 2016 peak of $28.5 billion. This declining trend could impede progress towards Goal 7, especially for the LDCs, LLDCs and small island developme",
    "new_id": 432
  },
  {
    "id": 32807,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why presenting aggregate figures for all regions may obscure critical realities about progress towards the SDGs as outlined in The Sustainable Development Goals Report 2024?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The lack of adequate data in many parts of the world means regional averages do not fully reflect individual country situations.",
      "B": "Aggregate figures are based exclusively on unadjusted national data, leading to inaccurate global comparisons.",
      "C": "The use of weighted averages ensures that smaller countries disproportionately influence the overall trends shown in the report.",
      "D": "Aggregate figures prioritize developed regions over developing ones, skewing the representation of global progress.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "48",
    "ref_doc": "SDG 2024.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Sustainable Development Goals Report 202446Regional groupings This report presents data on progress made towards achieving the SDGs worldwide and by various groups. The country groupings are based on the geographic regions defined in the Standard Country or Area Codes for Statistical Use (known as M49)5 of the United Nations Statistics Division. The geographic regions are shown on the map to the right. For the purpose of presentation, some of the M49 regions have been combined. The use of geographic regions as the basis for country groupings is a major change from The Sustainable Development Goals Report 2016 and the progress reports on the Millennium Development Goals. Previously, data were presented for countries in “developed” and “developing” regions, which were further broken down into geographic subregions. Although there is no established convention for the designation of “developed” and “developing” countries or areas in the United Nations system, data for some indicators in this report are still being presented for developed and developing regions and countries for the purpose of statistical analysis only, and are based on the practice employed by the international agencies that provided the data. 6 The text and figures present, to the extent possible, data for least developed countries, landlocked developing countries and small island developing States, which are country groups requiring special attention. A complete list of countries included in each region and subregion and country group is available at https:/ /unstats.un.org/sdgs/indicators/ regional-groups/.The term “country” used in this report also refers, as appropriate, to territories and areas. The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this report do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the United Nations Secretariat concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Note to the reader Global indicator framework for the Sustainable Development Goals The information presented in this report is based on the latest available data (as of June 2024) on selected indicators in the global indicator framework1 for the Sustainable Development Goals. The global indicator framework is used to review progress at the global level and was developed by the Inter- Agency and Expert Group on SDG Indicators (IAEG-SDGs) and adopted by the General Assembly on 6 July 2017 (see resolution 71/313, annex). The choice of indicators used in the report does not represent a prioritization of targets, since all Goals and targets are equally important. Additional indicator analysis and information can be found in the “SDG Extended Report 2024” online. 2 Data sources The values for most of the indicators presented in the report are regional and/ or subregional aggregates. In general, the figures are weighted averages, using the reference population as a weight, of national data produced by national statistical systems and calculated by international agencies with specialized mandates. The national data are often adjusted for comparability and, where lacking, are estimated. As decided by the Statistical Commission and in accordance with Economic and Social Council resolution 2006/6, estimates used to compile the global indicators should be produced in full consultation with national statistical authorities. The criteria and mechanisms for validation by national statistical authorities are outlined in the report of the IAEG-SDGs 3 and were endorsed by the Statistical Commission at its fiftieth session.4Although the aggregate figures presented here are a convenient way to track progress, the situation of individual countries within a given region, and across population groups and geographical areas within a country, may vary significantly from regional averages. Presenting aggregate figures for all regions also obscures another reality: the lack, in many parts of the world, of adequate data to assess national trends and to inform and monitor the implementation of development policies. A database of available global, regional and country data and metadata for the SDG indicators is maintained by the United Nations Statistics Division at https:/ /unstats.un.org/sdgs. Owing to the emergence of new data and revised methodologies, data series presented in this report may not be comparable with previous data series. 1 T he complete",
    "new_id": 433
  },
  {
    "id": 32809,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why achieving productive and sustainable agriculture is described as central to meeting human needs, yet regional disparities suggest significant risks in reaching Goal 2 by 2030 as outlined in The Sustainable Development Goals Report 2024?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Regions with the lowest scores, such as the Least Developed Countries (LDCs), face systemic challenges that hinder their ability to improve at the required pace.",
      "A": "The global score for sustainable agriculture has consistently decreased since 2015, indicating a lack of progress.",
      "C": "Europe and Northern America's high scores in sustainable agriculture negate the need for improvements in other regions.",
      "D": "Record-high food prices in 2022 have directly caused irreversible declines in agricultural sustainability worldwide.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "12",
    "ref_doc": "SDG 2024.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Sustainable Development Goals Report 202410Zero hunger • After rising sharply in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, global hunger and food insecurity remained persistently high and almost unchanged for three years. In 2023, about 733 million people faced hunger, and 2.33 billion people experienced moderate to severe food insecurity. Despite progress, 148 million children under age 5 suffered from stunting in 2022. If current trends persist, one in five children under age 5 will be affected by stunting in 2030. • In 2022, almost 60 per cent of countries worldwide faced moderately to abnormally high food prices due to the spillover effects of conflicts, such as disrupted supply chains. • Achieving zero hunger requires intensified efforts to transform food systems so they are sustainable, resilient and equitable. Moreover, accelerating improvements in diets, nutrition, health and hygiene is crucial to meeting the target of halving the number of children suffering from chronic undernutrition. Hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition remain prevalent, calling for intensified efforts After rising sharply from 2019 to 2021, global hunger, measured by the prevalence of undernourishment, persisted at nearly the same level for three years, affecting 9.1 per cent of the population in 2023 compared with 7.5 per cent in 2019. Between 713 and 757 million people faced hunger in 2023 – one in 11 people globally, and one in five in Africa. Moreover, an estimated 28.9 per cent of the world’s population, or 2.33 billion people, were moderately or severely food insecure in 2023 – 383 million more than in 2019. Malnutrition among children under age 5 remains a significant concern, posing heightened risks to their growth and development. Globally in 2022, an estimated 22.3 per cent of children under age 5, or 148 million, were affected by stunting (being too short for their age), down from 24.6 per cent in 2015. Based on current trends, one out of five (19.5 per cent) of children under age 5 will be affected by stunting in 2030. Some 37 million children (5.6 per cent) were overweight, while 45 million (6.8 per cent) experienced wasting, above the global target of 3 per cent by 2030. Three quarters of children under age 5 with stunting lived in Central and Southern Asia (36.7 per cent) and sub-Saharan Africa (38.3 per cent). More than half of those affected by wasting lived in Central and Southern Asia (56.2 per cent) and almost one quarter in sub-Saharan Africa (22.9 per cent). T o achieve Goal 2, significant efforts are needed to mitigate the impacts of climate change, conflict and economic crisis. Record-high food prices in 2022 worsened purchasing power and access to food, negatively impacting food security and nutritional outcomes. Increased global public expenditure on agriculture was at least one positive trend. A woman sells produce in a village on the southernmost tip of Madagascar, where farmers are struggling to harvest parched crops. Accelerated action could bring productive and sustainable agriculture within reach globally Productive and sustainable agriculture is key to ensuring the attainment and continued satisfaction of human needs in present and future generations. T o assess global progress in sustainable agriculture, the Inter-agency and Expert Group on SDG Indicators adopted a new set of seven subindicators covering economic, social and environmental dimensions. Data from 2021 suggested that the world was at a moderate distance from achieving productive and sustainable agriculture (with a score of 3.4 out of 5) and had witnessed a slight improvement since 2015. Regional disparities were evident, however, with the highest score of 4.1 in Europe and Northern America compared to the lowest score of 2.6 in the LDCs. While more detailed analysis is required to investigate the root causes of varying rates of progress, evidence suggests that all regions urgently need to take sustained, concerted actions to improve productive and sustainable agriculture by 2030. They otherwise risk missing the target by a wide margin. WorldSmall island developing StatesLandlocked developing countriesLeast developed countriesEurope and Northern AmericaEastern and South-Eastern AsiaOceaniaLatin America and the CaribbeanCentral and Southern AsiaNorthern Africa and Western AsiaSub-Saharan AfricaStatus in achieving productive and sustainable agriculture, 2021 (score between 1 and 5) 2.82.82.7 4.13.83.73.6 3.42.62.6 3.4 1 2 3 4 5 Note: The score",
    "new_id": 434
  },
  {
    "id": 32810,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between maternal mortality trends and adolescent birth rates as described in The Sustainable Development Goals Report 2024?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Despite improvements in adolescent birth rates, disparities in maternal mortality persist due to factors such as regional fragility and income inequality.",
      "A": "The decline in adolescent birth rates has directly caused a proportional reduction in maternal mortality ratios globally.",
      "B": "Sub-Saharan Africa’s high maternal mortality ratio can be attributed solely to its disproportionately high adolescent birth rates compared to other regions.",
      "D": "Universal access to modern contraceptives has been achieved, eliminating any correlation between adolescent births and maternal deaths.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "15",
    "ref_doc": "SDG 2024.pdf",
    "source_text": "13Declines in maternal mortality have stalled, with wide disparities by region and income Between 2015 and 2020, the global maternal mortality ratio declined only marginally from 227 to 223 maternal deaths per 100,000 live births, over three times higher than the 2030 target of 70. Sub-Saharan Africa and Southern Asia account for 87 per cent of maternal deaths. In 2020, the maternal mortality ratio in low-income countries was 430 maternal deaths per 100,000 live births compared to 13 in high-income nations. The average maternal mortality ratio for very high and high alert fragile states was 551 in 2020, more than twice the global average. Achieving the 2030 target requires an annual reduction rate of 11.6 per cent between 2021 and 2030.Skilled birth attendance has improved globally, rising from 80 per cent of births in 2015 to 86 per cent in 2023. Improved care quality could save the lives of up to 1 million newborns and 150,000 mothers annually. Y et progress is stalling; 18 million births occurred without skilled assistance in 2023. In sub-Saharan Africa, only 73 per cent of births were attended by skilled personnel in 2023, the lowest rate worldwide. In contrast, Eastern and South-Eastern Asia achieved a rate of 96 per cent. Goal 3 | Good health and well-beingImprovements in adolescent birth rates and access to modern contraceptives do not benefit all women and girls equally The adolescent birth rate for women aged 15–19 years declined to 41.3 births per 1,000 women in 2023, from 47.2 in 2015 and 64.5 in 2000. For girls aged 10–14 years, the rate fell from 3.3 births per 1,000 girls in 2000 to 1.8 in 2015 and 1.5 in 2023. Y et 13.1 million babies, approximately 10 per cent of the total number of births, were born to adolescent mothers in 2023. Central and Southern Asia witnessed the largest drop-offs in adolescent birth rates between 2000 and 2023, with a 72 per cent reduction in the 15–19 age group and a 90 per cent decrease in the 10–14 cohort. Sub-Saharan Africa continued to have the highest rates globally, at 97.9 births per 1,000 women aged 15–19 and 4.4 per 1,000 girls aged 10–14 in 2023. The proportion of women of reproductive age (15–49 years) who have their need for family planning satisfied with modern methods has climbed from 76.5 per cent in 2015 to 77.6 per cent in 2024, corresponding to an additional 75 million women using modern contraceptive methods globally. By 2030, this proportion is projected to reach 78.2 per cent, a net increase of 45 million women. This marks a fair improvement but still falls far short of universal access. Under-5 deaths hit a record low in 2022; achieving the SDG target could save 9 million lives by 2030 Global under-5 deaths reached a historic low of 4.9 million in 2022, down from 9.9 million in 2000 and 6.0 million in 2015. Nearly half these deaths (2.3 million) occurred during the neonatal period (the first 28 days of life). The under-5 mortality rate was 37 deaths per 1,000 live births in 2022, a 51 per cent reduction since 2000 and a 14 per cent reduction from 2015. The global neonatal mortality rate fell to 17 deaths per 1,000 live births in 2022, a 44 per cent reduction since 2000 and a 12 per cent reduction since 2015. Unfortunately, the annual rate of reduction in under-5 mortality contracted from 3.8 per cent in 2000–2015 to 2.1 per cent in 2015–2022. The neonatal mortality rate followed a similar pattern, declining from 3.0 per cent to 1.8 per cent. If current trends continue, an estimated 35 million children will die before reaching their fifth birthday by 2030. If all countries met the target for under-5 mortality, an estimated 9 million lives could be saved by 2030. As of 2022, 134 countries had already met the target. Seven more were on track but 59 countries, nearly three quarters of which are in sub-Saharan Africa, will need faster progress to meet the target. 97.9 51.4 49.9 35.9 26.819.711.68.141.3128.9 83.5 69.4 51.696.2 21.927.8 19.364.4 02040608010012014015–19 years 4.4 2.32.00.90.5 0.40.1 0.11.59.0 4.2 4.0 1.94.8 0.5 0.50.13.3 0246810 Sub- Saharan AfricaLatin America and the CaribbeanOceania* Northern Africa and Western AsiaCentral and Southern AsiaEastern and South- Eastern AsiaEurope and Northern AmericaAustralia and New ZealandWorld10–14 years * Excluding Australia and New Zealand.Adolescent birth rate, by age group, 2000 and 2023 (births per 1,000 women or girls in each age group) 2000 2023 Under-5 and neonatal mortality rate, 2015–2022 (deaths pe",
    "new_id": 435
  },
  {
    "id": 32812,
    "question": "Which factor or combination of factors, if addressed through effective fisheries management, could potentially reverse declines in fish stocks while excluding influences beyond the scope of such management as outlined in The Sustainable Development Goals Report 2024?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Overfishing fishing practices alone, as they are directly manageable through regulatory frameworks.",
      "A": "Climate change and habitat degradation, as these are central to restoring biodiversity and optimal stock levels.",
      "B": "Pollution and poor management, since both can be mitigated by enhancing monitoring systems and enforcing sustainable practices.",
      "C": "Eutrophication and ocean acidification, as they are primarily driven by external environmental processes unrelated to fisheries management.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "38",
    "ref_doc": "SDG 2024.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Sustainable Development Goals Report 202436Life below water • Oceans face significant challenges from eutrophication, worsening acidification, declining fish stocks, rising temperatures and widespread pollution. All these factors destroy habitats, diminish biodiversity and threaten coastal communities and the health of marine ecosystems, vital to over 3 billion people. • Efforts to address these mounting concerns remain uneven. Key actions include implementing sustainable fishing practices, expanding marine protected areas to safeguard key biodiversity areas, increasing capacities to monitor ocean health and addressing the pollution that is choking waterways. • Comprehensive global action is under way, yet it must accelerate. Priorities include ensuring that the Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies enters into force as soon as possible; increasing participation in the Agreement on Port State Measures to combat illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing; adopting a global plastic pollution instrument; and ensuring that the Agreement on Marine Biodiversity of Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction enters into force as soon as possible to ensure the long-term health and sustainability of oceans. A group of bleached corals in a reef in Indonesia. Record high ocean temperatures have triggered a fourth global coral bleaching event. Overfishing, pollution, climate change and poor management drive continued declines in fish stocks The sustainability of global fishery resources declined from 90.0 per cent in 1974 to 64.6 per cent in 2019 and further to 62.3 per cent in 2021, due to overfishing, pollution, poor management and other factors. Fish stocks within biologically sustainable levels, however, comprised around 76.9 per cent of global marine fish landings in 2021. Averaging 80 million tons annually, global marine fish landings have remained relatively stable since 1995. T rends in 2021 for major fishing regions vary greatly, from 33 per cent to 84 per cent of fish stocks at sustainable levels (underfished and maximally sustainably fished). The Southeast Pacific had the highest percentage of overfished stocks at 66.7 per cent, followed by the Mediterranean and Black Sea at 62.5 per cent, the Northwest Pacific at 56 per cent and the Eastern Central Atlantic at 51.3 per cent. In contrast, the Eastern Central Pacific, Northeast Atlantic, Northeast Pacific and Southwest Pacific had the lowest proportions of overfished stocks, ranging from 16 to 24 per cent. Overfishing can harm biodiversity, ecosystems and fisheries production, and imposes adverse social and economic costs. Effective fisheries management can possibly reverse these effects (if they are driven by overfishing and not factors such as habitat degradation, pollution or climate change) and lead to optimal stock levels while supporting global food security and coastal communities. The ongoing albeit decelerated decline in biologically sustainable fish stocks worldwide underscores the need for enhanced regulatory frameworks and efficient monitoring systems. Proportion of fish stocks within biologically sustainable and biologically unsustainable levels, 1974 –2021 (percentage) 0255075100 1974 1980 1990 2000 2010 2021Maximally sustainably fished UnderfishedOverfished Note: Underfished and maximally sustainably fished stocks are considered within biologically sustainable levels. Overfished stocks are considered at biologically unsustainable levels.Proportion of fish stocks within biologically sustainable levels, by marine region, 2004 and 2021 (percentage) 56.5 65.9 90.0 77.4 70.8 70.4 56.5 85.7 88.6 94.3 75.0 89.3 68.4 63.6 81.033.3 37.5 44.0 48.7 58.0 58.8 59.5 62.7 64.3 65.2 66.7 75.9 76.5 79.4 84.2 0 20 40 60 80 100Pacific, Southeast Mediterranean and Black Sea Pacific, Northwest Atlantic, Eastern Central Atlantic, Western Central Atlantic, Southwest Atlantic, Southeast Indian Ocean, Eastern Atlantic, Northwest Pacific, Western Central Indian Ocean, Western Pacific, Southwest Pacific, North east A tlantic, Northeast Pacific, Eastern Central 2004 2021",
    "new_id": 436
  },
  {
    "id": 32813,
    "question": "Which scenario best illustrates a situation where an entity would be required to disclose a violation despite it appearing to fall outside typical reporting circumstances, as outlined in the Biofuels – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "An entity experiences continuous discharges that slightly exceed monthly averages, resulting in a formal administrative penalty order.",
      "B": "An entity self-reports a minor exceedance of weekly average discharge limits but receives no formal enforcement action.",
      "C": "An entity violates pre-treatment requirements, but the violation is resolved internally without any governmental enforcement action.",
      "D": "An entity records non-continuous discharges exceeding permitted frequency levels, but these are deemed inconsequential by local authorities.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "13",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Biofuels.pdf",
    "source_text": "6The entity shall discuss whether its water management practices result in any additional lifecycle impacts or trade- offs in its organisation, including trade-offs in land use, energy production and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and why the entity chose these practices despite lifecycle trade-offs. RR-BI-140a.3. Number of incidents of non-compliance associated with water quality permits, standards and regulations 1The entity shall disclose the total number of incidents of non-compliance, including violations of a technology- based standard and exceedances of quantity or quality-based standards. 2The scope of disclosure includes incidents governed by applicable jurisdictional statutory permits and regulations, which include the discharge of a hazardous substance, violation of pre-treatment requirements or total maximum daily load (TMDL) exceedances. 3The scope of disclosure shall only include incidents of non-compliance that resulted in a formal enforcement action(s). 3.1 Formal enforcement actions are defined as governmental recognised actions that address a violation or threatened violation of water quantity or quality laws, regulations, policies or orders, and can result in administrative penalty orders, administrative orders and judicial actions, among others. 4Violations shall be disclosed, regardless of their measurement methodology or frequency. These include violations for: 4.1 Continuous discharges, limitations, standards and prohibitions that are generally expressed as maximum daily, weekly and monthly averages; and 4.2 Non-continuous discharges, limitations that are generally expressed in terms of frequency, total mass, maximum rate of discharge and mass or concentration of specified pollutants. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |BIOFUELS |13",
    "new_id": 437
  },
  {
    "id": 38229,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between socioeconomic and climate-change scenarios in determining urban damage projections by 2030 as outlined in GAR Special Report 2023 Mapping Resilience for the Sustainable Development Goals",
    "options": {
      "B": "Urban damage projections integrate both socioeconomic changes under SSP2 and climate-change impacts under RCP4.5, relative to a 2010 baseline.",
      "A": "Urban damage projections for 2030 rely solely on historical socioeconomic patterns without considering climate-change scenarios.",
      "C": "The SSP2-4.5 scenario assumes rapid declines in CO2 emissions starting immediately, influencing urban damage calculations significantly.",
      "D": "The increase in urban damage is calculated independently of any specific climate or socioeconomic scenario, using only flood risk estimates.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "44",
    "ref_doc": "GAR 2023.pdf",
    "source_text": "Map 10 SDG Variable Year Source 11.1.1 Proportion of urban population living in slum households (%)Latest value since 2006UN Habitat Urban Indicators Database Increase in the urban damage between 2010 and 2030 relative to the 2010 values under the SSP2 RCP4.5 scenario, for flood with a return period of 100 years (%)2015 Aqueduct Global Flood Risk Maps, WRI (World Resources Institute) Relative change in urban population from 2022 to 2050 (%)2018 United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division (2018). World Urbanization Prospects: The 2018 Revision, Online Edition. The proportion of urban population living in slum households is available on the UN Habitat Urban Indicators Database (UN Habitat, 2021) and corresponds to the latest value since 2006. The data for urban damage comes from the Aqueduct Global Flood Risk Maps of the WRI Institute (Luo, 2015), which provides current and future river flood risk estimates in urban damage by country. The increase in urban damage was calculated as follows: The values of urban damage for 2010 correspond to the baseline hydrological and socioeconomic scenarios, while the values for 2030 correspond to the SSP2 socioeconomic change and RCP 4.5 climate-change scenarios. As previously mentioned, t he SSP2-4.5 scenario is commonly considered as the middle-of-the-road intermediate GHG scenario, where CO2 emissions remain around current levels until the middle of the century, and start to decline after that, and socioeconomic factors follow their historic patterns. The values for relative change in urban population use the median (50 per cent) prediction of the urban population at mid-year by country from the World Urbanization Prospects 2018 revision (UN DESA, 2018). The values represented in the map were calculated as follows:Mean near surface air temperature under a 2ºC warming scenario SSP2-4.5 (ºC)2021 IPCC WGI Interactive Atlas: Gutiérrez, J.M., R.G. Jones, G.T. Narisma, L.M. Alves, M. Amjad, I.V. Gorodetskaya, M. Grose, N.A.B. Klutse, S. Krakovska, J. Li, D. Martínez-Castro, L.O. Mearns, S.H. Mernild, T. Ngo- Duc, B. van den Hurk, and J.-H. Yoon, 2021: Atlas. In Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Masson- Delmotte, V., P . Zhai, A. Pirani, S.L. Connors, C. Péan, S. Berger, N. Caud, Y. Chen, L.Goldfarb, M.I. Gomis, M. Huang, K. Leitzell, E. Lonnoy, J.B.R. Matthews, T.K.Maycock, T. Waterfield, O. Yelekçi, R. Yu, and B. Zhou (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press. In Press. Interactive Atlas available from Available from http:// interactive-atlas.ipcc.ch/ The data on share of modern renewables and energy efficiency was provided by IEA (World Energy Balances) and United Nations (Energy Balances 2020 and Energy Statistics Database 2020). The values of the mean near surface air temperature are available on the IPCC WGI Interactive Atlas (IPCC, 2021d). The SSP2-4.5 scenario is commonly considered as the ‘middle-of-the-road’ intermediate GHG scenario, where CO2 emissions remain around current levels until the middle of the century, and start to decline after that, and socioeconomic factors follow their historic patterns. Map 9 SDG Variable Year Source 11.6.2 Annual mean levels of fine particulate matter (population-weighted), by location (micrograms per cubic metre)2019 SDG Portal Ambient air pollution attributable death rate (per 100 000 population, age-standardized)2019 WHO Data on ambient air pollution attributable death rate is available on the Global Health Observatory of WHO (World Health Organization, 2023b), while the annual mean levels of fine particulate matter can be accessed from the SDG Portal (United Nations, 2023a). 87 86 GAR23: Special Report",
    "new_id": 438
  },
  {
    "id": 38231,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the reason why managing connectivity is considered both a source of risk and resilience, according to the interdependent dynamics described in GAR Special Report 2023 Mapping Resilience for the Sustainable Development Goals?",
    "options": {
      "C": "While connectivity can enhance social cohesion and diverse perspectives, excessive homogeneity within connected systems may reduce adaptability and critical reasoning.",
      "A": "Connectivity always strengthens system integrity by fostering trust and collaboration among stakeholders.",
      "B": "The primary function of connectivity is to ensure slow-onset variables are effectively managed across all interconnected systems.",
      "D": "Connectivity mitigates risks by inherently reducing exposure to threats through shared resources and responsibilities.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "39",
    "ref_doc": "GAR 2023.pdf",
    "source_text": "Table 2. Summary of key resilience elements and related action cases Key UN guidance/ IPCC elementWhy it matters Relevant action case examples from the report 3.1 Understand the risk and contextUnderstanding risk is the bedrock priority of the Sendai Framework, from which other actions stem. All 3.1.1 Understand who and what is vulnerable and whyWhen developing a strategy, who needs resilience, and from what, are the first questions to ask? In answering, it is important to understand how changes in one system affect other systems, so the integrity of the whole can be addressed (United Nations, 2020).Fiji Yemen 3.2 Recognize systems are interconnectedUnderstanding how systems are interconnected is important in deciding what type of strategy is needed and where to prioritize investments. Given that the impacts of climate change increase over time, this requires a capacity to understand how slow-onset feedback affects already complex systems (United Nations, 2020).All 3.2.1 Foster complex system understandingAlthough systems are interlinked, each actor has its own set of needs and thinking patterns that dictate how they interact and affect other elements within the same system. Using a complex-systems approach is a way to move beyond reductionist thinking, to appreciate the integrity of the system as a whole. Doing so allows policymakers to anticipate the range of impacts and to avoid inadvertent maladaptive interventions.European Union Yemen 3.2.2. Manage connectivityConnectivity refers to the way different components within a system interact. This connectivity can either be a source of risk or a source of resilience. For example, a family network can help its members through difficult times but, as experienced during the COVID-19 pandemic, the same interaction can contribute to spreading the disease. Socially, connectivity can build cohesion and help build trust, and bring different insights and perspectives. However, too much homogeneity can lower innovation and critical reasoning.Barbados Jamaica and St Lucia 3.2.3 Manage slow variables and feedbacksSlow-onset variables and feedback accumulate in natural systems gradually, increasing exposure to threats. For instance, increasing temperatures may slowly reduce the productivity of certain types of crops, leading to more food insecurity. Deciding how to intervene to modify slow-onset processes requires an understanding of how they are changing and why. Great Green Wall IndiaIn 2020, UNDP Common Guidance on Helping Build Resilient Societies, highlighted the four key elements, in Figure 5 below, that help make sustainable development resilient. In 2022, the Global Assessment Report of UNDRR echoed these same themes, while the IPCC Report of the same year also highlighted the importance of resilient sustainable development, and expanded on key themes. Resilience can be seen as a key connector between climate change, disaster risk reduction and sustainable- development action. The experience gained though action now is also essential to improving foresight capacity, and to fostering more-collaborative, participatory processes, and an agile and anticipatory style of governance that will be essential for a volatile climate future (UNDP Global Centre for Public Service Excellence, 2018). The action cases in this report highlight that countries and communities are already applying these elements in their policies and actions to build a more resilient future. Figure 5 summarises how key elements of sustainable development need to include understanding risk, recognising systems are interconnected, including stakeholders and building capacities for resilience. Figure 5. Elements of sustainable development Source : Adapted from (United Nations, 2020) Understanding the context • Understand who and what is vulnerable and why • Manage slow variables and feedbackBuild capacities for resilience • Encourage learning and experimentation • Maintain diversity and redundancy • Enhance polycentric governance Include stakeholders • Broaden participationRecognise systems are interconnected • Foster complex system understanding • Manage connectivity 77 76 GAR23: Special Report",
    "new_id": 439
  },
  {
    "id": 38233,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why addressing both frequent smaller disasters and infrequent high-impact shocks is critical for sustainable development, based on their combined potential to undermine systemic resilience as outlined in GAR Special Report 2023 Mapping Resilience for the Sustainable Development Goals?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Both frequent smaller disasters and infrequent high-impact shocks can cascade across systems, with the former preventing recovery time and the latter causing catastrophic setbacks in areas with resilience deficits.",
      "A": "Frequent smaller disasters primarily affect gender equality, while infrequent high-impact shocks are the main drivers of poverty increases.",
      "B": "Smaller disasters create minimal economic disruption, whereas high-impact shocks are solely responsible for reversing decades of progress in poverty reduction.",
      "C": "Infrequent high-impact shocks disproportionately affect women’s employment levels, while frequent smaller disasters are more likely to increase extreme poverty rates.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "36-37",
    "ref_doc": "GAR 2023.pdf",
    "source_text": "Extreme shocks and cascading impacts Map 14. Percentage of population in poverty (<$1.9 per day) in 2019 and increase between 2019 and 2022 (SDG indicators 1.1.1 and 8.5.2) Disasters occur only when a lack of resilience allows systems to be overwhelmed. As hazard events become more frequent and more intense due to climate change, efforts to build resilience and reduce existing risk, while avoiding the creation of new risk, need to be accelerated. Given the frequency and overlapping nature of events, even relatively small but frequent events can have an outsized impact if countries do not have the opportunity to recover and restore their systems. While most disaster-related losses are due to smaller and medium-sized events, infrequent high-impact shocks can wipe out decades of sustainable gains in a short period in areas with high levels of resilience deficits. As such, it is also important to plan and act to prevent the potential impacts of lower-frequency, high-impact events. When, unfortunately, events like the COVID-19 pandemic do occur, it is essential to understand what went wrong, and how impacts cascaded across systems to undermine sustainable development. This lesson can help inform future action to better prevent and prepare for future similar hazard events. Between 2019 and 2022, poverty rates increased globally by 8 per cent, pushing an additional 54 million people into poverty. The countries that experienced the highest rise in poverty rates are illustrated in Map 14. COVID-19 resulted in economic losses, many of which disproportionately affect the most vulnerable people. Key figures 6.2 million Deaths directly attributable to COVID-19 (WHO, 2023). 70 million Number of persons that fell into extreme poverty in 2020 due primarily to COVID-19 (the global extreme poverty rate of 8.4% in 2019 increased to 9.3% in 2020) (World Bank, 2022b) 70 GAR23: Special Report\n\n[Page 37]\nKey figures As seen in Map 15, between 2019 and 2020, women’s employment levels fell by 4.2 per cent compared to 3 per cent for men (ILO, 2021). In a study of 58 countries, women living with children were more likely to lose their jobs than men living with children (29 per cent compared to 20 per cent) (UN Women, 2021b) (UN Women, 2021a). The long-term impact is that progress to achieve SDG targets on gender equality has significantly regressed, with some reports stating that 40 years were lost (World Economic Forum, 2021a).Map 15: Change in female unemployment between 2019 and 2022 relative to the 2019 values and ratio between female and male unemployment rates between 2019 and 2022 (SDG indicators 1.1.1 and 8.5.2) 135 Years Years expected to close the gender-inequality gap from 2021 (World Economic Forum, 2021b) 43% Percentage of women employed compared to 69% of men in 2021 (ILO, 2021) 72 GAR23: Special Report",
    "new_id": 440
  },
  {
    "id": 38234,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the underlying reason for Maldives' strategic shift toward the 'Blue Economy' and renewable energy initiatives, while also addressing its vulnerabilities as outlined in GAR Special Report 2023 Mapping Resilience for the Sustainable Development Goals?",
    "options": {
      "A": "To mitigate environmental risks and enhance resilience against climate change impacts by diversifying away from tourism and fuel import dependency.",
      "B": "To achieve rapid economic growth by fully exploiting untapped marine resources and reducing reliance on imports.",
      "C": "To comply with international environmental agreements and secure additional funding for infrastructure development.",
      "D": "To prioritize short-term recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic through immediate investments in high-yield sectors.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "33",
    "ref_doc": "GAR 2023.pdf",
    "source_text": "A crisis often brings opportunity and a chance to change course. This is the case with Maldives, which, after making impressive development gains, found that its reliance on tourism for growth, in combination with environmental pressures, threatened to undermine its achievements. To consolidate gains and increase its resilience, including against rising temperatures, Maldives embarked on a diversification strategy across all major sectors, including its economy, and its electricity and water systems. Situated in a remote region of the Indian Ocean, with its communities separated over hundreds of coral islands, life in Maldives is dependent on, and exposed to, the forces of nature. To develop its economy and allow its population to reach the level of affluency of other nations, Maldives embarked on a development strategy that focused largely on tourism, and an energy system that relied on fuel imports. This resulted in it achieving upper middle-income status according to the World Bank, and in raising the standard of living for its citizens (World Bank, 2023). However, the COVID-19 pandemic and slow-onset environmental pressures have revealed vulnerabilities. Maldives experienced a 33 per cent economic contraction during the pandemic. Hazards related to diminishing freshwater reserves, cyclones and sea-level rise threatened to undermine the country’s advances (Asian Development Bank, 2020a). The government response was to create recovery programmes that encouraged economic diversification, collaboration and innovation. To diversify its economy away from tourism, Maldives has shifted investments to the ‘Blue Economy’ (sustainable use of ocean resources). It has taken steps 15 Fishing accounts for 90% of the country’s exports. (Ministry of Fisheries, Marine Resources and Agriculture, 2019) 16 The Maldives Ministry of Environment is implementing the Coastal Protection Projects.to modernize its fishing industry, improving the capacity to refine its products. It has banned the use of fishing nets 15 and expanded marine-protection areas, which now cover 543 km2 (Ministry of Environment, Climate Change and Technology, Republic of Maldives, 2022a). Also, starting in 2023, all single-use plastics have been banned (PSM News, 2023). These measures help make the economy more resilient while also protecting the coastal ecosystems, providing a buffer against storms and tidal surges. 16 To address chronic water shortages, the government has diversified and decentralized water management. It has implemented new climate-resilient IWRM systems on four main islands, that combine rainwater harvesting with desalination and water-rationalization interventions. Improvements are being made to recycle wastewater, with dozens of water-treatment plants constructed on the islands (World Bank, 2019). It has also increased water storage and developed water-security plans for the event of water shortages. These policies improve access to clean water and allow the groundwater to recharge, thus improving ecosystems and reducing pollution, while also reducing costs related to water management (UNDP Climate, 2022). Maldives is investing in renewable energy to enhance the resilience of its electrical system. In December 2022, the country opened its first 5 MW solar facility outside the capital as part of a programme to develop 50 MW of solar and battery capacity, supported by the World Bank. The innovative financing framework utilized for this project may be used as a model in other small island developing States, including Mauritius and Seychelles (Chen et al., 2023). Maldives is also expanding rooftop solar capacities, which increased from 1.5 MW to 21.5 MW between 2009 and 2019 (Ministry of Environment, ACTION CASE: MALDIVES Strengthening resilience through economic diversification Climate Change and Technology, Republic of Maldives, 2022b). To improve grid stability, high-voltage connections are being built between the islands. 17 These efforts improve resilience and are also cost- effective by reducing expenditure on expensive fuel imports. Energy transition is also central to achieving the country’s ambition to become net zero by 2030. The combination of these diverse set of interventions marks a turning point for Maldives, moving it away from reacting to emergencies to more sustainable, longer- term solutions. 17 Interconnection of the power grids: Hulhulmale’–Hulhule’–Male’ (phase 1 in 2021) and Male’–Villingili–Gulhifalhu–Thilafushi (phase 2 in",
    "new_id": 441
  },
  {
    "id": 38237,
    "question": "Which of the following conclusions can be drawn regarding the relationship between urban population growth, flood risk, and slum vulnerability as described in GAR Special Report 2023 Mapping Resilience for the Sustainable Development Goals?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Regions with high concentrations of slums are likely to face disproportionately greater flood risks due to inadequate infrastructure.",
      "A": "Urban areas with convenient access to open public spaces will experience reduced flood damage by 2050.",
      "C": "The doubling of slum populations by 2050 will correlate with a proportional increase in global urban flood damage.",
      "D": "Economic losses from flooding will decrease in urban areas where climate adaptation measures are implemented by 2030.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "29",
    "ref_doc": "GAR 2023.pdf",
    "source_text": "Projected relative change in urban population between 2022 and 2030Resilience deficit 8. Increasing flood risk and urbanization Map 10. Percentage of urban population living in slums (latest value since 2006), increase in urban damage between 2010 and 2030 relative to the 2010 values under the SSP2 RCP4.5 scenario, for flood with a return period of 100 years and projected relative change in urban population between 2022 and 2050 (SDG indicator 11.1.1) 45.2% Urban population with convenient access to open public areas. (SDG indicator 11.7.1) (UN DESA, 2022) 20-24% Increase in global population exposure to flooding between 2000 and 2018 (Tellman et al., 2021) 31% Economic losses due to hazards caused by flooding between 1970 and 2019 (WMO, 2021) 170% Projected increase in damage caused by riverine flooding with 2°C warming without adaptation (IPCC, 2022) (WMO, 2021)Flooding is one of the costliest metrological hazards, causing hundreds of billions of dollars of damage annually (Ward et al., 2013). Although the impacts of climate change on riverine and urban flooding vary (Alifu et al., 2022), with some areas expected to receive more rain and others less (IPCC, 2021a), the overall increase in the intensity of rains increases flood risk, particularly in south Asia, south-east Asia and the western Amazon (Eccles et al., 2019). The population in slums and unplanned urban settlements is projected to double by 2050, an increase of 100 per cent from 760 million in 2022 to 1570 million in 2050 (Arnell and Gosling, 2016). Map 10 shows that without rapid action to address this resilience deficit, many of these already vulnerable people will be also exposed to significantly higher flood risk Urban areas, where most of the world’s population lives, will be particularly vulnerable, given the inability of urban surfaces to absorb rain (Hettiarachchi et al., n.d.). In some regions, such as Europe, direct damage due to flooding is expected to increase sixfold without climate change adaptation and risk reduction, with losses per square metre being the highest in urban areas (European Commission, 2020). Map 10 shows the projected damage to urban areas due to riverine flooding based on urban- population growth rate. The map also shows the correlation between poor infrastructure vulnerable to riverine flooding and the preponderance of urban slums. Key figures 56 GAR23: Special Report",
    "new_id": 442
  },
  {
    "id": 38580,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the logical relationship between regulatory pressures faced by entities in the Investment Banking & Brokerage industry and their implications for sustainability-related disclosures, as outlined in the Investment Banking & Brokerage – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Entities are required to disclose systemic risks associated with capital allocation activities, while also facing scrutiny over compensation practices that indirectly affect ESG integration transparency.",
      "A": "Regulatory pressures primarily require increased disclosure of proprietary trading limits, which directly reduces the need for reporting on employee diversity metrics.",
      "B": "The focus on stress testing and capital requirements has eliminated the necessity for detailed disclosures on whistleblower policies and procedures as part of business ethics reporting.",
      "D": "New regulations mandate that all revenue from underwriting and advisory services be reported exclusively in presentation currency without requiring supplementary qualitative descriptions.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "5-6",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Investment Banking & Brokerage.pdf",
    "source_text": "Use of the Standards SASB Standards are intended to aid entities in disclosing information about sustainability-related risks and opportunities that could reasonably be expected to affect the entity ’s cash flows, its access to finance or cost of capital over the short, medium or long term. An entity determines which Industry Standard(s) and which disclosure topics are relevant to its business, and which associated metrics to report. In general, an entity should use the SASB Standard specific to its primary industry as identified in SICS® . However, companies with substantial business in multiple SICS® industries should refer to and consider the applicability of the disclosure topics and associated metrics in additional SASB Standards. The disclosure topics and associated metrics contained in this Standard have been identified as those that are likely to be useful to investors. However, the responsibility for making materiality judgements and determinations rests with the reporting entity. Industry Description Investment Banking & Brokerage industry entities perform a wide range of functions in the capital markets, including raising and allocating capital and providing market-making and advisory services for corporations, financial institutions, governments and high net-worth individuals. Specific activities include financial advisory and securities underwriting services conducted on a fee basis; securities and commodities brokerage activities, which involve buying and selling securities or commodities contracts and options on a commission or fee basis; and trading and principal investment activities, which involve the buying and selling of equities, fixed income, currencies, commodities and other securities for client-driven and proprietary trading. Investment banks also originate and securitise loans for infrastructure and other projects. Entities in the industry generate revenues from global markets and, therefore, are exposed to various regulatory regimes. The industry continues to face regulatory pressure to reform and disclose aspects of operations that present systemic risks. Specifically, entities are facing new capital requirements, stress testing, limits on proprietary trading and increased scrutiny over compensation practices. Note: This standard addresses ‘pure play ’ investment banking and brokerage services. Separate standards exist for the Mortgage Finance (FN-MF), Commercial Banking (FN-CB), Consumer Finance (FN-CF), Asset Management & Custody Services (FN-AM), and Insurance (FN-IN) industries. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |INVESTMENT BANKING & BROKERAGE |5\n\n[Page 6]\nSUSTAINABILITY DISCLOSURE TOPICS & METRICS Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORYUNIT OF MEASURECODE Employee Diversity & InclusionPercentage of (1) gender and (2) diversity group representation for (a) executive management, (b) non-executive management, (c) professionals, and (d) all other employees 1QuantitativePercentage (%)FN-IB-330a.1 Incorporation of Environmental, Social, and Governance Factors in Investment Banking & Brokerage ActivitiesRevenue from (1) underwriting, (2) advisory and (3) securitisation transactions incorporating integration of environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors, by industryQuantitativePresentation currencyFN-IB-410a.1 (1) Number and (2) total value of investments and loans incorporating integration of environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors, by industryQuantitativeNumber, Presentation currencyFN-IB-410a.2 Description of approach to incorporation of environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors in investment banking and brokerage activitiesDiscussion and Analysisn/a FN-IB-410a.3 Business EthicsTotal amount of monetary losses as a result of legal proceedings associated with fraud, insider trading, antitrust, anti- competitive behaviour, market manipulation, malpractice, or other related financial industry laws or regulations 2QuantitativePresentation currencyFN-IB-510a.1 Description of whistleblower policies and proceduresDiscussion and Analysisn/a FN-IB-510a.2 continued... 1Note to FN-IB-330a.1 – The entity shall describe its policies and programmes for fostering equitable employee representation in its global operations. 2Note to FN-IB-510a.1 – The entity shall briefly describe the nature, context and any corrective actions taken because of monetary losses. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |INVESTMENT BANKING & BROKERAGE |6",
    "new_id": 443
  },
  {
    "id": 38582,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes why an entity's disclosure of variable remuneration for Material Risk Takers (MRTs) is critical to understanding its risk management framework, as outlined in the Investment Banking & Brokerage – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "It highlights potential alignment between compensation structures and excessive short-term risk-taking, allowing investors to assess how entities balance long-term value creation with immediate financial rewards.",
      "A": "It ensures that all employees classified as MRTs are exclusively from senior management or the top 10% highest paid individuals, guaranteeing uniformity in risk oversight.",
      "B": "It mandates that fixed remuneration be discretionary and non-transparent, ensuring flexibility in rewarding high-performing employees while maintaining strict regulatory compliance.",
      "C": "It provides a definitive measure of whether traders responsible for pricing Level 3 assets are prioritizing credit proposals over trading book decisions.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "24",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Investment Banking & Brokerage.pdf",
    "source_text": "Employee Incentives & Risk-taking Topic Summary Variations in employee compensation structures in the Investment Banking & Brokerage industry may incentivise employees to focus on short- or long-term entity performance. Structures that emphasise short-term performance may encourage excessive risk-taking, with adverse implications for long-term corporate value. Various financial crises in recent decades have increased regulatory and shareholder scrutiny towards excessive risk-taking behaviour. Enhanced disclosure of employee compensation, focusing on performance metrics and variable remuneration, policies regarding clawback provisions, supervision, control and validation of traders ’ pricing of Level 3 assets may provide investors with a better understanding of how entities are preserving corporate value by prioritising long-term growth over short-term reward. Metrics FN-IB-550b.1. Percentage of total remuneration that is variable for Material Risk Takers (MRTs) 1The entity shall disclose the percentage of variable remuneration for its employees classified as Material Risk Takers (MRTs). 1.1 The entity shall consider its employees MRTs if their actions may have a material effect on the entity ’s risk exposure. Such employees generally exhibit characteristics that may include: 1.1.1 membership of the management body in its management or supervisory function; 1.1.2 membership of senior management; 1.1.3 leadership of a material business unit, or responsibility for risk management within a business unit; 1.1.4 responsibility for initiating credit proposals or structuring credit products; 1.1.5 responsibility for making, approving or vetoing a decision on transactions on the trading book; or 1.1.6 being in the top 10% of the entity ’s highest paid employees by total remuneration. 1.2 Variable remuneration is defined as all remuneration that is not fixed. 1.3 Remuneration is fixed if all the conditions for its award and its amount: 1.3.1 are based on predetermined criteria; 1.3.2 are non-discretionary, reflecting the level of professional experience and seniority of staff; 1.3.3 are transparent with respect to the individual amount awarded to the individual staff member; 1.3.4 are permanent, maintained over a period tied to the specific role and organisational responsibilities; SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |INVESTMENT BANKING & BROKERAGE |24",
    "new_id": 444
  },
  {
    "id": 38583,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes why entities in the Investment Banking & Brokerage industry might prioritize robust internal controls, based on an analysis of potential legal and regulatory risks, as outlined in the Investment Banking & Brokerage – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "To minimize losses incurred due to legal proceedings while simultaneously enhancing trust with clients and protecting shareholder value through compliance.",
      "B": "To exclusively avoid monetary losses from civil actions, as criminal penalties are not significant enough to impact shareholder value.",
      "C": "Because entities are required to disclose all monetary liabilities, including legal defense fees, which directly affect their profitability.",
      "D": "To ensure that only environmental and social risks are mitigated, as these are the primary concerns outlined by regulatory bodies.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "16-17",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Investment Banking & Brokerage.pdf",
    "source_text": "7.2 Traditional microeconomic factors such as supply of and demand for products or services which affect financial conditions and operational results of clients as well as their creditworthiness 7.3 Time horizon of investments and loans 7.4 Risk and return profiles of investments and loans 7.5 Risk profiles of (a) underwritten debt and equity securities, (b) advisory transactions (for example, mergers and acquisitions) and (c) securitised assets. 8The entity may disclose additional quantitative measures related to the incorporation of ESG factors in investment banking and brokerage activities, such as: 8.1 Number of investment banking and brokerage transactions screened according to Equator Principles (EP III) (or equivalent) by EP Category 8.2 Number of investment banking and brokerage transactions for which a review of environmental or social risks was performed, for example, by the entity ’s Environmental and Social Risk Management (ESRM) group. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |INVESTMENT BANKING & BROKERAGE |16\n\n[Page 17]\nBusiness Ethics Topic Summary The regulatory environment surrounding the Investment Banking & Brokerage industry continues to evolve internationally. Entities must adhere to a complex and often inconsistent set of rules relating to performance and conduct, as well as provide disclosure on issues including insider trading, antitrust behaviour, price fixing and market manipulation. Entities are subject to strict legal requirements against tax evasion, fraud, money laundering and corrupt practices. In some jurisdictions, enhanced rewards for whistle-blowers may increase the number of complaints brought to regulators. Entities that ensure regulatory compliance through robust internal controls may build trust with clients, increase revenue and protect shareholder value by minimising losses incurred because of legal proceedings. Metrics FN-IB-510a.1. Total amount of monetary losses as a result of legal proceedings associated with fraud, insider trading, antitrust, anti-competitive behaviour, market manipulation, malpractice, or other related financial industry laws or regulations 1The entity shall disclose the total amount of monetary losses incurred during the reporting period resulting from legal proceedings associated with fraud, insider trading, antitrust, anti-competitive behaviour, market manipulation, malpractice or other related financial industry laws or regulations. 2The legal proceedings shall include any adjudicative proceeding involving the entity, whether before a court, a regulator, an arbitrator or otherwise. 3The losses shall include all monetary liabilities to the opposing party or to others (whether as the result of settlement, verdict after trial or otherwise), including fines and other monetary liabilities incurred during the reporting period as a result of civil actions (for example, civil judgements or settlements), regulatory proceedings (for example, penalties, disgorgement or restitution) and criminal actions (for example, criminal judgements, penalties or restitution) brought by any entity (for example, governmental, business or individual). 4The scope of monetary losses shall exclude legal and other fees and expenses incurred by the entity in its defence. 5The scope of the disclosure shall include legal proceedings associated with the enforcement of applicable jurisdictional laws or regulations. 6 The scope of the disclosure shall exclude the amount of any monetary losses disclosed in metric FN-IB-510b.3. 7The disclosure shall also include enforcements related to activities adjudicated by applicable jurisdictional legal or regulatory authorities with mandates broader than the financial industry. 8 The entity shall disclose the relevant jurisdictional legal or regulatory authorities involved. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |INVESTMENT BANKING & BROKERAGE |17",
    "new_id": 445
  },
  {
    "id": 38584,
    "question": "Which of the following most accurately reflects the conditions under which variable remuneration for Material Risk Takers (MRTs) can be adjusted through malus or clawback provisions, and how this aligns with the entity’s overall risk management framework, as outlined in the Investment Banking & Brokerage – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Malus or clawback provisions may be applied based on identified risks associated with MRT remuneration, and their implementation involves both the Board and the Firm Risk Committee in decision-making to ensure alignment with the entity’s risk management objectives.",
      "A": "Malus or clawback provisions are applied when MRTs fail to meet qualitative criteria, and these provisions are managed exclusively by the Chief Risk Officer as part of the entity’s regulatory compliance.",
      "C": "Malus or clawback provisions apply only to non-MRT employees, and their purpose is to incentivize performance that aligns with industry best practices rather than regulatory requirements.",
      "D": "Variable remuneration adjustments for MRTs occur automatically in response to national wage-setting criteria, without requiring input from the Board or any risk management bodies.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "25",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Investment Banking & Brokerage.pdf",
    "source_text": "1.3.5 are non-revocable, meaning that the permanent amount is only changed via collective bargaining or following renegotiation in line with national criteria on wage-setting; 1.3.6 cannot be reduced, suspended or cancelled by the institution; 1.3.7 do not provide incentives for risk assumption; and 1.3.8 do not vary with performance. 2The percentage shall be calculated as the aggregate amount of the variable remuneration of the entity ’s MRTs divided by the aggregate amount of the total remuneration of the entity ’s MRTs. 3The entity may disclose the percentage of total remuneration that is variable for employees not classified as MRTs. 4The entity may disclose the number of employees classified as MRTs, provided at the group level and disaggregated by geographical segment, if the number of MRTs is more than 10. Note to FN-IB-550b.1 1The entity shall discuss its remuneration policies for MRTs. 1.1 The discussion shall include: (a) the employee remuneration regulatory environment in which the entity operates, whether the entity is required to have specific remuneration policies in place, and whether it has adopted its remuneration policies because of regulatory requirements or voluntarily as industry best practice; (b) the performance objectives for the institution, business areas and staff; (c) the applicable qualitative and quantitative criteria the entity considers in classifying its employees as MRTs; (d) the methods for the measurement of performance of MRTs, including performance criteria; and (e) the structure of variable remuneration, including (if applicable) the instruments in which parts of the variable remuneration are awarded. 2The entity shall discuss how remuneration policies for MRTs fit into the entity ’s overall risk management framework. 2.1 The discussion shall include: (i) the role and decision-making process of the Board and the Firm Risk Committee; (ii) the role and decision-making process of the Chief Risk Officer; and (iii) how risks associated with remuneration of MRTs are identified, measured and managed at the entity level. FN-IB-550b.2. Percentage of variable remuneration of Material Risk Takers (MRTs) to which malus or clawback provisions were applied 1The entity shall disclose the percentage of variable remuneration for employees classified as Material Risk Takers (MRTs) to which malus or clawback provisions were applied during the reporting period. 1.1 The entity shall consider its employees MRTs if their actions may have a material effect on the entity ’s risk exposure. Such employees generally exhibit characteristics that may include: 1.1.1 membership of the management body in its management or supervisory function; SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |INVESTMENT BANKING & BROKERAGE |25",
    "new_id": 446
  },
  {
    "id": 39638,
    "question": "Which scenario would most likely classify an asset as Indirectly Managed based on the operational control definition in the Real Estate – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "A single-tenant building where the tenant exclusively controls all operating and environmental policies.",
      "A": "A multi-tenant building where the landlord implements environmental policies but tenants can propose changes.",
      "B": "A building with shared authority between landlord and tenant, where both parties can introduce but not enforce policies.",
      "D": "A vacant property fully controlled by the landlord, where no tenant occupies the space.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "24",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Real Estate.pdf",
    "source_text": "5.1.2Water Purchased by the Landlord and water Purchased by Tenant 5.1.3Managed Assets and Indirectly Managed Assets 5.1.4Geographical markets 6The following terms are defined according to the 2018 GRESB Real Estate Assessment Reference Guide: 6.1Base Building is defined as water consumed in supplying central building services to lettable/leasable areas and common areas. 6.2Tenant Space is defined as the lettable floor area (both vacant and let/leased areas) that is or can be occupied by tenants. 6.3Whole Building is defined as water used by tenants and base building services to lettable/leasable and common spaces. This should include all water supplied to the building for the operation of the building and the tenant space. 6.4Purchased by Landlord is defined as water purchased by the landlord but consumed by the tenant. This may include water purchased by the landlord but used for vacant space. 6.5Purchased by Tenant is defined as water purchased by the tenant. Typically, this is data outside the entity's immediate control. 6.6Managed Assets and Indirectly Managed Assets are defined as follows: ‘This definition of Managed assets and the definition of Indirectly Managed assets are solely based on the landlord/tenant relationship. [Managed and Indirectly Managed Assets are] assets or buildings for which the landlord is determined to have ‘operational control’ where operational control is defined as having the ability to introduce and implement operating and/or environmental policies and measures. In case both the landlord and tenant have the authority to introduce and implement any or all the policies mentioned above, the asset or building should be reported as a Managed asset. Where a single tenant has the sole authority to introduce and implement operating and/or environmental policies and measures, the tenant should be assumed to have operational control, so it should be considered to be an Indirectly Managed asset.’ 7The entity shall consider the 2018 GRESB Real Estate Assessment Reference Guide as a normative reference, thus any updates made year-on-year shall be considered updates to this guidance. IF-RE-140a.3. Like-for-like percentage change in water withdrawn for portfolio area with data coverage, by property sector 1The entity shall disclose the like-for-like percentage change in water withdrawn for the portfolio area with data coverage. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD | REAL ESTATE | 24",
    "new_id": 447
  },
  {
    "id": 39676,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the nuanced relationship between ENERGY STAR® certification requirements and the entity's disclosure obligations under the described framework in the Real Estate – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The entity may calculate ENERGY STAR® certification percentages separately for U.S. and Canadian properties, but only if the certifications are officially in effect during the reporting period for both regions.",
      "A": "An entity must exclude all non-certified properties from its total portfolio gross floor area calculations when determining ENERGY STAR® certification percentages.",
      "B": "If a property is ineligible for ENERGY STAR® certification due to specific use characteristics, it can still be included in the denominator of the percentage calculation unless explicitly excluded by the entity.",
      "C": "Properties located in Canada must adopt the same ENERGY STAR® certification criteria as those in the U.S., without any distinctions based on regional eligibility rules.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "17",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Real Estate.pdf",
    "source_text": "assessments or other unofficial rating schemes are not valid). Some energy ratings are valid for a limited period only—the rating should be officially in effect during the reporting period.’ 2The entity may additionally disclose the percentage(s) by energy rating scheme. 3The entity shall (2) disclose the percentage of its portfolio certified to ENERGY STAR®. 3.1The percentage shall be calculated as the portfolio gross floor area certified to ENERGY STAR® in the US divided by the total portfolio gross floor area in the US. 3.1.1For a property to qualify as certified to ENERGY STAR®, the certification must be officially in effect during the reporting period (as aligned with the 2018 GRESB Real Estate Assessment Reference Guide). 3.1.2The entity may exclude from the denominator the portfolio gross floor area that is ineligible to be certified to ENERGY STAR® based on the property sector or other specific use characteristics that cause the property to be ineligible. 3.2If property is located in Canada, the entity may separately disclose the percentage of the portfolio in Canada that is certified to ENERGY STAR®. 3.2.1The percentage shall be calculated as the portfolio gross floor area that is certified to ENERGY STAR® in Canada divided by the total portfolio gross floor area in Canada. 4The entity shall disclose (1) the percentage of its portfolio that has an energy rating, and (2) the percentage of its portfolio that is certified to ENERGY STAR®, separately for each property type in its portfolio where properties are classified into sectors aligned with the FTSE EPRA Nareit Global Real Estate Index property sector classification. 5The entity shall consider the 2018 GRESB Real Estate Assessment Reference Guide as a normative reference, thus any updates made year-on-year shall be considered updates to this guidance. IF-RE-130a.5. Description of how building energy management considerations are integrated into property investment analysis and operational strategy 1The entity shall describe its strategic approach and the operational processes used to integrate energy-related considerations into the analysis of current and future property investments. 2The entity shall describe the following elements of its strategic approach, where relevant: 2.1The use of energy-reduction targets and performance against those targets 2.2The integration of property energy performance into the property acquisition due diligence process—for example, if these measures are qualitative (for example, whether the building has an energy rating) or quantitative (for example, the entity adjusts occupancy rate projections based on energy performance data) SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD | REAL ESTATE | 17",
    "new_id": 448
  },
  {
    "id": 39678,
    "question": "Which scenario would most likely necessitate a detailed description of normalization factors according to the Real Estate – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "An entity discloses normalized like-for-like percentage change in water withdrawn and uses custom methodologies for normalizing data related to weather conditions.",
      "B": "An entity reports on variations in like-for-like percentage change in water withdrawn solely due to differences between Base Building and Tenant Space.",
      "C": "An entity provides normalized like-for-like percentage change in water withdrawn while relying exclusively on third-party methodologies without additional explanation.",
      "D": "An entity analyzes distinctions such as Managed Assets versus Indirectly Managed Assets but refrains from disclosing normalized percentage changes.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "26",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Real Estate.pdf",
    "source_text": "7.1Normalisation factors and methodologies may include the following which are presented in the 2018 GRESB Real Estate Assessment Reference Guide: 7.1.1Air conditioning or natural ventilation 7.1.2Building age 7.1.3Degree days 7.1.4Footfall 7.1.5Occupancy rate 7.1.6Operational hours 7.1.7Weather conditions 7.1.8Other 7.2If the entity chooses to additionally disclose normalised like-for-like percentage change in water withdrawn, the entity shall provide a brief description of the normalisation factor and methodology or its use of a third- party methodology. 8The entity may describe the variations in like-for-like percentage change in water withdrawn. 8.1Variations in water withdrawn may occur based on distinctions which may include: 8.1.1Base Building, Tenant Space and Whole Building 8.1.2Water Purchased by the Landlord and water Purchased by Tenant 8.1.3Managed Assets and Indirectly Managed Assets 8.1.4Geographical markets 9The following terms are defined according to the 2018 GRESB Real Estate Assessment Reference Guide: 9.1Base Building is defined as water consumed in supplying central building services to lettable/leasable areas and common areas. 9.2Tenant Space is defined as the lettable floor area (both vacant and let/leased areas). 9.3Whole Building is defined as water used by tenants and base building services to lettable/leasable and common spaces. This should include all water supplied to the building for the operation of the building and the tenant space. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD | REAL ESTATE | 26",
    "new_id": 449
  },
  {
    "id": 39679,
    "question": "Which scenario best aligns with the entity's disclosure obligations regarding water withdrawal data while addressing potential ambiguities in regional stress classification, as outlined in the Real Estate – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "An entity calculates the percentage of water withdrawn in High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress regions using only the Base Building data when Whole Building data is unavailable.",
      "A": "An entity excludes all water withdrawal data for regions where tenants pay for water, as tenant space is outside the required reporting scope.",
      "C": "An entity reports total water withdrawn but excludes regions classified under Moderate Baseline Water Stress from the percentage calculation due to their lower risk impact.",
      "D": "An entity combines rainwater and municipal water sources into a single category for reporting purposes, assuming equal baseline stress levels across all regions.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "23",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Real Estate.pdf",
    "source_text": "IF-RE-140a.2. (1) Total water withdrawn by portfolio area with data coverage and (2) percentage in regions with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress, by property sector 1The entity shall disclose (1) the total amount of water, in thousands of cubic metres, withdrawn by the portfolio area for which water withdrawal data coverage is available. 1.1The scope of disclosure includes all property area in the entity’s portfolio for which water withdrawal data coverage is available, regardless of whether water is consumed by the Tenant Space or Base Building (including outdoor, exterior and parking areas) or which party pays for water expenses. 1.2The scope of disclosure excludes the portion of water consumed by the portfolio area for which water withdrawal data is unavailable. 1.2.1If water withdrawal data is unavailable for Tenant Space or Whole Building for a property but is available for the Base Building, then the entity shall disclose this water withdrawal data. 1.3The scope of water withdrawals is aligned with the 2018 GRESB Real Estate Assessment Reference Guide and includes water withdrawn from all sources. 1.3.1Water sources include surface water (including water from wetlands, rivers, lakes and oceans), groundwater, rainwater collected directly and stored by the entity, and water and wastewater obtained from municipal water supplies, water utilities or other entities. 2The entity shall disclose (2) the percentage of water withdrawn in regions with High (40–80%) or Extremely High (> 80%) Baseline Water Stress. 2.1High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress shall be determined by the World Resources Institute’s (WRI) Water Risk Atlas tool, Aqueduct. 2.2The percentage shall be calculated as the amount of water withdrawn (by volume) in regions with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress divided by the total amount of water withdrawn (by volume). 3Water withdrawal data shall be disclosed by (a) Base Building and (b) Tenant Space, or (c) Whole Building, or a combination of these. 4The entity shall disclose (1) total water withdrawn and (2) percentage in regions with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress, separately for each property type in its portfolio where properties are classified into sectors aligned with the FTSE EPRA Nareit Global Real Estate Index property sector classification. 5The entity may describe the variations in water withdrawn. 5.1Variations in water withdrawn may occur based on distinctions which may include: 5.1.1Base Building, Tenant Space and Whole Building SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD | REAL ESTATE | 23",
    "new_id": 450
  },
  {
    "id": 39681,
    "question": "Which of the following most accurately reflects how an entity's prioritization of lease structures and third-party initiatives might influence tenant behavior over time, as described in the Real Estate – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Integrating third-party green lease initiatives into standard contracts could indirectly incentivize sustainable tenant behavior by aligning financial and operational structures with sustainability goals.",
      "A": "By mandating tenants to adopt green lease templates, entities can ensure uniform sustainability practices across all leased properties, thus eliminating variability in compliance.",
      "B": "Tenant behavior is primarily influenced by cost recovery clauses, which override any indirect effects from third-party initiatives or lease structures.",
      "D": "Entities that prioritize separately metering energy consumption guarantee improved tenant sustainability behaviors, regardless of lease type or third-party involvement.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "33-34",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Real Estate.pdf",
    "source_text": "3.1.5Whether the entity can prioritise sustainability requirements over minimising the costs of improvements and adjustments 3.2Whether the entity prioritises separately metering or submetering tenant energy consumption and water withdrawals, and if so, if the entity also prioritises its own ability to measure the tenant energy consumption and water withdrawals 3.3Whether the entity prioritises lease structures that require tenants to pay grid electricity and water utility expenses based on actual and exclusive consumption of such resources 4The entity shall include a discussion of its support, participation and use of third-party initiatives concerning green leases. 4.1Third-party initiatives concerning green leases may include green lease templates, principles, requirements, strategies and educational programs provided by organisations. 4.2Examples of third-party initiatives concerning green leases may include: 4.2.1Building Owners and Managers Association International, Commercial Lease: Guide to Sustainable and Energy Efficient Leasing for High-Performance Buildings 4.2.2California Sustainability Alliance, Green Leases Toolkit 4.2.3CMS, Green Lease Clauses in Europe - A practical approach 4.2.4Corporate Realty, Design & Management Institute, Model Green Lease 4.2.5Green Lease Leaders and Green Lease Library (programs jointly operated by the Institute for Market Transformation and the U.S. Department of Energy’s Better Building Alliance) 4.2.6Natural Resources Defence Council, Energy Efficiency Lease Guidance 4.2.7Real Property Association of Canada, Green Office Leases 4.2.8U.S. General Services Administration, Green Lease Policies and Procedures 4.2.9U.S. Green Building Council, Green Office Guide: Integrating LEED into Your Leasing Process” and “Greening Your Lease 4.3The entity shall describe whether third-party initiatives concerning green leases are integrated into standard lease contracts (generally aligned with GRESB Real Estate Assessment Q39.1). 5The entity shall describe how the lease types used (for example, triple-net or full-service) and their provisions (for example, cost recovery clauses, tenant fit out guides, utility information sharing, mandatory participation in energy ratings) may influence or incentivise tenant behaviour related to sustainability impacts. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD | REAL ESTATE | 33\n\n[Page 34]\n5.1The entity may provide a discussion of how such lease structures may impact property values—including tenant demand and the associated rental rates and occupancy rates—over the long term. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD | REAL ESTATE | 34",
    "new_id": 451
  },
  {
    "id": 43428,
    "question": "Under what condition can an entity exclude certain Tier I suppliers from its disclosure of facilities participating in the Rx-360 or equivalent audit programme, as outlined in the Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "If the excluded suppliers account for less than 10% of its total supplier spending.",
      "A": "If the excluded suppliers do not transact directly with the entity.",
      "B": "If the excluded suppliers' facilities are already covered under a different audit programme.",
      "C": "If the excluded suppliers are located in regions outside the entity’s primary market.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "26",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals.pdf",
    "source_text": "Supply Chain Management Topic Summary For the Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals industry, managing supply chain quality is essential for protecting consumer health and corporate value. Biotechnology and pharmaceuticals entities that fail to ensure quality throughout their supply chains may be susceptible to lost revenue, supply disruptions and reputational damage. Disclosure of supply chain audit programmes may provide investors with an understanding of how entities in this industry are protecting shareholder value. Metrics HC-BP-430a.1. Percentage of (1) entity ’s facilities and (2) Tier I suppliers ’ facilities participating in the Rx-360 International Pharmaceutical Supply Chain Consortium audit programme or equivalent third-party audit programmes for integrity of supply chain and ingredients 1The entity shall disclose (1) the percentage of its facilities that participate in the Rx-360 International Pharmaceutical Supply Chain Consortium audit programme or equivalent third-party audit programmes for integrity of supply chain and ingredients. 1.1 An equivalent third-party audit programme is one conducted by an external auditing agency and that contains the same integrity of supply chain and integrity of ingredient requirements as the Rx-360 programme. 1.2 The scope of the disclosure includes facilities owned or operated by the entity. 1.3 The percentage shall be calculated as the number of the entity ’s facilities participating in the Rx-360 (or equivalent) audit programme divided by the entity ’s total number of facilities. 2The entity shall disclose (2) the percentage of its Tier I suppliers ’ facilities (limited to facilities with which the entity conducts business) that participate in the Rx-360 (or equivalent) audit programme. 2.1 Tier I suppliers are those that transact directly with the entity. 2.2 The entity may limit its disclosure to those suppliers that in aggregate account for greater than or equal to 90% of its supplier spending. 2.3 The percentage shall be calculated as the number of the entity ’s Tier 1 suppliers ’ facilities participating in the Rx-360 (or equivalent) audit programme divided by the total number of its Tier 1 suppliers ’ facilities. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |BIOTECHNOLOGY & PHARMACEUTICALS |26",
    "new_id": 452
  },
  {
    "id": 43434,
    "question": "Which scenario would most likely fall outside the scope of monetary losses as defined by HC-BP-270a.1, even if associated with false marketing claims, according to the Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Legal fees and defense costs incurred during a regulatory proceeding related to false marketing claims.",
      "B": "A criminal penalty imposed on the entity for off-label promotion following a guilty plea.",
      "C": "A settlement paid to resolve allegations of civil misconduct involving deceptive advertising practices.",
      "D": "Restitution ordered by a court as part of a deferred prosecution agreement addressing illegal marketing activities.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "22-23",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals.pdf",
    "source_text": "Ethical Marketing Topic Summary Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals entities face challenges associated with the marketing of specific products. Direct- to-consumer advertisements for prescription drugs provide opportunities for increasing market share. However, marketing off-label uses may result in significant fines and settlements. Corporate disclosure of legal and regulatory fines and the codes of ethics that govern marketing activities may allow investors to better understand performance in this area. Metrics HC-BP-270a.1. Total amount of monetary losses as a result of legal proceedings associated with false marketing claims 1The entity shall disclose the total amount of monetary losses incurred during the reporting period resulting from legal proceedings associated with false marketing claims. 2The legal proceedings shall include any adjudicative proceeding involving the entity, whether before a court, a regulator, an arbitrator or otherwise. 3The losses shall include all monetary liabilities to the opposing party or to others (whether as the result of settlement, verdict after trial or otherwise), including fines and other monetary liabilities as a result of civil actions (for example, civil judgements or settlements), regulatory proceedings (for example, penalties, disgorgement or restitution) and criminal actions (for example, criminal judgements, penalties or restitution) brought by any entity (for example, governmental, business or individual). 4The scope of monetary losses shall exclude legal and other fees and expenses incurred by the entity in its defence. 5The scope of the disclosure shall include legal proceedings associated with the enforcement of applicable jurisdictional laws or regulations. Note to HC-BP-270a.1 1The entity shall briefly describe the nature (for example, judgement or order issued after trial, settlement, guilty plea, deferred prosecution agreement or non-prosecution agreement) and context (for example, off-label promotion) of all monetary losses resulting from legal proceedings. 2The entity shall describe any corrective actions implemented in response to the legal proceedings. This may include specific changes in operations, management, processes, products, business partners, training or technology. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |BIOTECHNOLOGY & PHARMACEUTICALS |22\n\n[Page 23]\nHC-BP-270a.2. Description of code of ethics governing promotion of off-label use of products 1The entity shall describe the aspects of its code of ethics that relate to ethical marketing and promotion of off-label use of products, including describing how the code defines ‘off-label promotion ’. 2A corporate policy, code of conduct, guideline or contractual terms that are similar in intent to a code of ethics shall be treated as equivalent to a code of ethics for the purposes of this metric. 3 The entity shall describe the mechanisms it has developed to ensure code compliance, which may include: 3.1 disciplinary actions for violations; 3.2 training; 3.3 internal audits; 3.4 regulatory review committees; and 3.5 training, including degree and frequency of training. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |BIOTECHNOLOGY & PHARMACEUTICALS |23",
    "new_id": 453
  },
  {
    "id": 43467,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between regulatory scrutiny and financial implications for entities in the Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals industry, as described in the Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Monetary losses due to legal proceedings in developing countries must be accompanied by an explanation of corrective actions but are not necessarily tied to clinical trial management inspections.",
      "A": "Entities are required to report all monetary losses from legal proceedings, regardless of geographic origin, to comply with SASB Standards.",
      "C": "Inspections leading to voluntary remediation or regulatory actions directly correlate with mandatory public disclosure of total monetary losses incurred globally.",
      "D": "The number of inspections related to pharmacovigilance is inversely proportional to the total amount of monetary losses reported by an entity.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "5-6",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals.pdf",
    "source_text": "Use of the Standards SASB Standards are intended to aid entities in disclosing information about sustainability-related risks and opportunities that could reasonably be expected to affect the entity ’s cash flows, its access to finance or cost of capital over the short, medium or long term. An entity determines which Industry Standard(s) and which disclosure topics are relevant to its business, and which associated metrics to report. In general, an entity should use the SASB Standard specific to its primary industry as identified in SICS® . However, companies with substantial business in multiple SICS® industries should refer to and consider the applicability of the disclosure topics and associated metrics in additional SASB Standards. The disclosure topics and associated metrics contained in this Standard have been identified as those that are likely to be useful to investors. However, the responsibility for making materiality judgements and determinations rests with the reporting entity. Industry Description The Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals industry develops, manufactures and markets a range of brand-name and generic medications. Research and development propels a significant portion of the industry and involves a high risk of product failure during clinical trials and the need to obtain regulatory approval. Concerns regarding sector pricing practices and consolidation have created downward pricing pressures. Primarily, demographics, insurance coverage rates, disease profiles and economic conditions drive consumer demand for the industry ’s products. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |BIOTECHNOLOGY & PHARMACEUTICALS |5\n\n[Page 6]\nSUSTAINABILITY DISCLOSURE TOPICS & METRICS Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORYUNIT OF MEASURECODE Safety of Clinical Trial ParticipantsDiscussion, by region, of management process for ensuring quality and patient safety during clinical trialsDiscussion and Analysisn/a HC-BP-210a.1 Number of inspections related to clinical trial management and pharmacovigilance that resulted in: (1) entity voluntary remediation or (2) regulatory or administrative actions taken against the entityQuantitative Number HC-BP-210a.2 Total amount of monetary losses as a result of legal proceedings associated with clinical trials in developing countries 1QuantitativePresentation currencyHC-BP-210a.3 Access to MedicinesDescription of actions and initiatives to promote access to health care products for priority diseases and in priority countries as defined by the Access to Medicine IndexDiscussion and Analysisn/a HC-BP-240a.1 List of products on the WHO List of Prequalified Medicinal Products as part of its Prequalification of Medicines Programme (PQP)Discussion and Analysisn/a HC-BP-240a.2 Affordability & PricingPercentage change in: (1) weighted average list price and (2) weighted average net price across product portfolio compared to previous reporting periodQuantitativePercentage (%)HC-BP-240b.2 Percentage change in: (1) list price and (2) net price of product with largest increase compared to previous reporting periodQuantitativePercentage (%)HC-BP-240b.3 continued... 1Note to HC-BP-210a.3 – The entity shall briefly describe the nature, context and any corrective actions taken because of monetary losses. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |BIOTECHNOLOGY & PHARMACEUTICALS |6",
    "new_id": 454
  },
  {
    "id": 43468,
    "question": "Which scenario would require disclosure under HC-BP-270a.1 but not necessarily under HC-BP-260a.3, according to the Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "A settlement involving monetary losses due to off-label promotion claims resolved through a deferred prosecution agreement.",
      "A": "An instance where the entity collaborates with wholesalers to seize counterfeit products and files criminal charges against counterfeiters.",
      "B": "A situation where the entity provides evidence leading to raids on counterfeiters, resulting in both arrests and product seizures.",
      "D": "A case where the entity implements corrective actions following regulatory penalties for marketing unapproved drug uses.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "21-22",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals.pdf",
    "source_text": "1.2 Business partners may include suppliers, wholesalers, retailers and hospitals. 1.3 Counterfeit products are defined as drugs sold under a product name without proper authorisation. Counterfeiting can apply to both brand-name and generic products, where the source identity is mislabelled in a way that suggests that it is the authentic, approved product. Counterfeit products may include products that lack the active ingredient, contain an insufficient or excessive quantity of the active ingredient, contain the wrong active ingredient, or have fake packaging. 2The scope of the disclosure shall include recommended actions for the respective parties to minimise risks of counterfeiting. 3 The scope of the disclosure shall include a description of the entity ’s mechanisms for product recall. HC-BP-260a.3. Number of actions that led to raids, seizure, arrests, or filing of criminal charges related to counterfeit products 1The entity shall disclose the total number of instances in which it took action to alert or aid applicable jurisdictional legal or regulatory authorities to counterfeiting, which may include: 1.1 providing information or evidence that led to raids or arrests of counterfeiters or the seizure of counterfeit products; and 1.2 filing of criminal charges against counterfeiters. 2If the entity collaborated with other entities, such as manufacturers, wholesalers or pharmacies, it may disclose these instances but should indicate which other entities were involved. 3The entity shall also provide a description of actions taken, including —where relevant —the parties involved, role of the entity, type and value of products in question, and outcome of the action. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |BIOTECHNOLOGY & PHARMACEUTICALS |21\n\n[Page 22]\nEthical Marketing Topic Summary Biotechnology & Pharmaceuticals entities face challenges associated with the marketing of specific products. Direct- to-consumer advertisements for prescription drugs provide opportunities for increasing market share. However, marketing off-label uses may result in significant fines and settlements. Corporate disclosure of legal and regulatory fines and the codes of ethics that govern marketing activities may allow investors to better understand performance in this area. Metrics HC-BP-270a.1. Total amount of monetary losses as a result of legal proceedings associated with false marketing claims 1The entity shall disclose the total amount of monetary losses incurred during the reporting period resulting from legal proceedings associated with false marketing claims. 2The legal proceedings shall include any adjudicative proceeding involving the entity, whether before a court, a regulator, an arbitrator or otherwise. 3The losses shall include all monetary liabilities to the opposing party or to others (whether as the result of settlement, verdict after trial or otherwise), including fines and other monetary liabilities as a result of civil actions (for example, civil judgements or settlements), regulatory proceedings (for example, penalties, disgorgement or restitution) and criminal actions (for example, criminal judgements, penalties or restitution) brought by any entity (for example, governmental, business or individual). 4The scope of monetary losses shall exclude legal and other fees and expenses incurred by the entity in its defence. 5The scope of the disclosure shall include legal proceedings associated with the enforcement of applicable jurisdictional laws or regulations. Note to HC-BP-270a.1 1The entity shall briefly describe the nature (for example, judgement or order issued after trial, settlement, guilty plea, deferred prosecution agreement or non-prosecution agreement) and context (for example, off-label promotion) of all monetary losses resulting from legal proceedings. 2The entity shall describe any corrective actions implemented in response to the legal proceedings. This may include specific changes in operations, management, processes, products, business partners, training or technology. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |BIOTECHNOLOGY & PHARMACEUTICALS |22",
    "new_id": 455
  },
  {
    "id": 44158,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the implicit relationship between the entity's approach to managing capital- and liquidity-related risks and its use of derivative instruments, as described in the Insurance – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The entity’s description of its approach to managing capital- and liquidity-related risks implies that acceptable collateral posted with central clearinghouses directly mitigates systemic non-insurance activity risks.",
      "A": "The entity's management of capital- and liquidity-related risks is primarily focused on reducing total exposure to centrally cleared derivatives.",
      "B": "The entity leverages acceptable collateral posted with central clearinghouses as a key mechanism to manage risks associated with both centrally cleared and non-centrally cleared derivatives.",
      "C": "The entity considers the fair value of securities lending collateral assets as unrelated to its strategy for managing capital- and liquidity-related risks.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "7",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Insurance.pdf",
    "source_text": "...continued TOPIC METRIC CATEGORYUNIT OF MEASURECODE Physical Risk ExposureProbable Maximum Loss (PML) of insured products from weather-related natural catastrophes 2QuantitativePresentation currencyFN-IN-450a.1 Total amount of monetary losses attributable to insurance pay-outs from (1) modelled natural catastrophes and (2) non-modelled natural catastrophes, by type of event and geographical segment (net and gross of reinsurance) 3QuantitativePresentation currencyFN-IN-450a.2 Description of approach to incorporation of environmental risks into (1) the underwriting process for individual contracts and (2) the management of entity-level risks and capital adequacyDiscussion and Analysisn/a FN-IN-450a.3 Systemic Risk ManagementExposure to derivative instruments by category: (1) total exposure to non- centrally cleared derivatives, (2) total fair value of acceptable collateral posted with a central clearinghouse, and (3) total exposure to centrally cleared derivativesQuantitativePresentation currencyFN-IN-550a.1 Total fair value of securities lending collateral assetsQuantitativePresentation currencyFN-IN-550a.2 Description of approach to managing capital- and liquidity-related risks associated with systemic non-insurance activitiesDiscussion and Analysisn/a FN-IN-550a.3 Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORYUNIT OF MEASURECODE Number of policies in force, by segment: (1) property and casualty, (2) life, (3) assumed reinsurance4 Quantitative Number FN-IN-000.A 2Note to FN-IN-450a.1 – The entity shall describe climate-related scenarios used, including the critical input parameters, assumptions and considerations, analytical choices, and time frames, in calculation of the PML. 3Note to FN-IN-450a.2 – The entity shall discuss how climate change-related impacts and variability of weather-related losses impact the cost of reinsurance and the entity's approach to transferring risk through reinsurance. 4Note to FN-IN-000.A – The entity additionally may disaggregate the number of policies in force by product line. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |INSURANCE |7",
    "new_id": 456
  },
  {
    "id": 44160,
    "question": "Which of the following scenarios most directly undermines an entity's ability to maintain its brand reputation and regulatory standing while aligning with the disclosed metric FN-IN-270a.1, as defined in the Insurance – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "An entity faces monetary losses from legal proceedings related to marketing opaque terms to vulnerable groups, leading to reputational damage and regulatory scrutiny.",
      "B": "An entity experiences a rise in customer churn due to increased premiums, despite clear communication about pricing changes.",
      "C": "An entity reduces its product offerings to simplify its portfolio, inadvertently causing dissatisfaction among customers seeking diverse options.",
      "D": "An entity incurs significant legal defense costs after challenging a regulator's enforcement of transparency laws, without any verdict or settlement against it.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "8",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Insurance.pdf",
    "source_text": "Transparent Information & Fair Advice for Customers Topic Summary Insurance products play an important societal role in alleviating unexpected economic shocks, allowing individual policyholders to reduce the financial consequences of events such as illnesses, accidents and deaths. However, unclear insurance policies, ambiguous product terms and potentially misleading sales tactics may erode brand reputation, spur legal disputes, and reduce the number of services and products an entity can offer. Regulators may deem some policies overly complex and unsuitable for customers. Moreover, entities compete based on financial strength, price, brand reputation, services offered and customer relationships. Dissatisfied customers may reduce or avoid insurance coverage, potentially leading to negative financial outcomes such as personal bankruptcies. While financial regulators continue to emphasise consumer protection and accountability, entities that maintain transparent policy terms and sell products to customers best suited to them may better maintain their brand reputation, avoid regulatory scrutiny and protect shareholder value. Failure to inform customers about products in a clear and transparent manner may result in increased consumer complaints, customer churn, or regulatory fines and settlements. Metrics FN-IN-270a.1. Total amount of monetary losses as a result of legal proceedings associated with marketing and communication of insurance product-related information to new and returning customers 1The entity shall disclose the total amount of monetary losses incurred during the reporting period resulting from legal proceedings associated with marketing and communication of insurance product-related information to new and returning customers. 1.1 The scope of the disclosure includes legal proceedings related to false advertising, transparency of small print, marketing to vulnerable groups (for example, small investors), transparency of fees, mis-selling products, overcharging clients, and legal responsibility of the entity with respect to transparent information and fair advice. 2The legal proceedings shall include any adjudicative proceeding involving the entity, whether before a court, a regulator, an arbitrator or otherwise. 3The losses shall include all monetary liabilities to the opposing party or to others (whether as the result of settlement, verdict after trial or otherwise), including fines and other monetary liabilities incurred during the reporting period as a result of civil actions (for example, civil judgements or settlements), regulatory proceedings (for example, penalties, disgorgement or restitution) and criminal actions (for example, criminal judgements, penalties or restitution) brought by any entity (for example, governmental, business or individual). 4The scope of monetary losses shall exclude legal and other fees and expenses incurred by the entity in its defence. 5The scope of the disclosure shall include legal proceedings associated with the enforcement of applicable jurisdictional laws or regulations. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |INSURANCE |8",
    "new_id": 457
  },
  {
    "id": 44161,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the relationship between legal proceedings and an entity's monetary losses, as detailed in the Insurance – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Monetary losses resulting from legal proceedings encompass fines, penalties, and restitution but exclude the entity’s defense-related legal fees and expenses.",
      "A": "Monetary losses from legal proceedings include all legal fees and expenses incurred by the entity during defense, as well as fines and settlements.",
      "C": "Entities may avoid disclosing monetary losses related to legal proceedings if those proceedings are associated with non-jurisdictional laws or regulations.",
      "D": "The disclosure of monetary losses is limited to civil actions and excludes regulatory or criminal proceedings, even when they involve misleading practices.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "8",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Insurance.pdf",
    "source_text": "Transparent Information & Fair Advice for Customers Topic Summary Insurance products play an important societal role in alleviating unexpected economic shocks, allowing individual policyholders to reduce the financial consequences of events such as illnesses, accidents and deaths. However, unclear insurance policies, ambiguous product terms and potentially misleading sales tactics may erode brand reputation, spur legal disputes, and reduce the number of services and products an entity can offer. Regulators may deem some policies overly complex and unsuitable for customers. Moreover, entities compete based on financial strength, price, brand reputation, services offered and customer relationships. Dissatisfied customers may reduce or avoid insurance coverage, potentially leading to negative financial outcomes such as personal bankruptcies. While financial regulators continue to emphasise consumer protection and accountability, entities that maintain transparent policy terms and sell products to customers best suited to them may better maintain their brand reputation, avoid regulatory scrutiny and protect shareholder value. Failure to inform customers about products in a clear and transparent manner may result in increased consumer complaints, customer churn, or regulatory fines and settlements. Metrics FN-IN-270a.1. Total amount of monetary losses as a result of legal proceedings associated with marketing and communication of insurance product-related information to new and returning customers 1The entity shall disclose the total amount of monetary losses incurred during the reporting period resulting from legal proceedings associated with marketing and communication of insurance product-related information to new and returning customers. 1.1 The scope of the disclosure includes legal proceedings related to false advertising, transparency of small print, marketing to vulnerable groups (for example, small investors), transparency of fees, mis-selling products, overcharging clients, and legal responsibility of the entity with respect to transparent information and fair advice. 2The legal proceedings shall include any adjudicative proceeding involving the entity, whether before a court, a regulator, an arbitrator or otherwise. 3The losses shall include all monetary liabilities to the opposing party or to others (whether as the result of settlement, verdict after trial or otherwise), including fines and other monetary liabilities incurred during the reporting period as a result of civil actions (for example, civil judgements or settlements), regulatory proceedings (for example, penalties, disgorgement or restitution) and criminal actions (for example, criminal judgements, penalties or restitution) brought by any entity (for example, governmental, business or individual). 4The scope of monetary losses shall exclude legal and other fees and expenses incurred by the entity in its defence. 5The scope of the disclosure shall include legal proceedings associated with the enforcement of applicable jurisdictional laws or regulations. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |INSURANCE |8",
    "new_id": 458
  },
  {
    "id": 44548,
    "question": "Which inference can be drawn regarding the relationship between asset managers offering multiple services and their alignment with climate-related reporting practices, as outlined in the Progress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Asset managers who do not offer multiple services are disproportionately represented among respondents not planning to report climate-related information.",
      "A": "Asset managers offering fiduciary management are less likely to report climate-related information than those offering wealth management.",
      "B": "The majority of asset managers offering more than one service align their reporting with TCFD recommendations, except for those exclusively providing execution and advisory services.",
      "D": "Wealth management services are the primary driver behind asset managers' decisions to adopt comprehensive climate-related disclosures.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "66",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS 2024.pdf",
    "source_text": "Progress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report | November 2024 | 66The survey asked asset managers who currently report or plan to report climate-related information about the types of services they offer (see Figure 1 .15). Of the 88% that offered more than one service, 67% said they offered fiduciary management or other outsourced discretionary fund allocation; 33% offered fund of funds, manager of managers or sub-advised products; 22% offered wealth management; and 33% offered other types of services. Figure 1.15—Services offered by asset manager respondents 88% 12%67% 33% 33%22%Offering more than one service (36) Execution and advisory only (5)Fiduciary management Fund of funds OtherWealth management Figure 1 .16 provides information about what type of asset owners responded to the survey. Figure 1.16—Types of asset owner respondents 48% 24% 5% 10%14%Non-corporate pension Insurance company Sovereign wealth fund Family office or otherCorporate pension1 .5.3—Summary of reporting of climate-related information The survey asked asset managers and asset owners whether they currently report, plan to report or do not plan to report climate-related information to their clients and beneficiaries. As shown in Figure 1 .17 , most respondents currently report climate-related information to their clients or beneficiaries—78% of asset managers and 81% of asset owners— and most of the remainder plan to report climate-related information. Figure 1.17—Reporting of climate-related information to clients and beneficiaries Status of reporting 79% 78% 81%All respondents (72)Percentage of those that currently report Asset managers Asset owners Respondents that said they do not plan to report climate-related information to their clients or beneficiaries—11% of asset managers (5) and 19% of asset owners (5)—were not asked to answer questions about their reporting on information aligned with the TCFD recommended disclosures (or ISSB Standards).",
    "new_id": 459
  },
  {
    "id": 44589,
    "question": "Which scenario best reflects the nuanced interplay between regulatory frameworks and assurance requirements for climate-related disclosures, as described in the Progress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report?",
    "options": {
      "D": "A large accelerated filer in the US, disclosing GHG emissions for the first time in FY 2026, is required to provide reasonable assurance on those disclosures by FY 2033.",
      "A": "A company operating in California with annual revenue exceeding $500 million must align its climate-related financial risk report with ISSB Standards exclusively, without the option to use TCFD recommendations.",
      "B": "Publicly accountable entities in Zambia are mandated to adopt ISSB Standards by FY 2025, while other entities are prohibited from using these standards entirely.",
      "C": "Foreign private issuers listed in the US can fulfill SEC climate-related disclosure requirements through compliance with ISSB Standards starting in FY 2026.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "121",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS 2024.pdf",
    "source_text": "Progress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report | November 2024 | 121Jurisdiction TCFD-aligned disclosure requirements New standards(c)Assurance of reported information Authority(a)Time frame and scope(b)Report type US US Securities and Exchange Commission (US SEC) (March 2024)(h)Phased FY 2026—large accelerated filers FY 2027—accelerated filers FY 2028—all other listed companiesFinancial filing or annual reportThe US SEC climate rule does not provide an alternative reporting regime for foreign private issuers to meet the US SEC’s climate-related disclosure requirements through ISSB Standards at this time. However, the US SEC recognised that companies registered with the US SEC might operate or be listed in jurisdictions that will adopt ISSB Standards.Climate-related financial information included in a registrant’s financial statements is subject to requirements for the audit of financial statements and internal control over financial reporting. GHG emissions disclosures are subject to limited assurance beginning in the third year after initial disclosures; large accelerated filers’ GHG emissions disclosures are subject to reasonable assurance from FY 2033. California State Legislature (October 2023)On or before 1 January 2026—companies operating in California with annual revenue >US$500 millionClimate- related financial risk report California Senate Bill No. 261 requires companies to disclose information about their climate- related financial risk in accordance with TCFD recommendations or ISSB Standards.(i)– Zambia Zambia Institute of Chartered Accountants (ZiCA) (November 2023)FY 2025—publicly accountable entitiesGeneral purpose financial reportsZiCA issued a circular requiring public accountable entities to use ISSB Standards. Other entities are permitted to use ISSB Standards.– continued ...",
    "new_id": 460
  },
  {
    "id": 44602,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why insufficient information from companies was less of a challenge for asset managers in the 2024 survey compared to prior years, based on the relationships and details provided in the Progress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The increase in average AUM size among respondents led to improved access to private investment data, mitigating this issue.",
      "B": "Asset managers developed new methodologies to independently estimate missing data, reducing reliance on external sources.",
      "C": "Public companies and private investments began providing more comprehensive climate-related disclosures, addressing prior gaps.",
      "D": "Regulatory scrutiny decreased significantly, allowing asset managers to report incomplete metrics without concern.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "69-70",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS 2024.pdf",
    "source_text": "Progress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report | November 2024 | 69Figure 1.20—Asset managers that currently report on specific metrics and targets (a) As discussed in Section 2.2— Reconciliation between TCFD recommendations and requirements in ISSB Standards , IFRS S2 is broadly consistent with TCFD recommended disclosure c) about describing the resilience of a company’s strategy. However, IFRS S2 does not specify particular scenarios for a company to use in its climate-related scenario analysis and therefore does not require a company to use a below 2°C scenario.46% 61% 61%59% Base siz e: 41Metrics and targets Percentage responding (a) Alignment with <2°C scenario: AUM(a) Alignment with <2°C scenario: products and strategies Other climate-related metrics (b) GHG emissions of AUM Weighted average carbon intensity: products and investment strategies (c) Targets related to GHG emissions Other climate-related targets39% 54% 32%The survey also asked respondents about seven specific climate-related metrics and targets, as shown in Figure 1 .20. The IFRS Foundation was interested in the level of reporting on some metrics included in the TCFD supplemental guidance, including GHG emissions associated with AUM and the weighted average carbon intensity for each product or investment strategy.22 Figure 1 .20 shows the percentage of asset managers that currently report on each of the seven metrics to their clients. More than half of the asset managers (61%) said they report on the GHG emissions associated with their AUM and on targets related to GHG emissions. These metrics are followed by other climate metrics (59%) and weighted average carbon intensity for each product or investment strategy (54%). The least-reported metrics were the extent to which AUM align with a well-below 2°C scenario (39%) and other climate- related targets (32%). Compared with the 2023 TCFD survey, asset manager respondents in 2024 had much higher rates of reporting on all metrics and targets. It is noted that these rates might reflect the size of respondents compared with the respondents in the previous year. Overall, the respondents to the 2024 IFRS Foundation survey are larger in terms of AUM than the respondents to the 2023 TCFD survey. 22 TCFD, Implementing the Recommendations of the T ask Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures , TCFD, 2021, https://assets.bbhub.io/ company/sites/60/2021/07/2021-TCFD-Implementing_Guidance.pdf , pages 48–49.\n\n[Page 70]\nProgress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report | November 2024 | 70Along with asking asset managers about the types of climate-related information they report to their clients, the survey asked asset managers about the challenges they face in reporting information on the TCFD core content recommendations. Table 1 .37 lists the challenges reported by asset managers. A lack of resources and concerns about negative regulatory or other stakeholder scrutiny were the two most frequently cited challenges. Almost 40% of asset manager respondents said a lack of resources is a challenge for their reporting in general and especially for reporting on strategy and metrics and targets. Overall, 29% cited concern about negative regulatory or other stakeholder scrutiny as a challenge, particularly in reporting on metrics and targets. Insufficient information from companies was less of a challenge for those surveyed this year compared with respondents in prior years. The survey asked respondents whether the issue of insufficient information related to public companies, private investments, other sources or some combination of the three options (respondents could select more than one option). Of asset managers that cited insufficient information as a challenge, 78% said the issue related to private investments, 68% said to public companies and 63% said to other sources. Table 1.37—Asset managers: challenges reporting climate-related information Challenge Governance StrategyRisk managementMetrics and targetsOverall Lack of resources 5% 29% 15% 24% 39% Concern about negative scrutiny 15% 17% 12% 22% 29% Insufficient information from companies7% 15% 20% 27% 27% Lack of expertise or capabilities 0% 12% 5% 7% 15% Lack of methodologies 0% 5% 5% 7% 15% Lack of board or senior management support5% 5% 0% 7% 12% Base siz e: 41",
    "new_id": 461
  },
  {
    "id": 44629,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects an implicit trend or relationship regarding the alignment of TCFD disclosures with company size for fiscal year 2023, as outlined in the Progress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Mid-sized companies (US$3.2b–12.3b) disclosed more on risk management processes than smaller companies but lagged behind larger companies in GHG emissions reporting.",
      "A": "Companies with a market capitalization below US$3.2b consistently demonstrated higher disclosure rates across all categories compared to larger companies.",
      "C": "The largest companies, with market capitalizations exceeding US$12.3b, showed the most significant improvement in governance-related disclosures from 2022 to 2023.",
      "D": "Smaller companies (<US$3.2b) disclosed less on climate-related targets than both mid-sized and larger companies, despite having higher rates of board oversight.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "31-32",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS 2024.pdf",
    "source_text": "Progress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report | November 2024 | 31Figure 1.5—TCFD-aligned disclosures by market capitalisation for fiscal years 2022 and 2023 The numbers in parentheses represent the size of the review population.Governance Strategy Risk management Metrics and targets 2022 2023 24% 21%30% 31%30% 27%22% 20%27% 27%38%49%46% 34%45%40% 26% 24%<US$3.2b market capitalisation (929)US$3.2b–12.3b market capitalisation (879)>US$12.3b market capitalisation (2,006) 42%59%63% 39%54% 52%\n\n[Page 32]\nProgress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report | November 2024 | 32Table 1.9—Disclosure by company size for fiscal year 2023 Percentage of companies Recommendation Recommended disclosure<US$3.2b market capitalisation (929)US$3.2b– 12.3b market capitalisation (879)>US$12.3b market capitalisation (2,006) Governance a) Board oversight 48% 61% 56% b) Management’s role 29% 36% 36% Strategy a) Risks and opportunities 39% 42% 35% b) Impact of risks and opportunities on company 24% 38% 43% c) Resilience of strategy 8% 10% 12% Risk management a) Risk identification and assessment processes 24% 33% 28% b) Risk management processes 25% 36% 36% c) Integration into overall risk management 15% 23% 17% Metrics and targets a) Climate-related metrics 40% 56% 60% b) GHG emissions 46% 65% 70% c) Climate-related targets 40% 56% 58% The numbers in parentheses represent the size of the review population.",
    "new_id": 462
  },
  {
    "id": 44634,
    "question": "Which inference can be drawn regarding the relationship between regulatory requirements and regional reporting practices among asset managers and asset owners, as described in the Progress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report?",
    "options": {
      "C": "A higher proportion of North American entities report climate-related information due to regulatory requirements compared to entities in other regions.",
      "A": "Regulatory requirements are uniformly distributed across regions, with no significant variation in their influence on reporting.",
      "B": "North American entities are less likely to report climate-related information due to regulatory requirements compared to their European and Asian-Oceania counterparts.",
      "D": "Entities in Europe and Asia-Oceania report climate-related information primarily due to senior management priorities rather than regulatory requirements.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "67-68",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS 2024.pdf",
    "source_text": "Progress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report | November 2024 | 67Figure 1 .18 shows the reasons asset managers and asset owners report or plan to report climate- related information to their clients and beneficiaries. The most cited reasons by asset managers for reporting were ‘Requests from clients (including in investment mandates)’ and ‘Required by regulators’ followed by ‘Climate-related financial information is material’ . Asset owners cited ‘Climate-related financial information is material’ and ‘Senior management priority’ as the main reasons they report or plan to report climate-related information. Figure 1.18—Reporting of climate-related information to clients and beneficiaries Reasons for reporting(a) (respondents could select more than one reason) 78% 86%Climate-related financial information is material 56% 62%Peers report information 83% 62%Requests from clients 83% 48%Required by regulators 61% 86%Senior management priority (a) Only respondents that said they currently report climate-related information to their clients and beneficiaries were asked this question. Asset managers Asset owners The IFRS Foundation found that of asset managers and asset owners that said one of the reasons for reporting is because of regulatory requirements, 48% were in North America, 32% in Europe and the remaining 20% in Asia-Oceania.Figure 1 .19 shows two common reporting channels asset managers and asset owners use to report climate-related information to their clients and beneficiaries—reports that are publicly available and reports that are made available to clients or beneficiaries only. Figure 1.19—Reporting of climate-related information to clients and beneficiaries Channels for reporting to clients and beneficiaries(a) 95% 92% 100%All respondents (57)Percentage of those using publicly available reports to communicate climate-related financial information to clients and beneficiaries Asset managers Asset owners (a) Only respondents that said they currently report climate-related information to their clients and beneficiaries were asked this question. The vast majority of asset managers (92%) said they use publicly available reports to communicate climate-related financial information to their stakeholders with the remainder (8%) saying that they only use reports that are made available to clients or beneficiaries only to communicate climate-related financial information. All asset owners (100%) who responded to the survey said they communicate climate-related information to their stakeholders via publicly available reports.\n\n[Page 68]\nProgress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report | November 2024 | 68Table 1.36—Asset managers: rates of reporting on recommended disclosures Recommendation Recommended disclosures Percentage for each reporting option Currently reportPlan to reportUndecided / other Governance a) Board oversight 83% 12% 5% b) Management’s role 86% 12% 2% Strategy a) Risks and opportunities 80% 15% 5% b) Impact of risks and opportunities on company 68% 22% 10% c) Resilience of strategy 42% 34% 24% Risk management a) Risk identification and assessment processes 76% 17% 7% b) Risk management processes 78% 15% 7% c) Integration into overall risk management 76% 20% 4% Metrics and targets a) Climate-related metrics 76% 20% 4% b) GHG emissions 71% 20% 9% c) Climate-related targets 49% 22% 29% Base siz e: 411 .5.4—Reporting of climate-related information by asset managers Almost 78% of the asset manager respondents said they currently report information in line with the TCFD recommendations and, of those, 37% said they currently report on all 11 TCFD recommended disclosures. Table 1 .36 shows the percentages of asset manager respondents that currently report, plan to report, or are undecided about reporting to their clients on the TCFD recommended disclosures. Those that report on the recommended disclosures most commonly report on management’s role (Governance b), at 86%. The next highest rates of reporting were on board oversight (Governance a) at 83% and on risks and opportunities (Strategy a) at 80%. The lowest rate of reporting—at 42%—was on the resilience of the company’s strategy under different climate-related scenarios (Strategy c), with 34% of asset managers saying they plan to report on this recommended disclosure.",
    "new_id": 463
  },
  {
    "id": 44686,
    "question": "Which industry's reporting behavior most directly challenges the assumption that higher financial size consistently correlates with more comprehensive TCFD-aligned disclosures, as described in the Progress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Materials and buildings, as its high average disclosure rate is not matched by its median revenue.",
      "A": "Transportation, because its companies disclosed on only one recommendation despite being in a high-revenue quartile.",
      "B": "Banking, since its relatively high asset median does not correspond to the highest average disclosure rate.",
      "C": "Insurance, due to its lower third-quartile assets compared to banking but higher rates of specific disclosures.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "33-34",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS 2024.pdf",
    "source_text": "Progress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report | November 2024 | 331.3—TCFD-aligned reporting by public companies by region This section provides insights into TCFD-aligned reporting practices by industry for each region— Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean, North America, Asia-Oceania and Europe. 1 .3.1—Africa The AI review of companies headquartered in Africa included 113 companies in 13 jurisdictions. The three jurisdictions with the largest number of companies reviewed were South Africa (69 companies), Nigeria and Egypt (10 companies in each), as shown in Table 1 .10. Table 1.10—Number of reviewed companies in Africa by jurisdiction South Africa 69 Zambia 3 Nigeria 10 Botswana 2 Egypt 10 Ghana 2 Kenya 7Mauritius 2 Morocco 3Zimbabwe 2 In addition, there was one company each from Sudan, Togo and Uganda. As discussed in Section 4.2— Issued and proposed disclosure requirements aligned with the TCFD recommendations , TCFD-aligned disclosure requirements were in effect in Egypt, Kenya and Mauritius for fiscal year 2023.Table 1 .11 provides descriptive statistics for seven out of eight industry groups in Africa, including an indication of companies’ size based on total assets for financial institutions and total revenues for non-financial companies. The median assets for reviewed banks and insurance companies were US$20.9 billion and US$4.9 billion, respectively. The non-financial companies had median revenues ranging from approximately US$300 million to US$3 billion. Table 1.11—Demographics of reviewed companies in Africa Number of companies and size range by industry Total assets (US$ billion) Financial institutionsNumber of companiesFirst quartileMedian Third quartile Banking 15 3.6 20.9 66.8 Insurance 10 1.4 4.9 36.2 Revenue (US$ billion) Non-financial companiesNumber of companiesFirst quartileMedian Third quartile Agriculture, food and forest products21 0.4 0.6 0.8 Consumer goods19 1.1 3.0 6.0 Energy 13 0.6 0.9 1.7 Materials and buildings26 0.8 1.7 4.7 Technology and media(a)1 – – – Transportation 7 <0.1 0.3 1.0 (a) There were not enough companies to calculate statistics.\n\n[Page 34]\nProgress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report | November 2024 | 34As shown in Table 1 .12, materials and buildings companies, on average, reported on more TCFD recommended disclosures than companies in other industries (5.4 out of 11 recommended disclosures on average). The banking and insurance industries also had comparatively similar levels of reporting aligned with the TCFD recommendations—these companies reported on average on 5.3 and 4.8 out of 11 recommended disclosures. These three industries also had the highest rates of reporting on all 11 recommended disclosures, respectively (see Table 1 .13). Specifically, insurance companies had the highest levels of reporting on board oversight and climate-related targets—at 80% and 70%. Materials and buildings had the highest rates of reporting on climate-related metrics at 73%, GHG emissions at 81% and lower rates of reporting on climate-related targets at 62%. Companies in the transportation industry, on average, reported in line with one of the 11 recommended disclosures. There was no reporting on five of the 11 recommended disclosures for the transportation industry (see Table 1 .13). The lowest level of reporting in each of the industries was on resilience of the company’s strategy under different climate-related scenarios (Strategy c). In fact, none of the reviewed insurance, transportation or consumer goods companies reported in line with Strategy c.Table 1.12—Average number of recommended disclosures per company in Africa Industry Number of disclosures Materials and buildings 5.4 Banking 5.3 Insurance 4.8 Consumer goods 2.9 Energy 2.9 Agriculture, food and forest products 2.3 Transportation 1. 1",
    "new_id": 464
  },
  {
    "id": 44693,
    "question": "Which inference can be drawn regarding the relationship between asset managers' AUM size and their likelihood of reporting climate-related metrics or GHG emissions in financial filings, as described in the Progress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report?",
    "options": {
      "A": "There is no clear trend linking AUM size to the use of financial filings for reporting climate-related metrics or GHG emissions, as these disclosures appear inconsistent across all AUM categories.",
      "B": "Larger asset managers are significantly more likely to report climate-related metrics in financial filings than smaller ones, as indicated by a direct correlation with AUM size.",
      "C": "The percentage of asset managers reporting GHG emissions increases consistently with AUM size, suggesting that regulatory pressure drives disclosure practices.",
      "D": "Smaller asset managers prioritize financial filings over other reporting formats for climate-related metrics due to their limited resources and focus on compliance.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "71-72",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS 2024.pdf",
    "source_text": "Progress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report | November 2024 | 71The IFRS Foundation also reviewed asset managers’ reporting on information based on their size using AUM. Table 1 .38 shows the percentage of asset managers in each AUM size category that currently report on the recommended disclosures. These results are generally consistent with those for the AI review of public companies, which showed that a higher percentage of larger companies than smaller companies disclosed climate-related information. Table 1.38—Asset managers: currently report climate-related information by AUM Recommendation Recommended disclosure <US$1b (4)US$1–9b (2)US$10–99b (10)>US$100b (25) Governance a) Board oversight 50% 100% 90% 84% b) Management’s role 75% 50% 90% 88% Strategy a) Risks and opportunities 75% 50% 80% 84% b) Impact of risks and opportunities on company 75% 50% 70% 68% c) Resilience of strategy 50% 0% 40% 44% Risk management a) Risk identification and assessment processes 50% 100% 70% 80% b) Risk management processes 75% 100% 70% 80% c) Integration into overall risk management 75% 50% 60% 84% Metrics and targets a) Climate-related metrics 50% 100% 60% 84% b) GHG emissions 50% 100% 60% 76% c) Climate-related targets 50% 0% 50% 52% The numbers in parentheses represent the number of respondents . Base siz e: 41\n\n[Page 72]\nProgress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report | November 2024 | 72Table 1 .39 provides a breakdown of the types of reports in which asset managers currently report climate-related information to their clients. Most asset managers currently report in sustainability reports (75%) or reports available to only their clients (at 73%). For asset managers that do not currently provide climate-related information to their clients (that is, plan to report, do not plan to report or are undecided), Table 1 .39 provides information about the types of reports in which asset managers stated they would report climate-related information to their clients if they had done so. More than 65% of asset managers currently report through climate-specific reports and 22% are planning to report to clients in this way, with 20% saying they report to clients through financial filings and 10% that they plan to report this way. Table 1.39—Asset managers: location of climate-related reporting (Respondents could select more than one report type) Reporting status Report type Currently reportPlan to reportDo not plan to reportUndecided Sustainability report 75% 12% 5% 5% Client report 73% 15% 2% 7% Climate-specific report 68% 22% 5% 5% Annual report 27% 7% 27% 15% Financial filing 20% 10% 27% 20% Other 12% 2% 0% 2% Base siz e: 41",
    "new_id": 465
  },
  {
    "id": 44694,
    "question": "Which trend, inferred from the data provided, demonstrates a potential disconnect between oversight and actionable progress in climate-related disclosures among African companies, as described in the Progress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report?",
    "options": {
      "B": "While disclosures on GHG emissions rose significantly, there was no corresponding improvement in resilience strategy reporting.",
      "A": "The consistent levels of disclosure for board oversight contrast with stagnation in reporting on management's role across most industries.",
      "C": "Companies showing increased reporting on climate-related targets have simultaneously reduced their focus on risk identification processes.",
      "D": "Industries with the highest increase in climate-related metrics also show declining governance disclosures related to board oversight.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "35-36",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS 2024.pdf",
    "source_text": "Progress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report | November 2024 | 35Table 1.13—TCFD-aligned disclosures by industry for fiscal year 2023 Percentage of companies in Africa Recommendation Recommended disclosure Banking (15) Insurance (10) Energy (13) Materials and buildings (26) Transportation (7) Agriculture, food and forest products (21) Consumer goods (19) Governance a) Board oversight 73% 80% 31% 69% 14% 24% 47% b) Management’s role 53% 60% 15% 38% 0% 19% 16% Strategy a) Risks and opportunities 27% 50% 23% 50% 0% 14% 21% b) Impact of risks and opportunities on company47% 30% 31% 54% 14% 19% 26% c) Resilience of strategy 13% 0% 15% 19% 0% 5% 0% Risk management a) Risk identification and assessment processes40% 20% 15% 35% 0% 10% 16% b) Risk management processes47% 40% 23% 42% 14% 19% 21% c) Integration into overall risk management53% 20% 8% 15% 0% 5% 16% Metrics and targets a) Climate-related metrics 53% 50% 46% 73% 29% 38% 42% b) GHG emissions 67% 60% 46% 81% 29% 43% 47% c) Climate-related targets 60% 70% 38% 62% 14% 33% 42% The numbers in parentheses represent the size of the review population. The review of reporting by companies in Africa for fiscal years 2022 and 2023 shows an increase in or nearly consistent levels of disclosures for all TCFD recommended disclosures (see Figure 1 .6). The largest increase—approximately seven percentage points—was for disclosures of climate-related targets (Metrics and targets c), whereas the reporting on climate-related metrics (Metrics and targets a) and board oversight (Governance a) remained unchanged.\n\n[Page 36]\nProgress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report | November 2024 | 36Figure 1.6—TCFD-aligned disclosures in Africa for fiscal years 2022 and 2023 Percentage of companies in Africa Base siz e: 11340%55%19%50% 27% 29% 25% 28% 31% 34% 10% 9% 17%22% 21% 32% 30% 50% 50% 47%56% Average percentage0%2022 2023 2022 2023 2022 2023 2022 2023 2022 2023 2022 2023 2022 2023 2022 2023 2022 2023 2022 2023 2022 2023 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%Fiscal year Recommended disclosure Recommendations Governance Risk management Metrics and targetsStrategya) Board oversight b) Management’s role a) Risks and opportunities a) Risk identification and assessment processes a) Climate-related metricsb) Risk management processes b) GHG emissionsc) Integration into overall risk management c) Climate-related targetsb) Impact of risks and opportunities on company c) Resilience of strategy50%",
    "new_id": 466
  },
  {
    "id": 44697,
    "question": "Which inference about climate-related disclosures in Latin America and the Caribbean is most strongly supported by the data, as described in the Progress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Transportation companies show the highest rate of reporting on climate-related targets but lag significantly in governance-related disclosures compared to insurance companies.",
      "A": "Insurance companies lead in reporting on all TCFD recommendations, including resilience of strategies under climate-related scenarios.",
      "B": "The largest year-over-year increase in disclosures was observed in GHG emissions reporting across all industries.",
      "D": "Integration of climate-related risks into overall risk management saw minimal improvement due to consistently low reporting rates.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "38-39",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS 2024.pdf",
    "source_text": "Progress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report | November 2024 | 38The AI review results for Latin America and the Caribbean are shown in Tables 1 .16–1 .17 . The reviewed insurance companies reported on more of the TCFD recommended disclosures than companies in other industries. Insurance companies also had the highest rates of reporting on all the recommended disclosures except two— climate-related targets (Metrics and targets c) and the resilience of the company’s strategy under different climate-related scenarios (Strategy c). In addition, insurance companies had the highest rate of reporting on board oversight and integration of climate-related risks into overall risk management, both at 88%, which is consistent with the AI review results for the region in previous TCFD annual status reports. Of the seven industries reviewed in Latin America and the Caribbean, transportation companies had the highest rates of reporting on climate-related targets (Metrics and targets c) at 70%, and lower rates of reporting on strategy and risk management recommendations. In general, there was minimal to no reporting on the resilience of companies’ strategies under different climate-related scenarios and on integration of climate-related risks into overall risk management (Risk management c).Table 1.16—Average number of recommended disclosures per company in Latin America and the Caribbean Industry Number of disclosures Insurance 6.9 Materials and buildings 3.8 Consumer goods 3.4 Banking 3.1 Energy 3.0 Agriculture, food and forest products 2.4 Transportation 2.2\n\n[Page 39]\nProgress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report | November 2024 | 39Table 1.17—TCFD-aligned disclosures by industry for fiscal year 2023 Percentage of companies in Latin America and the Caribbean Recommendation Recommended disclosure Banking (18) Insurance (8) Energy (25) Materials and buildings (29) Transportation (10) Agriculture, food and forest products (18) Consumer goods (10) Governance a) Board oversight 56% 88% 48% 41% 20% 22% 40% b) Management’s role 22% 75% 16% 34% 20% 17% 40% Strategy a) Risks and opportunities 33% 75% 32% 14% 0% 28% 30% b) Impact of risks and opportunities on company6% 50% 28% 31% 10% 22% 10% c) Resilience of strategy 0% 0% 0% 14% 0% 0% 10% Risk management a) Risk identification and assessment processes17% 50% 24% 31% 0% 17% 20% b) Risk management processes22% 63% 24% 41% 0% 17% 40% c) Integration into overall risk management22% 88% 16% 24% 10% 0% 10% Metrics and targets a) Climate-related metrics 39% 75% 40% 48% 40% 33% 50% b) GHG emissions 56% 75% 44% 52% 50% 44% 50% c) Climate-related targets 33% 50% 32% 48% 70% 44% 40% The numbers in parentheses represent the size of the review population. The comparison of reporting by companies in Latin America and the Caribbean for fiscal years 2022 and 2023 shows an increase in or generally consistent levels of disclosures for all TCFD recommended disclosures (see Figure 1 .7). The largest increase—approximately seven percentage points—was for disclosures of integration of climate-related risks into overall risk management (Risk management c), followed by management and board oversight—approximately five to seven percentage points (Governance a and b). There was a slight decrease in reporting on climate-related targets (Metrics and targets c).",
    "new_id": 467
  },
  {
    "id": 44713,
    "question": "Which jurisdiction's regulatory body explicitly announced the adoption of ISSB Standards while also developing an adoption roadmap, distinguishing it from others mentioned in terms of its dual approach to climate-related disclosures, as described in the Progress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Zimbabwe, via the Public Accountants and Auditors Board (PAAB) announcement in August 2023.",
      "A": "Egypt, through its Financial Regulatory Authority resolutions issued in July 2021.",
      "B": "New Zealand, under the Financial Sector (Climate-related Disclosures and Other Matters) Amendment Act 2021.",
      "C": "California, following amendments to Senate Bill No. 261 by Senate Bill No. 219 in September 2024.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "122",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS 2024.pdf",
    "source_text": "Progress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report | November 2024 | 122Jurisdiction TCFD-aligned disclosure requirements New standards(c)Assurance of reported information Authority(a)Time frame and scope(b)Report type Zimbabwe Public Accountants and Auditors Board (PAAB) (August 2023)FY 2024—companies operating in ZimbabweGeneral purpose financial reportsPAAB announced adoption of the ISSB Standards and is developing an adoption roadmap.– (a) The date in parentheses refers to the date of publication of the requirements or proposed requirements by the authority. (b) The time frames refer to the first fiscal year in which the requirements apply. (c) The new standards integrate the TCFD recommendations. For jurisdictions that have previously issued or proposed disclosure requirements aligned with the TCFD recommendations, the column ‘new standards’ includes information about the time frames and scope for the application of the new standards. (d) CVM, CVM Resolution No. 193, Article 6, 20 October 2023, https://www.gov.br/cvm/en/foreign-investors/regulation-files/ResolutionCVM193.pdf . (e) In July 2021 the Financial Regulatory Authority of Egypt issued resolutions requiring companies listed on the Egyptian Stock Exchange and companies operating in non-bank financial activities whose issued capital or net ownership rights are not less than 500 million Egyptian pounds to provide climate-related disclosures in accordance with the TCFD recommendations. The announcement of the Financial Regulatory Authority of Egypt is in Arabic. The United Nations Sustainable Stock Exchanges Initiatives provides a summary of the announcement in English. (f) According to New Zealand’s Financial Sector (Climate-related Disclosures and Other Matters) Amendment Act 2021, passed in October 2021, from fiscal year 2023 large publicly listed companies, insurers, banks, non-bank deposit takers and investment managers are required to provide climate-related information in accordance with Aotearoa New Zealand climate standards developed by New Zealand’s External Reporting Board (XRB) in line with the TCFD recommendations. Financial Sector (Climate-related Disclosures and Other Matters) Amendment Act 2021, https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2021/0039/latest/LMS479636.html . External Reporting Board (XRB) Aotearoa New Zealand Climate Standards, XRB, https://www.xrb.govt.nz/standards/climate-related-disclosures/aotearoa-new-zealand-climate-standards . (g) In February 2023 the Bank of Thailand released a policy statement requesting that all financial institutions disclose climate-related information in line with the TCFD recommendations at least once a year from fiscal year 2023. Bank of Thailand, ‘Policy statement of the Bank of Thailand Re: internalizing environmental and climate change aspects into financial institution business’ , Bank of Thailand, 2023, https://www.bot.or.th/ content/dam/bot/fipcs/documents/FPG/2566/EngPDF/25660028.pdf . (h) On 4 April 2024 the US SEC issued an order to stay the rule, pending completion of an ongoing judicial review, ‘In the Matter of the Enhancement and Standardization of Climate-Related Disclosures for Investors: Order Issuing Stay, US SEC, 2024, https://www.sec.gov/files/ rules/other/2024/33-11280.pdf . (i) In September 2024 California Senate Bill No. 261 was amended by Senate Bill No. 219, https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient. xhtml?bill_id=202320240SB219 .",
    "new_id": 468
  },
  {
    "id": 44747,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes a key difference in the implementation timelines for climate-related disclosures between Indian and Japanese regulatory frameworks, as outlined in the Progress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Japan requires immediate disclosure of governance and risk management information upon rule enactment, whereas India delays all disclosures until at least 2025–2026.",
      "B": "India mandates full compliance with all disclosure categories by 2025–2026, while Japan staggers its requirements starting from 2023.",
      "C": "India requires tier IV primary co-operative banks to comply one year later than other entities, while Japan applies uniform deadlines across all company types.",
      "D": "Japan allows companies to omit non-material strategy disclosures indefinitely, whereas India begins requiring such disclosures for all entities from 2027–2028.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "132",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS 2024.pdf",
    "source_text": "Progress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report | November 2024 | 13257 Reserve Bank of India (RBI), ‘Press release—RBI invites comments on the “Draft Disclosure Framework on Climate-related Financial Risks, 2024”’ , RBI, 2024, https://www.rbi.org.in/Scripts/BS_PressReleaseDisplay.aspx?prid=57408 . 58 Financial Services Agency, Japan (JFSA), ‘Press release—Results of public comments on the proposed amendments to the cabinet office ordinance on disclosure of corporate details, etc.’ , JFSA, 2023, https://www.fsa.go.jp/news/r4/sonota/20230131/20230131 .html . 59 SSBJ, ‘The SSBJ issues exposure drafts of sustainability disclosure standards to be applied in Japan’ , SSBJ, 2024, https://www.ssb-j.jp/en/ exposure_drafts/y2024/2024-0329.html .India In February 2024 the Reserve Bank of India published a draft disclosure framework for regulated banks on climate-related financial risks.57 The draft framework would require some financial institutions to disclose information about their climate-related financial risks and opportunities. The proposed disclosure requirements are structured in line with the TCFD recommendations. The draft framework applies to: • all scheduled commercial banks (excluding local area banks, payments banks and regional rural banks); • all tier IV primary (urban) co-operative banks; • all India financial institutions; and • all top and upper layer non-banking financial companies. Companies within the scope of the draft framework would be required to report information on governance, strategy and risk management from fiscal year 2025–2026 onwards. Information on metrics and targets would be required from fiscal year 2027–2028 onwards. For tier IV primary (urban) co-operative banks, the requirements would apply one year later.Japan In January 2023 the Financial Services Agency, Japan (JFSA), announced new rules that require listed companies to disclose sustainability information—including climate-related information—in four categories generally aligned with the TCFD recommendations.58 The disclosure of information about governance and risk management is required, whereas the disclosure of information about strategy and metrics and targets is required only if the information is material. The rules became effective on 31 January 2023 and apply to securities registration statements and annual securities reports for fiscal years ending on and after 31 March 2023. The Sustainability Standards Board of Japan (SSBJ) is developing sustainability disclosure standards based on ISSB Standards. JFSA is determining which companies will be required to apply the SSBJ’s standards. In March 2024 the SSBJ published exposure drafts of sustainability disclosure standards to be applied in Japan.59 The proposed standards integrate most of the requirements in ISSB Standards and include jurisdiction-specific options a company may apply if appropriate. The SSBJ plans to issue the standards by 31 March 2025.",
    "new_id": 469
  },
  {
    "id": 44754,
    "question": "Which jurisdiction's phased assurance requirements explicitly create a scenario where companies will need to transition from limited to reasonable assurance on all sustainability-related matters, and what is the earliest year this transition could fully occur for any entity, as described in the Progress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Nigeria; FY 2029",
      "A": "New Zealand; FY 2024",
      "C": "Pakistan; FY 2026",
      "D": "Singapore; FY 2025",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "116-117",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS 2024.pdf",
    "source_text": "Progress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report | November 2024 | 116Jurisdiction TCFD-aligned disclosure requirements New standards(c)Assurance of reported information Authority(a)Time frame and scope(b)Report type New Zealand New Zealand Government(f) (October 2021)FY 2023—issuers with securities >NZ$60 million Banks with assets >NZ$1 billion, asset managers with assets under management (AUM) >NZ$1 billion, insurers with premium income >NZ$250 millionAnnual report – External limited assurance for Scope 1, Scope 2 and Scope 3 GHG emissions, using International Standard on Assurance (NZ) 3410 Assurance Engagements on Greenhouse Gas Statements or International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 14064-3 Greenhouse gases—Part 3: Specification with guidance for the verification and validation of greenhouse gas statements , from FY 2024. Nigeria Financial Reporting Council of Nigeria (FRC) (March 2024)Phased FY 2024—companies are permitted to use ISSB Standards FY 2028—all public interest entities except government and government organisations FY 2030—small and medium-sized entities General purpose financial reportsThe FRC has issued a roadmap for the adoption of ISSB Standards and has amended the Financial Reporting Act to reflect the application of ISSB Standards.Phased Limited assurance starting from the third year of reporting, progressing to reasonable assurance for all sustainability-related matters from the sixth year of reporting. Pakistan Institute of Chartered Accountants of Pakistan (ICAP) (December 2023— proposed )Phased FY 2025—companies meeting two out of three criteria (annual revenue >Pakistani rupees 25 billion, >1,000 employees and total assets >Pakistani rupees 12.5 billion) FY 2026—companies meeting two out of three criteria (annual revenue >Pakistani rupees 12.5 billion, >500 employees and total assets >Pakistani rupees 6.25 billion) FY 2027—other listed companiesGeneral purpose financial reportsICAP , through its Sustainability Working Group, explored whether to adopt ISSB Standards in Pakistan and published a report recommending the time frame and scope of the requirements.Assurance in accordance with ISSA 5000 would be required from the second year of reporting. continued ...\n\n[Page 117]\nProgress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report | November 2024 | 117Jurisdiction TCFD-aligned disclosure requirements New standards(c)Assurance of reported information Authority(a)Time frame and scope(b)Report type Philippines Securities and Exchange Commission (February 2019)FY 2022—all registrantsFinancial filing or sustainability reportThe Securities and Exchange Commission requested comments on Revised Sustainability Reporting Guidelines for Publicly Listed Companies and the Securities and Exchange Commission Sustainability Reporting Form ( SuRe Form ), both of which take into account requirements in ISSB Standards in the reporting form. The Philippines Sustainability Reporting Committee endorsed ISSB Standards for use from FY 2025 subject to the issuance of regulations roadmap adopted by the relevant regulators.– Singapore Singapore Exchange (SGX) (December 2021)FY 2023—listed companies operating in specific industries FY 2024—listed companies operating in specific industriesSustainability report or annual reportIn September 2024 SGX RegCo amended its listing rules to require issuers to provide climate-related disclosures based on ISSB Standards. FY 2025—issuers are required to refer to ISSB Standards in preparing climate-related disclosures and to disclose Scope 1 and Scope 2 GHG emissions and the measurement approach used.Issuers are encouraged to obtain independent external assurance on the sustainability report. SGX RegCo will conduct a separate public consultation on the mandatory assurance requirements for climate-related disclosures in the future.The Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority and Singapore Exchange Regulation (ACRA and SGX RegCo) (July 2023— proposed )Phased All issuers and large non-listed companiesSustainability report or annual report continued ...",
    "new_id": 470
  },
  {
    "id": 44756,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the underlying reason why respondents emphasized interoperability between ISSB Standards and other frameworks as critical for reducing companies' compliance burden, as described in the Progress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Companies can avoid duplicative efforts by aligning ISSB Standards with widely used frameworks like ESRS, thus streamlining sustainability reporting processes.",
      "A": "Interoperability ensures that all companies will adopt ISSB Standards uniformly, eliminating regional differences in reporting practices.",
      "B": "Jurisdictions mandating specific standards are likely to abandon their requirements entirely in favor of adopting ISSB Standards exclusively.",
      "D": "The integration of TCFD recommendations into ISSB Standards alone is sufficient to reduce complexity without requiring alignment with other frameworks.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "77",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS 2024.pdf",
    "source_text": "Progress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report | November 2024 | 771 .5.6—ISSB-specific questions As mentioned previously, the IFRS Foundation also included questions in the survey to better understand asset managers’ and asset owners’ reporting practices in relation to ISSB Standards. The IFRS Foundation’s findings are shown in Figure 1 .22. Of those asset managers and asset owners that responded to the optional questions about ISSB Standards, 84% of asset managers and 100% of asset owners want or expect portfolio companies to make the transition from disclosures prepared using the TCFD recommendations to disclosures prepared using ISSB Standards. These respondents cited the integration of the TCFD recommendations into ISSB Standards, the comparability of information provided through use of ISSB Standards and jurisdictional adoption of ISSB Standards as primary reasons for their expectations. The most common factors respondents gave that could accelerate the adoption of ISSB Standards were: •regulatory factors and action; •more guidance on implementation; and •examples of reporting in accordance with ISSBStandards in practice. Respondents also emphasised the critical importance of interoperability between ISSB Standards and other established standards and frameworks to streamline and enhance the quality of sustainability reporting. Many respondents expressed strong support for the information required by ISSB Standards to be consistent with that required by other standards that already have widespread use, such as ESRS. This response emphasises that interoperability is vital for maintaining consistency between reporting regimes and reducing the compliance burden on companies (see Section 4.4—Interoperability of ISSB Standards with other standards and initiatives). Furthermore, some respondents said it would be helpful for jurisdictions that require companies to comply with particular standards to permit the use of ISSB Standards to reduce the reporting burden on companies. Figure 1.22—Asset manager and asset owner respondents’ comments about the transition from TCFD recommendations to ISSB Standards Percentage wanting or expecting portfolio companies to make the transition from disclosures prepared using the TCFD recommendations to disclosures prepared using ISSB Standards 11% 89% Base siz e: 55 Yes (49) No (6) The numbers in parentheses represent the number of respondents that answered optional questions pertaining to ISSB Standards and the TCFD recommendations. Percentage wanting or expecting portfolio companies to make the transition from disclosures prepared using the TCFD recommendations to disclosures prepared using ISSB Standards by organisation type 89% 84% 100%All respondents (55) Asset managers Asset owners",
    "new_id": 471
  },
  {
    "id": 44757,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects a logical implication of the methodology used to select companies for the AI review, as described in the Progress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Companies were included in the review only if they had publicly available annual reports for both fiscal years 2022 and 2023, regardless of their alignment with TCFD reporting standards.",
      "A": "The removal of subsidiaries was primarily based on their inability to provide reports in English, ensuring consistency in language across the dataset.",
      "B": "The preference for companies with the highest revenue or total assets within an industry was implemented to ensure that all selected entities were part of the S&P Global 1200 index.",
      "C": "The use of GICS® subsectors and industries ensured uniformity in market capitalization representation across large, medium, and small companies within each industry.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "151-152",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS 2024.pdf",
    "source_text": "Progress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report | November 2024 | 151APPENDIX 1—COMPANY SELECTION AND AI REVIEW METHODOLOGY A1.1—Companies included in the review The IFRS Foundation used AI technology to examine financial filings, annual reports, integrated reports, sustainability reports and other relevant documents from public companies in five regions spanning eight industries. All industries covered correspond to the industries in the TCFD 2023 status report. These industries include: • banking; • insurance; • energy; • materials and buildings; • transportation; • agriculture, food and forest products; • technology and media; and • consumer goods. In selecting the population of companies for the AI review (see Section 1 .2— TCFD- aligned reporting by public companies ), the IFRS Foundation aimed to maintain consistency with the sample selection process used in the TCFD 2023 status report. Specifically, the methodology employed for this report involved:• identifying public companies —those with publicly traded debt or equity—in the eight industries and their sub-industries outlined in Table A.1. These sub-industries are based on the Global Industry Classification Standard (GICS®) subsectors and industries.88 • identifying public companies in specific indexes to provide coverage of large, medium and small market capitalisation companies. The specific indexes used were S&P Global 1200, S&P Global MidCap and S&P Global SmallCap. • removing subsidiaries to prevent duplicate observations. Companies sharing the same industry and ultimate parent for capital structure considerations were identified, with preference given to the company with the highest annual revenue (for non-financial industries) or total assets (for financial industries). This approach aimed to minimise the inclusion of subsidiaries’ annual reports. • removing companies without available annual reports for the fiscal years 2022 and 2023 to ensure uniformity in the dataset and consistent reporting for the two consecutive years. • removing companies lacking reports in English . This methodology resulted in a final dataset comprising 3,814 unique companies and corresponding to 25,127 reports in 2022 and 26,637 reports in 2023. The company distribution by industry is summarised in Table A.1 . 88 In March 2023 the Global Industry Classification Standard’s industry classifications were changed. These changes were considered in this year’s report when grouping companies into industries. See S&P Dow Jones Indices, ‘S&P Dow Jones Indices and MSCI announce revisions to the Global Industry Classification Standard (GICS®) structure in 2023’ , S&P Global, 2022, https://www.msci.com/documents/1296102/29559863/GICS_Press_Release_31_March_2022.pdf/f0ac4118-d6c3-4456-3c7b- 2b0174099e4e?t=1648760411652 .\n\n[Page 152]\nProgress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report | November 2024 | 152Table A.1—Industry and sub-industry of companies selected for review for fiscal years 2022 and 2023 Industries Sub-industries Banking 534 companies• Regional banks • Large, diversified banks• Investment and asset management firms Insurance 150 companies• Multi-line insurance • Property and casualty insurance• Life and health insurance • Reinsurance Energy 444 companies• Oil and gas • Coal• Utilities Materials and buildings 1,398 companies• Chemicals • Construction materials • Capital goods• Metals and mining • Real estate management and development Transportation 242 companies• Air freight • Passenger air transportation • Maritime transportation• Rail transportation • Trucking services • Automobiles Agriculture, food and forest products 288 companies• Beverages • Agriculture• Packaged foods and meats • Paper and forest products Technology and media 364 companies• Technology hardware and equipment• Interactive media and services Consumer goods 394 companies• Consumer retailing • Textiles and apparel Total: 3,814 companies",
    "new_id": 472
  },
  {
    "id": 44758,
    "question": "Which inference about the relationship between company size and disclosure practices can be drawn from the provided data on North American companies, as described in the Progress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report?",
    "options": {
      "A": "There is no clear evidence in the text to suggest that company size, whether measured by assets or revenue, has a direct impact on the adoption of TCFD-aligned disclosures in North America.",
      "B": "Larger financial institutions are more likely to have comprehensive TCFD-aligned disclosures than smaller non-financial companies because of their higher asset base.",
      "C": "The absence of mandatory TCFD-aligned disclosure requirements in Canada and the US directly correlates with lower disclosure rates among companies with median revenues below US$7 billion.",
      "D": "Smaller companies in the technology and media sector are less likely to align with TCFD recommendations due to their limited revenue range compared to larger banks and insurers.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "40-41",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS 2024.pdf",
    "source_text": "Progress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report | November 2024 | 40Figure 1.7—TCFD-aligned disclosures in Latin America and the Caribbean for fiscal years 2022 and 2023 Percentage of companies in Latin America and the Caribbean 45%49%13%36% 23% 28% 28% 27% 24% 23% 4% 4% 20%18% 23% 27% 29% 43% 44% 43%50% Base siz e: 1190%2022 2023 2022 2023 2022 2023 2022 2023 2022 2023 2022 2023 2022 2023 2022 2023 2022 2023 2022 2023 2022 2023 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%Fiscal year Recommended disclosure Recommendation Governance Risk management Metrics and targetsStrategya) Board oversight b) Management’s role a) Risks and opportunities a) Risk identification and assessment processes a) Climate-related metricsb) Risk management processes b) GHG emissionsc) Integration into overall risk management c) Climate-related targetsb) Impact of risks and opportunities on company c) Resilience of strategy43%\n\n[Page 41]\nProgress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report | November 2024 | 411 .3.3—North America The AI review of companies headquartered in North America included 1,111 companies, with the majority headquartered in the United States (946 companies) and the remainder in Canada (165 companies), as shown in Table 1 .18. As discussed in Section 4.2— Issued and proposed disclosure requirements aligned with the TCFD recommendations , no TCFD-aligned disclosure requirements were in effect in fiscal year 2023 in Canada or the US. Table 1 .19 provides descriptive statistics for reviewed companies in eight industry groups along with an indication of their size based on total assets for financial institutions and total revenue for non-financial companies. The median assets for reviewed banks and insurance companies were US$14.9 billion and US$34.3 billion, respectively. The non-financial companies had median revenues ranging from approximately US$2.7 billion to US$7 billion. Table 1.18—Number of reviewed companies in North America by jurisdiction US 946 Canada 165Table 1.19—Demographics of reviewed companies in North America Number of reviewed companies and size range by industry Total assets (US$ billion) Financial institutionsNumber of companiesFirst quartileMedian Third quartile Banking 224 7.5 14.9 43.1 Insurance 52 6.9 34.3 93.0 Revenue (US$ billion) Non-financial companiesNumber of companiesFirst quartileMedian Third quartile Agriculture, food and forest products56 2.0 7.0 12.5 Consumer goods128 2.7 6.7 18.1 Energy 184 1.1 2.9 10.5 Materials and buildings336 1.2 2.7 6.8 Technology and media75 1.0 2.8 9.2 Transportation 56 3.0 6.6 13.6",
    "new_id": 473
  },
  {
    "id": 44759,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why consistent and comparable climate-related financial reporting by sovereigns is considered crucial for companies preparing TCFD-aligned disclosures, as outlined in the Progress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report?",
    "options": {
      "B": "It provides companies with a clearer understanding of their operating environment, aiding in comprehensive disclosure preparation.",
      "A": "It ensures that companies can directly adopt sovereign standards without modification, simplifying compliance.",
      "C": "It enables companies to rely exclusively on sovereign data, reducing the need for internal assessments of climate risks.",
      "D": "It allows companies to shift regulatory accountability for climate disclosures to sovereign entities.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "149",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS 2024.pdf",
    "source_text": "Progress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report | November 2024 | 1495.1 .5—Climate-related disclosure by sovereigns The TCFD expected that the issuance of ISSB Standards in June 2023 and various jurisdictions’ efforts to require climate-related financial disclosures would lead to further progress. The TCFD was encouraged, for example, by the International Public Sector Accounting Standards Board’s (IPSASB) plans to develop a climate-related disclosure standard for the public sector. IPSASB climate-related disclosure standard In May 2022 the IPSASB published a consultation paper seeking feedback on developing public sector sustainability reporting guidance, which it proposed to align with the ISSB’s work and the TCFD recommendations. In June 2023 the IPSASB announced its decision to develop a climate-related disclosure standard for the public sector. The IPSASB said that there was ‘strong global stakeholder support for the proposals in its consultation paper’ , with substantial support for developing guidance on climate-related disclosures first. The TCFD was encouraged by the IPSASB’s efforts and was of the view that developing a consistent climate-related financial disclosure framework for sovereigns—consistent with the TCFD recommendations and ISSB Standards, as appropriate—was important for both preparers and users of climate-related financial disclosures. Consistent and comparable reporting by sovereigns would support companies in preparing comprehensive TCFD-aligned disclosures and transition plans that appropriately reflect their operating environment. Such reporting would also improve investors’ ability to appropriately assess and price their climate-related risks and effectively allocate capital. In June 2023 the IPSASB announced it would begin developing the first sustainability reporting standard for the public sector on climate-related disclosures.85 The project overview states that the standard would be based on IFRS S2.86 In June 2024 the IPSASB announced that the World Bank is supporting the development of the climate-related disclosures standard for the public sector.87 In October 2024 the IPSASB published a draft standard for consultation, building on IFRS S2. 5.2—Next steps The introduction of sustainability-related disclosure requirements into regulatory frameworks through the adoption or other use of ISSB Standards supports the provision of more comparable and reliable information about sustainability-related risks and opportunities for global capital markets. The progress towards use of ISSB Standards by companies and adoption of ISSB Standards by jurisdictions is expected to be beneficial to the increased specificity about the information to be provided, the links to information in the financial statements and the trend towards disclosure being required to be provided rather than being recommended or subject to ‘comply or explain’ approaches. 85 International Public Sector Accounting Standards Board (IPSASB), ‘IPSASB begins development of climate-related disclosures standard for the public sector’ , IPSASB, 2023, https://www.ipsasb.org/news-events/2023-06/ipsasb-begins-development-climate-related-disclosures-standard- public-sector . 86 IPSASB, Climate-related Disclosures—Project Brief and Outline , IPSASB, 2023, https://ifacweb.blob.core.windows.net/publicfiles/2023-06/ Final%20Draft%20Climate-related%20Disclosures%20Project%20Brief%20-%20Clean.pdf . 87 IPSASB, ‘IPSASB developing the first public sector sustainability reporting standard with support from the World Bank’ , IPSASB, 2024, https://www.ipsasb.org/news-events/2024-06/ipsasb-developing-first-public-sector-sustainability-reporting-standard-support-world-bank .",
    "new_id": 474
  },
  {
    "id": 44760,
    "question": "Which of the following best reflects a necessary condition for accelerating the adoption of ISSB Standards, based on both direct respondent feedback and implications drawn from their cited concerns, as described in the Progress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Regulatory action alongside enhanced guidance and practical examples demonstrating alignment with current standards like ESRS.",
      "A": "The creation of entirely new sustainability frameworks to replace existing standards.",
      "B": "Jurisdictional mandates that exclusively enforce ISSB Standards without allowing integration with other frameworks.",
      "D": "A global agreement requiring all companies to abandon TCFD-based disclosures immediately.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "76-77",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS 2024.pdf",
    "source_text": "Progress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report | November 2024 | 76Table 1 .42 provides a breakdown of the types of reports in which asset owners currently report climate-related information to their beneficiaries. Most asset owners currently report in sustainability reports (67%), climate-specific reports (57%) or annual reports (57%). Reporting of climate- related information in financial filings or in direct client reports is used by 10% of asset owners who responded to the survey. For asset owners that do not currently report climate-related information to their beneficiaries (that is, plan to report, do not plan to report or are undecided), Table 1 .42 provides information about the types of reports in which asset owners stated they would report climate-related information to their beneficiaries if they had done so. Table 1.42—Asset owners: location of climate-related reporting (Respondents could select more than one report type) Reporting status Report type Currently reportPlan to reportDo not plan to reportUndecided Financial filing 10% 10% 24% 14% Annual report 57% 10% 10% 10% Sustainability report 67% 0% 10% 10% Climate-specific report 57% 5% 14% 14% Client report 10% 0% 24% 24% Other 14% 5% 5% 5% Base siz e: 21\n\n[Page 77]\nProgress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report | November 2024 | 771 .5.6—ISSB-specific questions As mentioned previously, the IFRS Foundation also included questions in the survey to better understand asset managers’ and asset owners’ reporting practices in relation to ISSB Standards. The IFRS Foundation’s findings are shown in Figure 1 .22. Of those asset managers and asset owners that responded to the optional questions about ISSB Standards, 84% of asset managers and 100% of asset owners want or expect portfolio companies to make the transition from disclosures prepared using the TCFD recommendations to disclosures prepared using ISSB Standards. These respondents cited the integration of the TCFD recommendations into ISSB Standards, the comparability of information provided through use of ISSB Standards and jurisdictional adoption of ISSB Standards as primary reasons for their expectations. The most common factors respondents gave that could accelerate the adoption of ISSB Standards were: •regulatory factors and action; •more guidance on implementation; and •examples of reporting in accordance with ISSBStandards in practice. Respondents also emphasised the critical importance of interoperability between ISSB Standards and other established standards and frameworks to streamline and enhance the quality of sustainability reporting. Many respondents expressed strong support for the information required by ISSB Standards to be consistent with that required by other standards that already have widespread use, such as ESRS. This response emphasises that interoperability is vital for maintaining consistency between reporting regimes and reducing the compliance burden on companies (see Section 4.4—Interoperability of ISSB Standards with other standards and initiatives). Furthermore, some respondents said it would be helpful for jurisdictions that require companies to comply with particular standards to permit the use of ISSB Standards to reduce the reporting burden on companies. Figure 1.22—Asset manager and asset owner respondents’ comments about the transition from TCFD recommendations to ISSB Standards Percentage wanting or expecting portfolio companies to make the transition from disclosures prepared using the TCFD recommendations to disclosures prepared using ISSB Standards 11% 89% Base siz e: 55 Yes (49) No (6) The numbers in parentheses represent the number of respondents that answered optional questions pertaining to ISSB Standards and the TCFD recommendations. Percentage wanting or expecting portfolio companies to make the transition from disclosures prepared using the TCFD recommendations to disclosures prepared using ISSB Standards by organisation type 89% 84% 100%All respondents (55) Asset managers Asset owners",
    "new_id": 475
  },
  {
    "id": 44765,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why reporting on the resilience of a company’s strategy under different climate-related scenarios remains consistently low compared to other TCFD recommendations, as described in the Progress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report?",
    "options": {
      "D": "A significant majority of companies find this disclosure difficult to implement, as indicated by survey results showing nearly 90% of respondents rating it as challenging.",
      "A": "Companies generally lack access to reliable data needed for scenario analysis, making it impossible to report.",
      "B": "The disclosure is considered less relevant by companies, leading to its deprioritization in favor of metrics like GHG emissions.",
      "C": "Regulatory requirements for this disclosure are weaker than those for governance and metrics, reducing compliance urgency.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "20-21",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS 2024.pdf",
    "source_text": "Progress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report | November 2024 | 20Overall, the percentage of companies disclosing information in line with the TCFD recommendations increased in 2023 relative to 2022, as did the amount of TCFD-aligned information that companies disclosed. The results of this report and of previous TCFD annual status reports are that the percentage of companies disclosing climate-related information continues to increase, but more progress is necessary. For example, as shown in Figure 1 .1, the percentage of companies disclosing information in line with at least one of the 11 TCFD recommended disclosures is 82% in 2023—up from 73% in 2022. Similarly, 44% of companies disclosed information in line with at least five of the 11 TCFD recommended disclosures in 2023—up from 38% in 2022. Approximately 2–3% of companies disclosed in line with all 11 recommended disclosures. Furthermore, the average number of the recommended disclosures made per company in 2022 was 5.1 and increased in 2023 to 5.2. Figure 1.1—AI review results for fiscal years 2022 and 2023 Percentage of companies reporting on at least one TCFD recommended disclosure 73% 2022 2023 Base size: 3,81482%Percentage of companies disclosing Number of recommended disclosures Base siz e: 3,814At least 1At least 1 73% At least 5 44% At least 5 38% At least 7 25%At least 7 29% All 11 2%At least 1 82% At least 5 At least 7 All 11Year 2022 2023\n\n[Page 21]\nProgress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report | November 2024 | 21As shown in Figure 1 .2, the percentage of companies disclosing information in line with each of the 11 TCFD recommended disclosures increased from 2022 to 2023. The largest increase in reporting was for companies reporting on their GHG emissions and climate-related metrics, at 10 and eight percentage points respectively. Reporting on board oversight of climate-related issues saw the third-largest increase, at seven percentage points. Key takeaway From 2022 to 2023 the recommended disclosure that saw the largest increase in reporting by companies was for GHG emissions and climate-related metrics, followed by board oversight of climate-related disclosures. In general, reporting on climate-related metrics and targets was higher than for the other three core TCFD recommendations. In 2023, more than 60% of the reviewed companies disclosed their GHG emissions (Metrics and targets b). In addition, more than 50% of the companies reported on climate-related metrics and targets. Notably, the percentage of companies reporting on governance, specifically, board oversight of climate-related disclosures, was also more than 50%.Key takeaway Companies reported on climate-related metrics and targets and board oversight more than other recommended disclosures. In contrast, 11% of the reviewed companies disclosed the resilience of their strategy (Strategy c) for the fiscal year 2023, compared with 9% in fiscal year 2022. A 2022 TCFD survey of more than 200 companies found that almost 90% of the surveyed companies rated this recommended disclosure as somewhat difficult or very difficult to implement, which might help explain the lower frequency of reporting for this recommendation.15 Similarly, 18% of the companies reviewed in 2023 discussed how the processes for identifying, assessing and managing climate-related risks are integrated into the company’s overall risk management (Risk management c), up from 16% in fiscal year 2022. Key takeaway In the two years reviewed, the least-reported recommended disclosures were the resilience of the company’s strategy under different climate-related scenarios and the integration of climate-related risks and opportunities into overall risk management. 15 See TCFD, T ask Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures: 2022 Status Report , TCFD, 2022, https://assets.bbhub.io/company/sites/60/2022/10/2022-TCFD-Status-Report.pdf .",
    "new_id": 476
  },
  {
    "id": 44766,
    "question": "Which of the following best represents a logical implication of the IFRS Foundation's categorization of company references to ISSB Standards, as described in the Progress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report?",
    "options": {
      "A": "General references to the ISSB do not inherently indicate an intention to adopt or align with ISSB Standards.",
      "B": "Companies expressing general support for the ISSB are required to align their disclosures with ISSB Standards in the future.",
      "C": "A company’s mention of SASB Standards under ISSB supervision indicates planned or stated alignment with ISSB Standards.",
      "D": "References to participating in ISSB activities imply a commitment to applying ISSB Standards for sustainability disclosures.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "53",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS 2024.pdf",
    "source_text": "Progress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report | November 2024 | 531.4—Companies referencing ISSB Standards To understand companies’ progress in preparing to use ISSB Standards, the IFRS Foundation reviewed publicly available reports of some listed and private companies. The findings from this review provide insights into the state of corporate reporting practices and the progress being made towards the use of ISSB Standards in various regions and sectors. The IFRS Foundation collected, categorised and analysed references to the ISSB in those reports to analyse the companies’ level of commitment to using ISSB Standards, using three reference categories. The reference categories include general reference to the ISSB, planned alignment and stated alignment with the sustainability-related disclosure requirements in ISSB Standards.19 Table 1.30 provides definitions and examples for each category. Table 1.30—Reference categories and examples Reference category Reference example 1 General reference —a company referenced the ISSB: • as a standard-setter in the sustainability disclosure landscape, without stating that it had applied or intended to apply ISSB Standards to disclose information; • to describe its past, current or future participation in activities organised by the ISSB or the IFRS Foundation; • to voice its support for the global baseline, without stating it intends to align its disclosures with ISSB Standards; or • in the context of its current or planned alignment with the SASB Standards or the Integrated Reporting Framework, not ISSB Standards.‘Various global regulators and standard setting bodies, including the ISSB, are publishing guidelines and standards aligned with the TCFD recommendations. ’ ‘We support the ISSB in its aim to develop consistent, comparable and reliable global sustainability standards. ’ ‘We remain vocal in our support and active in an engagement that endorses efforts toward further harmonisation and standardisation of sustainability reporting. In line with this, we continue participating in consultations with the ISSB. ’ ‘In addition, the company responds in this report to the indicators identified for the “Electric Utilities and Power Generators” and “Gas Utilities and Distributors” sectors by the SASB Standards, which are under the supervision of the ISSB. ’ continued ... 19 The review of the references is an analysis of references companies made about their use or planned use of ISSB Standards rather than an analysis of information provided by companies.",
    "new_id": 477
  },
  {
    "id": 44768,
    "question": "Which of the following statements accurately reflects the implementation strategy for ISSB Standards in Costa Rica and El Salvador, as described in the Progress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Costa Rica allows voluntary adoption of ISSB Standards from fiscal year 2024, while El Salvador enables their use only for companies applying IFRS Accounting Standards from fiscal year 2025.",
      "A": "Both Costa Rica and El Salvador mandate the application of ISSB Standards for all companies starting in fiscal year 2025.",
      "C": "In both countries, regulated companies are required to apply ISSB Standards beginning in fiscal year 2026.",
      "D": "El Salvador requires all high tax payer companies to adopt ISSB Standards by fiscal year 2026, aligning with Costa Rica's phased approach.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "127",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS 2024.pdf",
    "source_text": "Progress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report | November 2024 | 127Costa Rica In January 2024 the Costa Rican Institute of Certified Public Accountants, the Colegio de Contadores Públicos, announced the adoption of ISSB Standards.40 The Standards will be implemented using a phased approach, which states: • all companies can apply ISSB Standards on a voluntary basis from fiscal year 2024; • regulated companies will be required to apply ISSB Standards from fiscal year 2025; and • companies that are classified as high tax payers will be required to apply ISSB Standards from fiscal year 2026. El Salvador In August 2024 the national standard-setter, the Consejo de Vigilancia de la Profesión de Contaduría Pública y Auditoría, issued a resolution permitting companies that prepare financial statements applying IFRS Accounting Standards to use ISSB Standards from fiscal year 2025.41Mexico In December 2021 the TCFD Mexico Consortium was launched to support voluntary use of the TCFD recommendations in Mexico.42 The national standard-setter, Consejo Mexicano de Normas de Información Financiera y de Sostenibilidad, is promoting: • application of ISSB Standards for listed companies and public interest organisations; and • application of local standards based on ISSB Standards for SMEs. In September 2024 the National Banking and Securities Commission, the Comisión Nacional Bancaria y de Valores, proposed to require non-financial companies to use ISSB Standards from fiscal year 2025.43 40 Colegio de Contadores Públicos, Circular No. 33-2023-Adopción de Normas Internacionales de Información Financiera Relacionadas con Sostenibilidad , Colegio de Contadores Públicos, 2023, https://www.ccpa.or.cr/circular-n-33-2023-adopcion-normas-internacionales-de-informacion-financiera-relacionadas-con-sostenibilidad/ . 41 Consejo de Vigilancia de la Profesión de Contaduría Pública y Auditoría, Resolution 82, 2024 https://www.cvpcpa.gob.sv/resolucion-82 . 42 International Climate Initiative (IKI), ‘Official launch of the TCFD Mexico Consortium’ , IKI, 2021, https://iki-alliance.mx/en/lanzamiento-oficial-del-consorcio-tcfd-mexico/ . 43 Comisión Nacional Bancaria y de Valores, (CNBV), Resolución que modifica las disposiciones de carácter general aplicables a las emisoras de valores y a otros participantes del mercado de valores , CNBV, 2024, https://www.cofemersimir.gob.mx/portales/resumen/57550 .",
    "new_id": 478
  },
  {
    "id": 44769,
    "question": "What implication arises from the interplay between the adoption of digital taxonomies and the challenges faced by users of climate-related information, as discussed in the Progress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report?",
    "options": {
      "C": "By enabling automated validation checks and technology-driven monitoring, digital taxonomies address key inefficiencies that hinder comparability and analysis of climate-related information.",
      "A": "Digital taxonomies primarily benefit companies by reducing their internal data processing costs, with minimal impact on external stakeholders.",
      "B": "The adoption of digital taxonomies is likely to exacerbate the existing disparities in how climate-related data is reported across industries.",
      "D": "The development of machine learning models for analyzing climate-related reports negates the need for advancements in digital reporting practices.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "90",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS 2024.pdf",
    "source_text": "Progress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report | November 2024 | 902.4—The role of digital taxonomies and digital reporting for climate-related data In addition to standard-setting work, the ISSB has prioritised the development of a digital taxonomy to enable the digital reporting of sustainability-related financial information. The ISSB believes the primary benefit of digital reporting, compared to paper-based reporting, is the improved ability to search, extract and compare reported information. The IFRS Foundation’s website contains more information regarding the IFRS Foundation’s efforts to increase the availability and usage of digital information, including the introductory article Digital Financial Reporting—Facilitating digital comparability and analysis of financial reports published in April 2024. In addition to posing challenges for companies and their executives, factoring in climate-related information has imposed substantial information processing costs on investors, creditors, data providers, assurance providers, regulators and other consumers of information. Investors interested in climate-related data have often had to engage in time consuming, manual efforts to gather data from disparate sources available at different times. Such constraints make comparison of climate-related information among companies a real challenge. Users of climate-related information can benefit from having relevant information presented in a digital format. For example, similar to the approach used for the analysis discussed in Section 1 .2— TCFD-aligned reporting by public companies , some investors and other stakeholders interested in examining the extent and quality of companies’ climate reporting develop machine learning or AI models to examine large volumes of relevant reports for many companies simultaneously. However, the quality of the model-generated output is highly dependent on the quality and structure of the underlying data, which can be improved through the adoption of digital reporting practices. Digital taxonomies like the ISSB Taxonomy will enable digital reporting of climate-related information, which in turn will reduce the costs of searching through documents, enable automated data collection, lead to more efficient information processing and help expand the population of possible global investment targets. Digital taxonomies and digital financial reporting are major steps forward in enhancing the availability, accessibility and comparability of data. Additionally, by reducing the costs associated with searching and processing information, these advancements might facilitate more efficient and effective analysis and help to improve market oversight. In addition, as emphasised in the 2023 TCFD status report, having central access to digital reports plays an important role. Central access to digital reports can help reporting companies and their investors carry out more efficient and accurate benchmarking and peer analyses. More broadly, the availability of digital reports will result in more efficient market oversight and enforcement reviews, enable automated validation checks and technology-driven monitoring and improve overall data sharing in the market. Advancements in digital reporting not only build upon the work of the TCFD and of the ISSB, but also support the establishment of central, globally comparable sustainability data repositories. The development of a global open repository for climate data will provide free, public access to a central source of climate-related information, in line with the TCFD recommendations and the requirements in IFRS S2.",
    "new_id": 479
  },
  {
    "id": 44770,
    "question": "Which of the following best reflects the relationship between FEBRABAN’s initiatives and the regulatory requirements imposed by BCB and CVM regarding TCFD-aligned disclosures, as described in the Progress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report?",
    "options": {
      "D": "FEBRABAN’s initiatives complemented the regulatory framework by encouraging early adoption of TCFD recommendations before mandatory compliance was enforced.",
      "A": "FEBRABAN’s initiatives are legally binding and took precedence over the voluntary adoption phase outlined by BCB and CVM.",
      "B": "FEBRABAN’s efforts to promote TCFD recommendations were rendered redundant after BCB and CVM mandated TCFD-aligned disclosures for regulated entities.",
      "C": "FEBRABAN solely focused on translating international standards into local frameworks, leaving implementation guidance to BCB and CVM.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "128",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS 2024.pdf",
    "source_text": "Progress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report | November 2024 | 128Spotlight on Brazil The sustainability-related disclosure requirements for regulated institutions and listed companies are based on the TCFD recommendations. The Brazilian Securities and Exchange Commission (CVM) permits the use of ISSB Standards from fiscal year 2024 and requires listed companies to apply ISSB Standards from fiscal year 2026. TCFD recommendations ISSB Standards 2018 2020 2021–2022 2023–2024 Voluntary —the Brazilian Federation of Banks (FEBRABAN) has encouraged the Brazilian banking sector to apply the TCFD recommendations.Mandatory —the Central Bank of Brazil (BCB) and CVM require regulated institutions and listed companies to provide information in line with the TCFD recommendations. Companies are permitted to apply ISSB Standards from fiscal year 2024. FEBRABAN started an initiative to implement the TCFD recommendations in the Brazilian banking sector, following a roadmap to support the sector.In January 2020 FEBRABAN published a progress report describing the Brazilian banking sector’s progress in implementing the TCFD recommendations in 2019.BCB issued disclosure requirements for regulated institutions to be implemented in two phases (governance, strategy and risk management in the first phase, and quantitative aspects—such as metrics and targets—in the second phase). CVM amended its rules — effective from 2023—to require securities issuers to state whether they disclose sustainability -related information and whether the information is aligned with the TCFD recommendations or other standards or frameworks.CVM approved a resolution : • permitting listed companies, investment funds and securitisation companies to apply ISSB Standards from fiscal year 2024; and • requiring listed companies to apply ISSB Standards from fiscal year 2026. The Brazilian national standard-setter, Comitê Brasileiro de Pronunciamentos de Sustentabilidade (CBPS), and the Conselho Federal de Contabilidade published two exposure drafts of local translated standards (CBPS 01 and CBPS 02).",
    "new_id": 480
  },
  {
    "id": 44771,
    "question": "Which inference can be drawn regarding the relationship between industries' average disclosure counts and their reporting on specific TCFD recommendations, as described in the Progress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The lower average disclosures in banking and consumer goods industries correlate with particularly weak performance in Governance and Risk Management categories.",
      "B": "Industries with higher average disclosures consistently reported the highest rates across all individual TCFD recommendations.",
      "C": "Energy companies’ leadership in average disclosures is primarily due to their comprehensive reporting on risk management processes.",
      "D": "Insurance companies outperformed energy companies in Strategy-related disclosures, driving their higher overall average disclosure count.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "42-43",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS 2024.pdf",
    "source_text": "Progress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report | November 2024 | 42The AI review results for North America are shown in Tables 1 .20–1 .21 . The reviewed energy companies reported, on average, in line with six of the 11 recommended disclosures—the highest of all industries reviewed. They were followed by insurance companies, which disclosed an average of 4.7 of the 11 recommended disclosures. Energy companies also had the highest rates of reporting among the reviewed industries, reporting on eight of the 11 recommended disclosures. The exceptions were reporting on the three recommended disclosures related to risk management. For these recommended disclosures, the reviewed insurance companies had the highest rates of reporting. Banks, consumer goods companies and technology and media companies reported less climate-related information than companies in the other reviewed industries. On average, these companies reported on two to three of the 11 recommended disclosures. The reporting on targets of the reviewed North American banks was at 23%, compared with the 79% reporting rate of the reviewed European banks (see Table 1 .29). The highest rates of reporting by companies in the energy, insurance, transportation and agriculture, food and forest products industries were on their boards’ oversight of climate-related issues (Governance a), whereas the highest rate of reporting by banks was on their climate-related risks and opportunities (Strategy a). In five of the eight reviewed industries, more than 50% of the companies reported on climate-related risks and opportunities (Strategy a). In six of the eight industries, close to or more than 50% of the reviewed companies reported on GHG emissions (Metrics and targets b). For all eight industries, the lowest rates of reporting were on the resilience of the company’s strategy under different climate-related scenarios (Strategy c). Table 1.20—Average number of recommended disclosures per company in North America Industry Number of disclosures Energy 6.0 Insurance 4.7 Transportation 4.4 Agriculture, food and forest products 4.3 Materials and buildings 4.2 Technology and media 3.4 Consumer goods 3.3 Banking 2.8\n\n[Page 43]\nProgress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report | November 2024 | 43Table 1.21—TCFD-aligned disclosures by industry for fiscal year 2023 Percentage of companies in North America Recommendation Recommended disclosure Banking (224) Insurance (52) Energy (184) Materials and buildings (336) Transportation (56) Agriculture, food and forest products (56) Technology and media (75) Consumer goods (128) Governance a) Board oversight 36% 75% 82% 62% 64% 66% 52% 52% b) Management’s role 26% 60% 61% 35% 41% 39% 29% 26% Strategy a) Risks and opportunities 53% 58% 66% 52% 43% 48% 37% 51% b) Impact of risks and opportunities on company17% 35% 51% 34% 39% 34% 27% 20% c) Resilience of strategy 3% 8% 19% 8% 5% 9% 8% 5% Risk management a) Risk identification and assessment processes21% 46% 32% 25% 27% 25% 19% 18% b) Risk management processes23% 50% 41% 30% 38% 23% 25% 13% c) Integration into overall risk management23% 31% 26% 15% 27% 20% 12% 12% Metrics and targets a) Climate-related metrics 22% 23% 68% 47% 48% 41% 37% 38% b) GHG emissions 29% 44% 79% 55% 54% 59% 49% 50% c) Climate-related targets 23% 37% 74% 51% 59% 66% 48% 46% The numbers in parentheses represent the size of the review population. The comparison of reporting by companies in North America for fiscal years 2022 and 2023 shows generally consistent levels of TCFD-aligned disclosures, with some recommended disclosures experiencing slight increases or decreases (see Figure 1 .8). The largest increase—approximately three percentage points—was for disclosures of GHG emissions (Metrics and targets b), followed by an increase in reporting on climate-related targets of one percentage point (Metrics and targets c). Reporting on risk management processes (Risk management b) decreased by approximately four percentage points and reporting on management’s role (Governance a) and impact of climate-related risks and opportunities on the company (Strategy b) both decreased by approximately two percentage points.",
    "new_id": 481
  },
  {
    "id": 44774,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between the regulatory frameworks for climate-related disclosures in Hong Kong SAR and Australia as of the information provided, as described in the Progress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report?",
    "options": {
      "B": "While Hong Kong SAR requires alignment with ISSB Standards through its stock exchange, Australia’s legislation applies exclusively to financial institutions and large companies with a phased implementation.",
      "A": "Both jurisdictions mandate immediate compliance with their respective sustainability reporting standards for all companies starting in fiscal year 2025.",
      "C": "Australia’s framework relies on voluntary adoption of TCFD-aligned disclosures, whereas Hong Kong SAR enforces mandatory compliance for all listed companies by fiscal year 2025.",
      "D": "The Central Bank of Bangladesh directly influenced both Hong Kong SAR and Australia to adopt ISSB-based standards, ensuring uniformity across Asia-Oceania.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "131",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS 2024.pdf",
    "source_text": "Progress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report | November 2024 | 1314.3.4—Asia-Oceania Australia In September 2024 the Australian Parliament approved the legislation introduced by the Department of the Treasury in Australia requiring companies that present financial reports and meet specified size thresholds to provide climate-related disclosures in accordance with the Australian Sustainability Reporting Standards (ASRS) developed by the Australian Accounting Standards Board (AASB).51 The requirements apply to financial institutions and to large listed and unlisted companies and will be phased in over a three-year period beginning with fiscal year 2025.52 In September 2024 the AASB issued AASB S1 General Requirements for Disclosure of Sustainability-related Financial Information and AASB S2 Climate-related Disclosures , which are in line with the structure of the TCFD recommendations and are based on ISSB Standards. Bangladesh In December 2023 the Central Bank of Bangladesh issued a circular based on ISSB Standards requiring banks and financial institutions to provide disclosures about their sustainability-related risks and opportunities from fiscal year 2024.53China In May 2024 the Ministry of Finance of the People’s Republic of China published the Exposure Draft of Chinese Sustainability Disclosure Standards for Business Enterprises – Basic Standard and Explanation of the Drafting . The Exposure Draft formulates the unified China Sustainability Disclosure Standards based on ISSB Standards. Hong Kong SAR In April 2024 the Hong Kong Stock Exchange revised its environmental, social and governance (ESG) reporting framework to require all issuers to disclose climate-related information in their ESG reports in line with the TCFD recommendations and ISSB Standards (as opposed to the current ‘comply and explain’ approach), from fiscal year 2025.54 In August 2023 the Hong Kong Monetary Authority (HKMA) released a circular with high-level principles to assist authorised institutions in planning for a net-zero transition. The HKMA developed the high-level principles based on the findings and recommendations of international bodies, such as the TCFD’s ‘Guidance on metrics, targets, and transition plans’ .55 In September 2024 the Hong Kong Institute of Certified Public Accountants published Exposure Drafts of Sustainability Disclosure Standards to be applied in Hong Kong from 1 August 2025. The Exposure Drafts are fully aligned with IFRS S1 and IFRS S2.56 51 Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia, Treasury Laws Amendment (Financial Market Infrastructure and Other Measures) Bill 2024, Schedule 4, https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r7176 . 52 According to the Explanatory Memorandum to Bill 2024, section 4.180–4.187 , larger companies are required to provide the information for annual periods starting in 2025, with other companies following in 2026 and 2027 , https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/ems/r7176_ ems_dd1e1136-f342-4dbf-8eae-9db60d977f84/upload_pdf/JC012553.pdf;fileType%3Dapplication%2Fpdf . 53 Bangladesh Bank, ‘Guideline on Sustainability and Climate-related Financial Disclosure’ , Bangladesh Bank, 2023, https://www.bb.org.bd/ mediaroom/circulars/gbcrd/dec262023sfd06e.pdf . 54 Hong Kong Stock ‘Exchange (HKEX), Exchange Publishes Conclusions on Climate Disclosure Requirements’ , HKEX, 2024, https://www.hkex.com. hk/News/Regulatory-Announcements/2024/240419news?sc_lang=en . 55 Hong Kong Monetary Authority (HKMA), ‘Circular—Planning for net-zero transition’ , HKMA, 2023, https://www.hkma.gov.hk/media/eng/doc/key- information/guidelines-and-circular/2023/20230829e1 .pdf ; and TCFD, ‘Guidance on metrics, targets, and transition plans’ , TCFD, 2021, https://assets.bbhub.io/company/sites/60/2021/07/2021-Metrics_Targets_Guidance-1 .pdf . 56 Hong Kong Institute of Certified Public Accountants (HKICPA), Invitation to comment on Exposure Draft HKFRS S1 General Requirements for Disclosure of Sustainability-related Financial Information; and Exposure Draft HKFRS S2 Climate-related Disclosures, HKICPA, 2024, https://www.hkicpa.org.hk/en/Standards-setting/Standards/Open-for-comment-documents/Sustainability-Reporting .",
    "new_id": 482
  },
  {
    "id": 44777,
    "question": "Which inference can be drawn about the relationship between the TCFD recommendations and the ISSB Standards based on the progress reported, as described in the Progress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The adoption of ISSB Standards indicates a gradual shift away from TCFD recommendations, though companies still predominantly use TCFD-aligned disclosures.",
      "A": "The TCFD recommendations have been fully replaced by the ISSB Standards as the sole framework for climate-related disclosures.",
      "B": "Jurisdictions adopting ISSB Standards are required to discontinue the use of TCFD recommendations in their regulatory frameworks.",
      "D": "Companies referencing the ISSB in their reports have ceased using TCFD-aligned disclosures entirely.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "3-4",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS 2024.pdf",
    "source_text": "Progress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report | November 2024 | 31 F inancial Stability Board (FSB), FSB Roadmap for Addressing Financial Risks from Climate Change Progress: 2023 Progress Report , FSB, 2023, https://www.fsb.org/wp-content/uploads/P130723.pdf .This report informs the work of the FSB, in co-ordination with IOSCO and the IFRS Foundation: •to assist jurisdictions—through a broad capacity-building programme—to consider how they might adopt, apply or otherwise use ISSB Standards; •to promote timely and widespread adoption of ISSB Standards, in line with jurisdictions’ individualcircumstances; and •to continue to report annually to the G20 on jurisdictions’ and companies’ progress in implementingclimate-related disclosures and reporting in line with international standards. 1 As set out in its Constitution, the IFRS Foundation remains committed to promoting and facilitating the global adoption, use and rigorous application of ISSB Standards and to co-ordinating efforts with other international organisations (including the Monitoring Board of the IFRS Foundation, IOSCO and the FSB) for the provision of globally comparable information for capital markets. Y ours sincerely, Erkki Liikanen Chair of the Trustees of the IFRS Foundation Terms defined in the Glossary are in italics the first time they appear in the Executive Summary and in Sections 1–5.\n\n[Page 4]\nProgress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report | November 2024 | 4EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Purpose of this report This report presents progress on corporate climate-related disclosures. The report continues the work of the Financial Stability Board’s (FSB) Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) to record the progress of companies reporting on its 11 recommended disclosures. Based on a sample of 3,814 public companies, in fiscal year 2023 82% of companies disclosed information in line with at least one of the 11 TCFD recommended disclosures and 44% of companies with at least five of the recommended disclosures. Approximately 2–3% of companies reported in line with all 11 TCFD recommended disclosures. The report shows that companies are making the transition from disclosures prepared using the TCFD recommendations to disclosures prepared using the two inaugural Standards issued by the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB) in June 2023. Between October 2023 and March 2024, more than 1,000 companies referenced the ISSB in their reports. This report also presents information about jurisdictions’ progress in introducing sustainability -related disclosure requirements in their legal and regulatory frameworks, including through the adoption or other use of ISSB Standards . As of September 2024 30 jurisdictions have decided to use or are taking steps to introduce ISSB Standards in their legal or regulatory frameworks. Together, these jurisdictions represent: • approximately 57% of global gross domestic product; • more than 40% of global market capitalisation; and • more than half of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions . Takeaways in numbers 82% of companies disclosed information in line with at least one of the 11 TCFD recommended disclosures 2–3% of companies reported in line with all 11 TCFD recommended disclosures 1,000+ companies referenced the ISSB in their reports 30 jurisdictions are on the journey to introducing ISSB Standards in their legal or regulatory frameworks",
    "new_id": 483
  },
  {
    "id": 44778,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures a key distinction between IFRS S2 and TCFD regarding greenhouse gas emissions disclosures, while considering the implications for companies' reporting practices, as outlined in the Progress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report?",
    "options": {
      "D": "IFRS S2 allows companies to omit Scope 1 and Scope 2 GHG emissions disclosures if they are immaterial, whereas TCFD recommends disclosing these metrics independently of materiality assessments.",
      "A": "IFRS S2 mandates the disaggregation of GHG emissions by constituent gases in all cases, whereas TCFD guidance does not require such granularity.",
      "B": "TCFD requires Scope 3 GHG emissions disclosure only when material, while IFRS S2 demands it regardless of materiality if the company operates in asset management, commercial banking, or insurance.",
      "C": "TCFD provides a detailed Scope 3 measurement framework, but IFRS S2 leaves the methodology for Scope 3 calculations entirely up to individual companies.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "86-87",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS 2024.pdf",
    "source_text": "Progress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report | November 2024 | 86Table 2.6—Detailed comparison of IFRS S2 and TCFD recommendations on metrics and targets TCFD recommendations, recommended disclosures and guidanceIFRS S2 4—Metrics and targets Disclose the metrics and targets used to assess and manage relevant climate -related risks and opportunities where such information is material.Disclose information that enables users of general purpose financial reports to understand a company’s performance in relation to its climate-related risks and opportunities, including progress towards any climate-related targets it has set, and any targets it is required to meet by law or regulation. 9 Recommended disclosure a) Climate-related metrics Disclose the metrics used by the company to assess climate-related risks and opportunities in line with its strategy and risk management process.IFRS S2 requires the same categories of cross-industry metrics as the TCFD guidance. IFRS S2 also requires disclosure of industry-based metrics relevant to a company’s business model and activities. The Industry-based Guidance on Implementing IFRS S2 is required to be considered in providing this information. 10 Recommended disclosure b) GHG emissions Disclose Scope 1, Scope 2 and, if appropriate, Scope 3 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and the related risks.IFRS S2 is broadly consistent with recommended disclosure b). However, whereas the TCFD recommendations include the disclosure of Scope 1 and Scope 2 GHG emissions ‘independent of materiality’ , and Scope 3 GHG emissions ‘as appropriate’ , ISSB Standards require a company to disclose information only if it is material. (a) IFRS S2 requires additional disclosures related to a company’s GHG emissions, including: •separate disclosure of Scope 1 and Scope 2 GHG emissions for (1)the consolidated accounting group and (2) associates, joint ventures, unconsolidated subsidiaries or affiliates not included in the consolidated accounting group; •disclosure of Scope 2 GHG emissions using a location-based approachand providing information about any contractual instruments that is necessary to inform users’ understanding; •disclosure of Scope 3 GHG emissions, including additional information about the company’s financed emissions if the company has activities in asset management, commercial banking or insurance; and •information about the measurement approach, inputs and assumptionsthe company has used in measuring Scope 3 GHG emissions. IFRS S2 also sets out a Scope 3 measurement framework to provide guidance for preparing Scope 3 GHG emissions disclosures. IFRS S2 does not require a company to disaggregate its GHG emissions disclosures by the constituent gases. However, IFRS S1 includes requirements on disaggregation that would result in the disclosure of the constituent gases being required if such disaggregation provides material information. (a) The TCFD provided guidance to support companies in developing climate-related financial disclosures consistent with the recommendations and recommended disclosures it published in 2017 . In 2021 the TCFD updated its guidance Implementing the Recommendations of the T ask Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures to encourage companies to disclose information about Scope 1 and Scope 2 GHG emissionsindependent of an assessment of materiality. continued ...\n\n[Page 87]\nProgress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report | November 2024 | 87TCFD recommendations, recommended disclosures and guidanceIFRS S2 11 Recommended disclosure c) Climate-related targets Describe the targets used by the company to manage climate-related risks and opportunities and performance against targets.IFRS S2 is broadly consistent with recommended disclosure c). IFRS S2 differs from the TCFD guidance in, for example, requiring disclosures about how the latest international agreement on climate change has informed the target and whether the target has been validated by a third party. IFRS S2 requires disclosure of more detailed information on GHG emissions targets, including additional information about a company’s planned use of carbon credits to achieve its net GHG emissions targets. IFRS S2 also includes additional requirements to disclose information about the approach to setting and reviewing each target, and how the company monitors progress against each target, including whether the target was derived using a sectoral decarbonisation approach .",
    "new_id": 484
  },
  {
    "id": 44779,
    "question": "What conclusion can be drawn about the IFRS Foundation's decision to exclude asset managers and asset owners from the AI review, based on their reporting practices and survey methodology, as described in the Progress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Publicly available reports for asset managers and asset owners were deemed too inconsistent to analyze effectively using AI.",
      "B": "The exclusion was due to insufficient alignment of asset managers' reports with ISSB Standards.",
      "C": "Asset managers and asset owners primarily focus on enterprise-level disclosures rather than client-specific ones, making AI analysis redundant.",
      "D": "The IFRS Foundation prioritized shareholder disclosures over beneficiary disclosures for asset managers, rendering AI tools unnecessary.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "60-61",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS 2024.pdf",
    "source_text": "Progress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report | November 2024 | 60Percentage of companies that referenced the ISSB Sector(a)Industry(a)Number of companiesGeneral referencePlanned alignmentStated alignment Services (52)Professional and commercial services(24) 63% 29% 8% Casinos and gaming (8) 37% 63% 0% Hotels and lodging (8) 50% 50% 0% Media and entertainment (5) 40% 60% 0% Advertising and marketing (4) 0% 100% 0% Sector total average 49% 47% 4% Technology and communications (62)Telecommunication services (26) 46% 35% 19% Software and IT services (21) 71% 29% 0% Hardware (6) 100% 0% 0% Semiconductors (5) 60% 20% 20% Internet media and services (4) 25% 75% 0% Sector total average 59% 31% 10% Transportation (45)Marine transportation (13) 62% 38% 0% Auto parts (7) 57% 29% 14% Air freight and logistics (6) 67% 33% 0% Airlines (6) 50% 50% 0% Automobiles (4) 25% 75% 0% Sector total average 55% 42% 3% The numbers in parentheses represent the size of the review population. Base siz e: 1,151 (a) Sectors and industries are defined according to the Sustainable Industry Classification System® (SICS®).\n\n[Page 61]\nProgress on Corporate Climate-related Disclosures—2024 Report | November 2024 | 611.5—Reporting by asset managers and asset owners 1 .5.1—Introduction The TCFD conducted annual surveys of asset managers and asset owners to explore their approaches to climate-related financial reporting. In 2024 the IFRS Foundation undertook a similar survey not only to continue to assess asset managers’ and asset owners’ perspectives with respect to climate-related financial reporting using the TCFD recommendations, but also to understand how asset managers and asset owners use (or plan to use) ISSB Standards. Table 1.35 provides background information about the activities of asset managers and asset owners. Asset managers’ and asset owners’ reporting is intended to satisfy the needs of clients, beneficiaries, regulators and oversight bodies, and often follows a format different from that of corporate financial reporting. To gain insight into how asset managers and asset owners use the TCFD recommendations (or ISSB Standards), the IFRS Foundation focused on asset managers’ and asset owners’ reporting to their clients and beneficiaries. However, the IFRS Foundation also recognised that many asset managers and asset owners report climate- related financial information to a broader range of stakeholders. Asset managers that are public companies have two distinct audiences for their climate-related financial information. The first audience is shareholders (who need to understand enterprise-level risks and opportunities and how the asset manager manages those risks and opportunities) and the second is clients (for whom product-, investment strategy- or client-specific disclosures are more relevant). The IFRS Foundation recognised that asset owners sit at the top of the investment chain and their disclosure of information on climate-related information—to the extent possible given data and method constraints—allows beneficiaries and other audiences to assess the asset owners’ investment considerations and approaches to climate change. The IFRS Foundation excluded asset managers and asset owners from the AI review because the types of reports required for analysis were not always publicly available. Instead, in early 2024 the IFRS Foundation surveyed asset managers and asset owners to gain insight into how they report climate-related financial information to their clients and beneficiaries, consistent with the approach previously taken by the TCFD. This section: • describes the scope of the review and the approach used to collect information on asset managers’ and asset owners’ reporting practices; and • summarises the results from the survey and highlights key findings related to the results.",
    "new_id": 485
  },
  {
    "id": 44904,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between anthropogenic activities, natural processes, and their combined impact on nitrous oxide (N₂O) emissions, as described in the Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Working Group I Contribution to the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report?",
    "options": {
      "B": "The post-industrial terrestrial N2O emissions due to nitrogen deposition is more significant than the increase attributed to global warming in pre-industrial times.",
      "A": "Anthropogenic activities have caused a greater increase in N2O emissions from soils than from inland waters since the 1980s.",
      "C": "Deforestation-induced pulses of N2O emissions are entirely offset by reduced emissions from mature tropical forests, leading to no net change in emissions.",
      "D": "Permafrost thaw contributes significantly to arctic N2O emissions, but current models fully account for this process in global emission estimates.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "728",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 WGI.pdf",
    "source_text": "711 Global Carbon and Other Biogeochemical Cycles and Feedbacks Chapter 55of these emissions (Murray et al., 2015; Hu et al., 2016; Lauerwald et al., 2019; Maavara et al., 2019; Kortelainen et al., 2020; Yao et al., 2020). Despite uncertainties because of the side effects of canals and reservoirs on nutrient cycling, these advances permit attribution of a fraction of inland water N 2O emissions to anthropogenic sources (Tian et al., 2020), which contributes to the increased anthropogenic share of the global N 2O source in this report compared to AR5 (Ciais et al., 2013). As an indirect consequence of agricultural nitrogen use and waste-water treatment, the anthropogenic emissions from inland waters have increased by about a quarter (0.1 TgN yr –1) between the 1980s and 2007–2016 (Tian et al., 2020). 5.2.3.4 Emissions and Sinks in Non-agricultural Land Soils are the largest natural source of N 2O, arising primarily from nitrogen processing associated with microbial nitrification and denitrification (Table 5.3; Butterbach-Bahl et al., 2013; Snider et al., 2015). Under some conditions, soils can also act as a net sink of N 2O, but this effect is small compared to the overall source (Schlesinger, 2013). Since AR5 (WGI, Section 6.4.3), improved global process- based models (Tian et al., 2019) suggest a present-day source of 6.7 (5.3–8.1) TgN yr–1 (2007–2016 average), which is consistent with the estimate in AR5. Process-based models and inventory-based methods show that increased N deposition has enhanced terrestrial N 2O emissions by 0.8 (0.4–1.4 TgN yr–1) relative to approximately pre-industrial times, and by 0.2 (0.1–0.2) TgN yr–1 between the 1980s and 2007–2016 ( limited evidence , medium agreement ) (Figure 5.16; Tian et al., 2019). This estimate is at the high end of the range reported in AR5 (WGI, Section 6.4.3). Model projections further show that global warming has led to increased soil N 2O emissions of 0.8 (0.3–1.3) TgN yr–1 since approximately pre-industrial times, of which about half occurred since the 1980s ( limited evidence, high agreement) (Tian et al., 2019, 2020). The SRCCL assessed that deforestation and other forms of land-use change significantly alter terrestrial N 2O emissions through emission pulses following conversions, generally resulting in long-term reduced emissions in unfertilized ecosystems ( medium evidence, high agreement). This conclusion is supported by a recent study demonstrating that the deforestation-pulse effect is offset by the effect of reduced area of mature tropical forests (Tian et al., 2020). Uncertainties remain in process-based models with respect to their ability to capture the complicated responses of terrestrial N 2O emissions to rain pulses, freeze–thaw cycles and the net consequences of elevated levels of CO 2 accurately (Tian et al., 2019). Emerging literature suggests that permafrost thaw may contribute significantly to arctic N 2O emissions (Voigt et al., 2020), but these processes are not yet adequately represented in models and upscaling to large-scale remains a significant challenge. 5.2.3.5 N2O Budget The synthesis of bottom-up estimates of N 2O sources (Sections 5.2.3.2– 5.2.3.4 and Figure 5.17) yields a global source of 17.0 (12.2 to 23.5) TgN yr –1 for the years 2007–2016 (Table 5.3). This estimate is comparable to AR5, but the uncertainty range has been reduced primarily due to improved estimates of ocean and anthropogenic N 2O Nitrous Oxide (N2O) Budget Agriculture Atmospheric deposition on landWastewaterStratospheric loss Atmospheric chemistry -0.3 Fossil fuels and industryRivers, estuaries, coastal zoneAtmospheric deposition on oceanBiomass and biofuel Soils under natural vegetationFlux: Million tonnes of N2O per year (TgN(N2O)/yr) Stocks: Million tonnes of Nitrogen (TgN) Atmosphere 0.2–1.2 2.5–4.3 0.3–0.4 4.9–6.5 0.5–0.8 2.5–5.8 0.4–1.4 -0.6–1.1 0.2–0.5 0.8–1.1 0.2–0.71293 +263+-16 12.4 –13.6 0.1–0.2Stocks Anthropogenic changeNatural Anthropogenic Surface sinkOceansAverage increase 4.5 (4.3-4.6)Both Figure 5.17 | Global nitrous oxide (N 2O) budget (2007–2016). Values and data sources as in Table 5.3. The atmospheric stock is calculated from mean N 2O concentration, multiplying a factor of 4.79 ± 0.05 Tg ppb–1 (Prather et al., 2012). Pool sizes for the other reservoirs are largely unknown. Further details on data sources and processing are available in the chapter data table (Table 5.SM.6).",
    "new_id": 486
  },
  {
    "id": 44928,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between regional glacier mass loss rates and their contribution to total global glacier mass loss during 2000–2019, according to the Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Working Group I Contribution to the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Alaska alone contributes a quarter of the total global glacier mass loss.",
      "A": "Regions with the highest mass loss rates, such as the Southern Andes and Alaska, collectively account for less than half of the total global glacier mass loss.",
      "B": "The periphery of Antarctica and High Mountain Asia, despite low mass loss rates, contribute disproportionately to the total global glacier mass loss due to their large glacier areas.",
      "D": "High regional mass loss rates correlate directly with each region's proportional contribution to total global glacier mass loss.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "1292",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 WGI.pdf",
    "source_text": "1275 Ocean, Cryosphere and Sea Level Change Chapter 99The SROCC found a globally coherent trend of glacier decline in the last decades, despite large annual variability and regional differences (very high confidence). Section 2.3.2.3 assesses the global glacier mass changes for the whole 20th century (see Table 9.5 for contribution to the sea level budget. Note that the peripheral glaciers in Greenland and Antarctica are added to the ice sheets for the budget). The AR6 assessment is based on Marzeion et al. (2015), using glacier-length reconstructions (Leclercq et al., 2011) and a glacier model forced by gridded climate observations (Marzeion et al., 2012), and not considering the estimated mass loss of uncharted glaciers (100 ± 50 Gt yr –1; Parkes and Marzeion, 2018). The time series are assumed independent, resulting in larger uncertainty than presented in SROCC (see also Section 9.6.1). The rate of global glacier mass loss (excluding the periphery of ice sheets) for the period 1901–1990 is estimated to be very likely 210 ± 90 Gt yr –1, representing 16 [28 to 7] % of the glacier mass in 1901, in agreement with SROCC within uncertainty estimates. Since SROCC, new regional estimates for the Andes (Dussaillant et al., 2019), High Mountain Asia (Shean et al., 2020), Iceland (Aðalgeirsdóttir et al., 2020), the European Alps (Davaze et al., 2020; Sommer et al., 2020) and Svalbard (Schuler et al., 2020), two new global (Ciracì et al., 2020; Hugonnet et al., 2021) and an ad hoc estimate for the latest glaciological observations (Zemp et al., 2020) have extended the glacier mass change time series up to 2018–2019 (Figure 9.21 and Supplementary Material Table 9.SM.3). A reconciled global estimate for the period 1962–2019 has been compiled by Slater et al. (2021). However, in contrast to Slater et al. (2021), after 2000 this assessment is based on the first globally complete and consistent estimate of 21st-century glacier mass change from differencing of digital elevation models (Hugonnet et al., 2021) covering 94.7% of glacier area with glacier mass change for each glacier in the inventory produced with unprecedented accuracy. The estimates from Hugonnet et al. (2021) agree within uncertainties with new and previous estimates at global (Hock et al., 2019b; Wouters et al., 2019; Zemp et al., 2019; Ciracì et al., 2020; Slater et al., 2021) and regional scale (Dussaillant et al., 2019; Aðalgeirsdóttir et al., 2020; Schuler et al., 2020; Shean et al., 2020). Excluding peripheral glaciers of ice sheets (RGI regions 5 and 19), glacier mass loss rate was very likely 170 ± 80 Gt yr –1 for the period 1971 to 2019 (8 [4 to 14] % of 1971 glacier mass), 210 ± 50 Gt yr –1 over the period 1993–2019 (6 [4 to 8] % of 1993 glacier mass) and 240 ± 40 Gt yr –1 over the period 2006–2019 (3 [2 to 4] % of 2006 glacier mass; Sections 2.3.2.3 and 9.6.1, Table 9.5, 4 and Cross-Chapter Box 9.1). Including the peripheral glaciers of the ice sheets, the global glacier mass loss rate in the period 2000–2019 is very likely 266 ± 16 Gt yr –1 (4 [3 to 6] % of glacier mass in 2000) with an increase in the mass loss rate from 240 ± 9 Gt yr –1 in 2000–2009 to 290 ± 10 Gt yr –1 in 2010–2019 (high confidence). These estimates are in agreement with SROCC estimate and extend the period to 2018–2019. In summary, new evidence published since SROCC shows that, during the decade 2010–2019, glaciers lost more mass than in any other decade since the beginning of the observational record ( very high confidence) (Section 8.3.1.7.1 and Figure 9.20). 4 T he periods in Table 9.5 end in 2018, leading to a slight difference in the values.9.5.1.1.2 Regional glacier changes A major advance since SROCC is the availability of high-accuracy mass loss estimates for individual glaciers (Hugonnet et al., 2021). These results show that, during the last 20 years, the highest regional mass loss rates (>720 kg m –2 yr –1) were observed in the Southern Andes, New Zealand, Alaska, Central Europe, and Iceland. Meanwhile, the lowest regional mass loss rates (<250 kg m–2 yr –1) were observed in High Mountain Asia, the Russian Arctic, and the periphery of Antarctica. Glacier mass loss in Alaska (25% of 2000–2019 total mass loss), the periphery of Greenland (13%), Arctic Canada North (11%), Arctic Canada South (10%), the periphery of Antarctica (8%), the Southern Andes (8%) and High Mountain Asia (8%), represent the majority (83%) of the total glacier mass loss during the last 20 years (2000–20",
    "new_id": 487
  },
  {
    "id": 44969,
    "question": "Which conclusion about Global Mean Surface Temperature (GMST) during the Last Interglacial (LIG) can be logically inferred from the Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Working Group I Contribution to the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The warmest millennia of the LIG were estimated at 0.5°C-1.5°C above 1850-1900.",
      "A": "GMST during the warmest millennia of the LIG was definitively synchronous across all regions, with anomalies reaching up to 3.5°C above 1850–1900.",
      "B": "The peak warmth during the LIG likely exceeded 1.5°C above 1850–1900 globally, but uncertainty remains due to potential asynchronicity of peak warmth among sites.",
      "C": "GMST anomalies for the LIG were consistently underestimated in post-AR5 studies due to reliance on land-based proxies over marine data.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "332",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 WGI.pdf",
    "source_text": "315 Changing State of the Climate System Chapter 22 Together, they indicate that GMST was 10°C–18°C warmer during the EECO compared with 1850–1900 (medium confidence). The AR5 did not assess the GMST for the MCO. Reconstructions based on data from multiple study sites include estimates of about 4°C (uncertainty range not specified; You et al., 2009) and 5°C–10°C (2 standard error range; Goldner et al., 2014) warmer than 1850–1900. Together, these studies indicate that GMST was 4°C–10°C warmer during the MCO (medium confidence). For the MPWP , new proxy-based estimates of global sea surface temperatures (SST) are about 2.0°C–3.5°C warmer than 1850–1900, depending on which proxy types are included in the analysis (Foley and Dowsett, 2019; McClymont et al., 2020). On the basis of model-derived relationships between land versus sea surface temperatures under different climate states (Figure 3.2b), the increase in GMST is estimated to have been roughly 15% greater than the increase in global SST. Therefore, GMST during the MPWP is estimated to have been 2.5°C–4.0°C warmer than 1850–1900 (medium confidence). For the LIG (Cross-Chapter Box 2.1, Figure 1, and Figure 2.11), a major new compilation of marine proxy data (Turney et al., 2020) from 203 sites indicates that the average SST from 129–125 ka was 1.0°C ± 0.2°C (2 SD) warmer than 1850–1900 (reported relative to 1981–2010 and adjusted here by 0.8°C). These temperatures represent the time of peak warmth, which may not have been synchronous among these sites. This compares with two other SST estimates for 125 ka of 0.5°C ± 0.3°C (± 2 SD) warmer at 125 ka relative to 1870–1889 (Hoffman et al., 2017), and about 1.4°C (no uncertainty stated) warmer at 125 ka relative to 1850–1900 (Friedrich and Timmermann, 2020; reported relative to 10–5 ka and adjusted here by 0.4°C; Kaufman et al., 2020a). The average of these post-AR5 global SST anomalies is 1°C. Commensurately (Figure 3.2b), GMST is estimated to have been roughly 1.1°C above 1850–1900 values, although this value could be too high if peak warmth was not globally synchronous (Capron et al., 2017). A further estimate of peak GMST anomalies of 1.0°C–3.5°C (90% range; adjusted here to 1850–1900 by adding 0.2°C) based on 59 marine sediment cores (Snyder, 2016) is considerably warmer than remaining estimates and is therefore given less weight in the final assessment. The warmest millennium of the LIG GMST reconstruction in J. Hansen et al. (2013) is 1.5°C above 1850–1900. In summary, GMST during the warmest millennia of the LIG (within the interval of around 129–125 ka) is estimated to have reached 0.5°C–1.5°C higher values than the 1850–1990 reference period (medium confidence). New GMST reconstructions for the LGM fall near the middle of AR5’s very likely range, which was based on a combination of proxy reconstructions and model simulations. Two of these new reconstructions use marine proxies to reconstruct global SST that were scaled to GMST based on different assumptions. One indicates that GMST was 6.2 [4.5 to 8.1] °C cooler than the late Holocene average (Snyder, 2016), and the other, 5.7°C ± 0.8°C (2 SD) cooler than the average of the first part of the Holocene (10–5 ka) (Friedrich and Timmermann, 2020). A third new estimate (Tierney et al., 2020) uses a much larger compilation of marine proxies along with a data- assimilation procedure, rather than scaling, to reconstruct a GMST of 6.1°C ± 0.4°C (2 SD) cooler than the late Holocene. Assuming that the 1850–1900 reference period was 0.2°C and 0.4°C cooler than the late and first part of the Holocene, respectively (Kaufman et al., 2020a), the midpoints of these three new GMST reconstructions average –5.8°C relative to 1850–1900. The coldest multi-century period of the LGM in the J. Hansen et al. (2013) reconstruction is 4.3°C colder than 1850–1900. This compares to land- and SST-only estimates of about –6.1°C ± 2°C and –2.2°C ± 1°C, respectively (2 SD), which are based on AR5-generation studies that imply a warmer GMST than more recent reconstructions (Figure 1c in Harrison et al., 2015; Figure 7 in Harrison et al., 2016). A major new pollen-based data-assimilation reconstruction averages 6.9°C cooler over northern extratropical land (Cleator et al., 2020). LGM temperature variability on centennial scales was about four times higher globally than during the Holocene, and even greater at high latitudes (Rehfeld et al., 2018). In summary, GMST is estimated to have been 5°C–7",
    "new_id": 488
  },
  {
    "id": 44974,
    "question": "Which of the following best reflects the relationship between emissions scenarios and the expected changes in drought patterns, as implied by the Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Working Group I Contribution to the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report?",
    "options": {
      "A": "While the specific regions affected by worsening droughts remain consistent across emissions scenarios, the severity of these droughts increases with higher emissions.",
      "B": "Higher emissions scenarios will lead to a greater spatial extent of regions affected by worsening droughts compared to lower emissions scenarios.",
      "C": "The pattern of regions experiencing worsening droughts varies significantly depending on whether low or high emissions scenarios are considered.",
      "D": "Emissions scenarios have no impact on either the spatial distribution or the magnitude of drought changes, as the pattern is entirely independent of emissions levels.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "1175",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 WGI.pdf",
    "source_text": "1158 Chapter 8 W ater Cycle Changes8FAQ 8.3 (continued) FAQ 8.3: Climate change and droughts In some regions, drought is expected to increase under future warming. FAQ 8.3, Figure 1 | Schematic map highlighting in brown the regions where droughts are expected to become worse as a result of climate change. This pattern is similar regardless of the emissions scenario; however, the magnitude of change increases under higher emissions.",
    "new_id": 489
  },
  {
    "id": 44977,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the implications of using regression over 150 years to estimate feedback parameters in global climate models, according to the Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Working Group I Contribution to the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report?",
    "options": {
      "B": "It provides a balanced approximation because biases from excluding land warming and ignoring state-dependence roughly cancel each other out in ensemble means.",
      "A": "It consistently overestimates feedback values due to the exclusion of land warming effects.",
      "C": "It underestimates feedback values by failing to account for state-dependence on multi-centennial scales, which is later corrected through emergent constraints.",
      "D": "It relies solely on interannual variability, assuming it perfectly mirrors long-term CO2-induced feedbacks without additional validation.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "985",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 WGI.pdf",
    "source_text": "968 Chapter 7 The Earth’ s Energy Budget, Climate Feedbacks and Climate Sensitivity7the physical climate feedbacks (Sections 5.4 and 6.4.5). Similarly, feedbacks associated with biogeophysical and ice-sheet changes can also be incorporated. In global climate models, the feedback parameters α x in global warming conditions are often estimated as the mean differences in the radiative fluxes between atmosphere-only simulations in which the change in SST is prescribed (Cess et al., 1990), or as the regression slope of change in radiation flux against change in GSAT using atmosphere–ocean coupled simulations with abrupt CO 2 changes (abrupt4xCO2) for 150 years (Box 7.1; Gregory et al., 2004; Andrews et al., 2012; Caldwell et al., 2016). Neither method is perfect, but both are useful and yield consistent results (Ringer et al., 2014). In the regression method, the radiative effects of land warming are excluded from the ERF due to doubling of CO 2 (Section 7.3.2), which may overestimate feedback values by about 15%. At the same time, the feedback calculated using the regression over years 1–150 ignores its state-dependence on multi-centennial time scales (Section 7.4.3), probably giving an underestimate of α by about 10% (Rugenstein et al., 2019). These effects are both small and approximately cancel each other in the ensemble mean, justifying the use of regression over 150 years as an approximation to feedbacks in ESMs. The change of the TOA radiative flux N as a function of the change of a climate variable x (such as water vapour) is commonly computed using the ‘radiative kernel’ method (Soden et al., 2008). In this method, the kernel ∂N/∂x is evaluated by perturbing x within a radiation code. Then multiplying the kernel by d x/dT inferred from observations, meteorological analysis or GCMs produces a value of α x. Feedback parameters from lines of evidence other than global models are estimated in various ways. For example, observational data combined with GCM simulations could produce an emergent constraint on a particular feedback (Hall and Qu, 2006; Klein and Hall, 2015), or the observed interannual fluctuations in the global mean TOA radiation and the surface air temperature, to which the linear regression analysis is applied, could generate a direct estimate of the climate feedback, assuming that the feedback associated with internal climate variability at short time scales can be a surrogate of the feedback to CO 2-induced warming (Dessler, 2013; Loeb et al., 2016). The assumption is not trivial, but can be justified given that the climate feedbacks are fast enough to occur at the interannual time scale. Indeed, a broad agreement has been obtained in estimates of individual physical climate feedbacks based on interannual variability and longer climate change time scales in GCMs (Zhou et al., 2015; Colman and Hanson, 2017). This means that the climate feedbacks estimated from the observed interannual fluctuations are representative of the longer-term feedbacks (decades to centuries). Care must be taken for these observational estimates because they can be sensitive to details of the calculation such as data sets and periods used (Dessler, 2013; Proistosescu et al., 2018). In particular, there would be a dependence of physical feedbacks on the surface warming pattern at the interannual time scale due, for example, to El Niño–Southern Oscillation. However, this effect both amplifies and suppresses the feedback when data include the positive and negative phases of the interannual fluctuation, and therefore the net bias will be small.In summary, the classical forcing–feedback framework has been extended to include biogeophysical and non-CO 2 biogeochemical feedbacks in addition to the physical feedbacks. It has also been used to analyse seasonal and interannual-to-decadal climate variations in observations and ESMs, in addition to long-term climate changes as seen in abrupt4xCO2 experiments. These developments allow an assessment of the feedbacks based on a larger variety of lines of evidence compared to AR5. 7.4.2 Assessing Climate F eedbacks This section provides an overall assessment of individual feedback parameters, α x, by combining different lines of evidence from observations, theory, process models and ESMs. To achieve this, we review the understanding of the key processes governing the feedbacks, why the feedback estimates differ among models, studies or approaches, and the extent to which these approaches yiel",
    "new_id": 490
  },
  {
    "id": 45284,
    "question": "Which statement accurately captures the nuanced relationship between climate metrics, emissions metrics, and their roles in policy decisions, as described in the Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Working Group I Contribution to the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report?",
    "options": {
      "C": "While climate metrics summarize temperature responses, emissions metrics evaluate forcing effects of gases, yet both can inform decisions on mitigation and adaptation under certain frameworks.",
      "A": "Climate metrics like ECS and TCR are primarily used to directly inform mitigation policies by quantifying the effects of specific GHG emissions.",
      "B": "Emissions metrics such as GWP and GTP measure surface temperature response and are thus interchangeable with climate metrics like TCRE in adaptation contexts.",
      "D": "Emissions metrics exclusively determine regional climate changes, whereas climate metrics like ECS and TCR are irrelevant for assessing localized impacts.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "948",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 WGI.pdf",
    "source_text": "931 The Earth’s Energy Budget, Climate Feedbacks and Climate Sensitivity Chapter 77In Box 7.1 an energy budget framework is introduced, which forms the basis for the discussions and scientific assessment in the remainder of this chapter and across the Report. The framework reflects advances in the understanding of the Earth system response to climate forcing since the publication of AR5. A schematic of this framework and the key changes relative to the science reported in AR5 are provided in Figure 7.1. A simple way to characterize the behaviour of multiple aspects of the climate system at once is to summarize them using global-scale metrics. This Report distinguishes between ‘climate metrics’ (e.g., ECS, TCR) and ‘emissions metrics’ (e.g., global warming potential, GWP , or global temperature-change potential, GTP), but this distinction is not definitive. Climate metrics are generally used to summarize aspects of the surface temperature response (Box 7.1). Emissions metrics are generally used to summarize the relative effects of emissions of different forcing agents, usually greenhouse gases (GHGs; Section 7.6). The climate metrics used in this report typically evaluate how the Earth system response varies with atmospheric gas concentration or change in radiative forcing. Emissions metrics evaluate how radiative forcing or a key climate variable (such as GSAT) is affected by the emissions of a certain amount of gas. Emissions-related metrics are sometimes used in mitigation policy decisions such as trading GHG reduction measures and life cycle analysis. Climate metrics are useful to gauge the range of future climate impacts for adaptation decisions under a given emissions pathway. Metrics such as the transient climate response to cumulative emissions of carbon dioxide (TCRE) are used in both adaptation and mitigation contexts: for gauging future global surface temperature change under specific emissions scenarios, and to estimate remaining carbon budgets that are used to inform mitigation policies (Section 5.5).Given that TCR and ECS are metrics of GSAT response to a theoretical doubling of atmospheric CO 2 (Box 7.1), they do not directly correspond to the warming that would occur under realistic forcing scenarios that include time-varying CO 2 concentrations and non-CO 2 forcing agents (such as aerosols and land-use changes). It has been argued that TCR, as a metric of transient warming, is more policy-relevant than ECS (Frame et al., 2006; Schwartz, 2018). However, as detailed in Chapter 4, both established and recent results (Forster et al., 2013; Gregory et al., 2015; Marotzke and Forster, 2015; Grose et al., 2018; Marotzke, 2019) indicate that TCR and ECS help explain variation across climate models both over the historical period and across a range of concentration-driven future scenarios. In emission-driven scenarios the carbon cycle response is also important (Smith et al., 2019). The proportion of variation explained by ECS and TCR varies with scenario and the time period considered, but both past and future surface warming depend on these metrics (Section 7.5.7). Regional changes in temperature, rainfall, and climate extremes have been found to correlate well with the forced changes in GSAT within Earth System Models (ESMs; Section 4.6.1; Giorgetta et al., 2013; Tebaldi and Arblaster, 2014; Seneviratne et al., 2016). While this so-called ‘pattern scaling’ has important limitations arising from, for instance, localized forcings, land-use changes, or internal climate variability (Deser et al., 2012; Luyssaert et al., 2014), changes in GSAT nonetheless explain a substantial fraction of inter-model differences in projections of regional climate changes over the 21st century (Tebaldi and Knutti, 2018). This Chapter’s assessments of TCR and ECS thus provide constraints on future global and regional climate change (Chapters 4 and 11). Box 7.1 | The Energy Budget Framework: Forcing and Response The forcing and response energy budget framework provides a methodology to assess the effect of individual drivers of global surface temperature response, and to facilitate the understanding of the key phenomena that set the magnitude of this temperature response. The framework used here is developed from that adopted in previous IPCC reports (see Ramaswamy et al., 2019 for a discussion). Effective Radiative Forcing (ERF), introduced in AR5 (Boucher et al., 2013; Myhre et al., 2013b) is more explicitly defined in this Repor",
    "new_id": 491
  },
  {
    "id": 45285,
    "question": "Which inference about the relationship between anthropogenic forcing and internal climate variability is most consistent with the information provided in the Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Working Group I Contribution to the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Internal variability delays the emergence of anthropogenic signals in long-term precipitation changes across many land regions.",
      "A": "Anthropogenic signals in precipitation changes are always detectable regardless of natural variability.",
      "B": "Temperature-related variables have not yet emerged beyond natural variability in most regions.",
      "C": "Ocean acidification and deoxygenation trends are primarily driven by internal variability rather than human influence.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "68",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 WGI.pdf",
    "source_text": "51 Technical SummaryTSof internal variability and forced change in the climate system. Simulations and understanding of modes of climate variability, including teleconnections, have improved since AR5 ( medium confidence), and larger ensembles allow a better quantification of uncertainty in projections due to internal climate variability. {1.4.2, 1.5.3, 1.5.4, 4.2, 4.4.1, Box 4.1, 8.5.2, 10.3.4, 10.4} Changes in regional climate can be detected even though natural climate variations can temporarily increase or obscure anthropogenic climate change on decadal time scales. While anthropogenic forcing has contributed to multi-decadal mean precipitation changes in several regions, internal variability can delay emergence of the anthropogenic signal in long-term precipitation changes in many land regions (high confidence). {10.4} Mean temperatures and heat extremes have emerged above natural variability in almost all land regions with high confidence. Changes in temperature-related variables, such as regional temperatures, growing season length, extreme heat and frost, have already occurred, and there is medium confidence that many of these changes are attributable to human activities. Several impact-relevant changes have not yet emerged from natural variability but will emerge sooner or later in this century depending on the emissions scenario (high confidence). Ocean acidification and deoxygenation have already emerged over most of the global open ocean, as has a reduction in Arctic sea ice ( high confidence). {9.3.1, 9.6.4, 11.2, 11.3, 12.4, 12.5, Atlas.3–Atlas.11} TS.1.2.4 Understanding of Human Influence The evidence for human influence on recent climate change has strengthened progressively from the IPCC Second Assessment Report to AR5 and is even stronger in this assessment, including for regional scales and for extremes. Human influence in the IPCC context refers to the human activities that lead to or contribute to a climate response, such as the human-induced emissions of greenhouse gases that subsequently alter the atmosphere’s radiative Figure TS.3 | Emergence of changes in temperature over the historical period. The intent of this figure is to show how observed changes in temperature have emerged and that the emergence pattern agrees with model simulations. The observed change in temperature at a global warming level of 1°C (a), and the signal-to-noise ratio (the change in temperature at a global warming level of 1°C, divided by the size of year-to-year variations, (b)) using data from Berkeley Earth. The right panels show the zonal means of the maps and include data from different observational datasets (red) and the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) simulations (black, including the 5–95% range) processed in the same way as the observations. {1.4.2, 10.4.3} 0.5 1 2 3 4 5Emergence of changes in surface temperature Annual mean temperature change and the change relative to year-to-year variations Zonal mean 90°N 60°N 30°N 0 30°S 60°S90°S(a) Change in temperature at a global warming level of 1°C 0.5 1 2 3 4 590°N 60°N 30°N 0 30°S 60°S90°S –4 –3.5 –3 –2.5 –2 –1.5 –1 –0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 Signal to noise ratioZonal mean–2.4 –2.1 –1.8 –1.5 –2.1 –0.9 –0.6 –0.3 0 0.3 0.6 0.9 1.2 1.5 1.8 2.1 2.4 (b) Change in temperature at a global warming level of 1°C relative to the size of year-to-year variations°CMissing data Missing dataObservation (Berkeley Earth) Other observation datasets CMIP6 multi-model mean (45) 5-95% model range",
    "new_id": 492
  },
  {
    "id": 45286,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the nuanced relationship between climate change impacts on snowmelt timing and their cascading effects on regional hydrological systems, as implied in the Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Working Group I Contribution to the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Earlier snowmelt will influence runoff, soil moisture, and evapotranspiration, but its specific impacts may vary depending on local environmental factors and competing climatic influences.",
      "B": "Earlier snowmelt will decrease soil moisture levels uniformly across all regions with seasonal snow, leading to widespread drought conditions.",
      "C": "Changes in snowmelt timing will alter runoff patterns but are unlikely to affect other components of the water cycle such as evapotranspiration or soil moisture.",
      "D": "Increased evaporation due to earlier snowmelt is expected to compensate for reduced snowpack, maintaining stable soil moisture and runoff patterns.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "1140",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 WGI.pdf",
    "source_text": "1123 Water Cycle Changes Chapter 88 8.4.1.7.2 Seasonal snow cover The AR5 assessed as very likely that the amount and seasonal duration of Northern Hemisphere (NH) snow cover will reduce under global warming (AR5 Sections 11.3.4.2 and 12.4.6.2). Changes in the total amount of water in the snow cover (snow water equivalent) are less certain because of the competing influences of temperature and precipitation. As snow cover is assessed in Chapter 9 (Section 9.5.3.3), only an overview of that assessment is provided here. Changes in seasonality of snow cover are assessed in Box 8.2. The continued consistency of reported results across all generations of model projections, along with improvements in process understanding, has increased confidence in snow cover projections since AR5. In summary, based on the results of Chapter 9, it is now virtually certain that future NH snow cover extent and duration will continue to decrease with global warming. While most studies have focused on the NH, process understanding suggests with high confidence that these results apply to the Southern Hemisphere (SH) as well. There is high confidence in snowmelt occurring earlier in the year. Changes to the timing and amount of snowmelt will have a strong influence on all the other aspects of the water cycle in regions with seasonal snow, including run-off, soil moisture, and evapotranspiration. 8.4.1.7.3 W etlands and lakes The AR5 did not include specific projections for wetlands and lakes. The SRCCL and SROCC provided some discussion of wetlands projections. For coastal wetlands, SRCCL noted the importance of sea level rise for increased saltwater intrusion, although projections of coastal wetland area with sea level rise are inconclusive. Some studies project substantial decreases (Spencer et al., 2016) while others indicate possible increases (Schuerch et al., 2018). SRCCL also noted the general expectation for decreases in water resources, including wetlands, in areas of decreased rainfall due to increased evaporation. Local studies of inland wetlands project decreases in a range of environments including mountain (Lee et al., 2015), mid- to high latitude (D. Zhao et al., 2018), and prairie (Sofaer et al., 2016) regions. In addition to affecting wetland extent and density, changes in flooding can also affect the connectivity between wetlands and rivers (Karim et al., 2016). Despite a number of uncertainties underlying the general response of wetlands to climate change, there are multiple ways climate change may cause considerable stress on both inland and coastal wetlands (Junk et al., 2013; Moomaw et al., 2018). Widespread changes are also projected for lakes (Woolway et al., 2020), including changes in lake temperature (Fang and Stefan, 1999; Sahoo et al., 2016), ice (Sharma et al., 2019), evaporation (W. Wang et al., 2018), and stability and mixing (Woolway and Merchant, 2019). Note that lake ice is also considered in Chapter 12 of this Report. To date, CO 2-induced lake acidification, analogous to ocean acidification, has not been the focus of many studies but may occur with continued emissions (Phillips et al., 2015). While glacier lakes in general increase with melting glaciers (Linsbauer et al., 2016; Colonia et al., 2017; Magnin et al., 2020) no clear projections are currently available (see discussion in Chapter 9). Projections of lake level means and variability show substantial changes for individual lakes (Bucak et al., 2017; Li et al., 2021) but can be sensitive to methodology, due to the competing processes involved (Notaro et al., 2015). Projected changes to wetlands and lakes due to climate change will occur in the context of widespread and continuing human-caused conversion and degradation of wetlands (e.g, Davidson, 2014), and where water withdrawals have a large impact on lake levels (e.g., Micklin, 2016). In summary, there is medium confidence that inland wetland extent will decrease in regions of projected precipitation decrease and evaporation increase, and high confidence that sea level rise will increase saltwater intrusion into coastal wetlands. However, there is low agreement on the influence of sea level rise on the extent of coastal wetlands. Regarding lakes, there is high confidence for temperature increases and ice decreases, based on both projections and physical expectations, and low confidence for non-homogeneous decreases in mixing, given there is currently limited evidence. 8.4.1.7.4 Groundwater Ground",
    "new_id": 493
  },
  {
    "id": 45287,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the nuanced relationship between CMIP6 models and observed warming trends, considering both their strengths and limitations, as discussed in the Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Working Group I Contribution to the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report?",
    "options": {
      "B": "While CMIP6 models generally replicate observed warming trends since 1850, they exhibit a slight cool bias during 1980_2000 and may overestimate warming from the 1970s or 1980s to 2010s.",
      "A": "CMIP6 models consistently overestimate warming throughout the entire historical period due to biases in aerosol radiative forcing.",
      "C": "The CMIP6 multi-model mean perfectly aligns with observed warming after 2000, resolving all issues identified in earlier CMIP5 simulations.",
      "D": "CMIP6 models fail to reproduce any significant features of observed warming trends, including periods of slow warming and volcanic cooling effects.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "450",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 WGI.pdf",
    "source_text": "433 Human Influence on the Climate System Chapter 33 Stevens, 2019). In addition, the biases of the limited number of models participating in HighResMIP are not entirely representative of overall CMIP6 biases, especially in the Southern Ocean, as indicated by comparing panels b and f of Figure 3.3. The AR5 assessed with very high confidence that models reproduce the general history of the increase in global-scale annual mean surface temperature since the year 1850, although AR5 also reported that an observed reduction in the rate of warming over the period 1998–2012 was not reproduced by the models (Cross-Chapter Box 3.1; Flato et al., 2013). Figure 3.2c and Figure 3.4 show time series of anomalies in annually and globally averaged surface temperature simulated by CMIP5 and CMIP6 models for the past millennium and the period 1850 to 2020, respectively, with the baseline set to 1850–1900 (see Section 1.4.1). As also indicated by Figure 3.4, the spread in simulated absolute temperatures is large (Palmer and Stevens, 2019). However, the discussion is based on temperature anomaly time series instead of absolute temperatures because our focus is on evaluation of the simulation of climate change in these models, and also because anomalies are more uniformly distributed and are more easily deseasonalized to isolate long-term trends (see Section 1.4.1). CMIP6 models broadly reproduce surface temperature variations over the past millennium, including the cooling that follows periods of intense volcanism ( medium confidence) (Figure 3.2c). Simulated GMST anomalies are well within the uncertainty range of temperature reconstructions ( medium confidence) since about the year 1300, except for some short periods immediately following large volcanic eruptions, for which simulations driven by different forcing datasets disagree (Figure 3.2c). Before the year 1300, larger disagreements between models and temperature reconstructions are expected because forcing and temperature reconstructions are increasingly uncertain further back in time, but specific causes have not been identified conclusively (Ljungqvist et al., 2019; PAGES 2k Consortium, 2019) (medium confidence). For the historical period, results for CMIP6 shown in Figure 3.4 suggest that the qualitative history of surface temperature increase is well reproduced, including the increase in warming rates beginning in the 1960s and the temporary cooling that follows large volcanic eruptions. Although virtually all CMIP6 modelling groups report improvements in their model’s ability to simulate current climate compared to the CMIP5 version (Gettelman et al., 2019; Golaz et al., 2019; Mauritsen et al., 2019; Swart et al., 2019; Voldoire et al., 2019b; T. Wu et al., 2019b; Bock et al., 2020; Boucher et al., 2020; Dunne et al., 2020), it does not necessarily follow that the simulation of temperature trends is also improved (Bock et al., 2020; Fasullo et al., 2020). The CMIP6 multi-model ensemble encompasses observed warming and the multi-model mean tracks those observations within 0.2°C over most of the historical period. Figure 3.4 confirms the findings of Papalexiou et al. (2020), who highlighted based on 29 CMIP6 models that most models replicate the period of slow warming between 1942 and 1975 and the late twentieth century warming (1975–2014). The CMIP6 multi-model mean is cooler over the period 1980–2000 than both observations and CMIP5 (Figure 3.4; Bock et al., 2020; Flynn and Mauritsen, 2020; Gillett et al., 2021). Biases of several tenths of a degree in some CMIP6 models over that period may be due to an overestimate in aerosol radiative forcing (Sections 6.3.5 and 7.3.3, and Figure 6.8; Andrews et al., 2020; Dittus et al., 2020; Flynn and Mauritsen, 2020). Papalexiou et al. (2020), Tokarska et al. (2020) and Stolpe et al. (2021) all report that CMIP6 models on average overestimate warming from the 1970s or 1980s to the 2010s, although quantitative conclusions depend on which observational dataset is compared against (see also Table 2.4). However, Figure 3.4, which includes a larger number of models than available to those studies, indicates that the CMIP6 multi-model mean tracks observed warming better than the CMIP5 multi-model mean after the year 2000. The CMIP6 multi-model mean GSAT warming between 1850–1900 and 2010–2019 and associated 5–95% range is 1.09 [0.66 to 1.64] °C. Cross-Chapter Box 2.3 assessed GSAT warming over the same period at 1.06 [0.88 to 1.21] °C. So som",
    "new_id": 494
  },
  {
    "id": 45294,
    "question": "Which factor, when considered in conjunction with others, most directly explains why Arctic warming exceeds Antarctic warming despite both poles experiencing greenhouse gas forcing, according to the Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Working Group I Contribution to the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Greater surface heat uptake in the Southern Ocean due to upwelling of deep waters that delays warming near Antarctica.",
      "A": "The dominance of deep atmospheric inversions over Antarctica as a result of the Antarctic Ice Sheet's elevation.",
      "B": "Stronger lapse-rate feedbacks in the Arctic caused by tropical convective processes enhancing upper tropospheric warming.",
      "D": "More-negative cloud feedbacks in the Southern Hemisphere high latitudes amplifying Antarctic warming asymmetry.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "1001",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 WGI.pdf",
    "source_text": "984 Chapter 7 The Earth’ s Energy Budget, Climate Feedbacks and Climate Sensitivity7the surface-albedo and lapse-rate feedbacks, which preferentially warm the Arctic (Graversen et al., 2014; Pithan and Mauritsen, 2014; Goosse et al., 2018). Latitudinal structure in the lapse-rate feedback reflects weak radiative damping to space with surface warming in polar regions, where atmospheric warming is constrained to the lower troposphere owing to stably stratified conditions, and strong radiative damping in the tropics, where warming is enhanced in the upper troposphere owing to moist convective processes. This is only partially compensated by latitudinal structure in the water-vapour feedback (Taylor et al., 2013), which favours tropical warming (Pithan and Mauritsen, 2014). While cloud feedbacks have been found to play little role in Arctic amplification in CMIP5 models (Pithan and Mauritsen, 2014; Goosse et al., 2018; Figure 7.12b), less-negative cloud feedbacks at high latitude, as seen within some CMIP6 models (Zelinka et al., 2020), tend to favour stronger polar amplification (Dong et al., 2020). A weaker Planck response at high latitudes, owing to less efficient radiative damping where surface and atmospheric temperatures are lower, also contributes to polar amplification (Pithan and Mauritsen, 2014). The effective radiative forcing of CO 2 is larger in the tropics than at high latitudes, suggesting that warming would be tropically amplified if not for radiative feedbacks and poleward latent heat transport changes (Figure 7.12b–d; Stuecker et al., 2018). While the contributions to regional warming can be diagnosed within ESM simulations (Figure 7.12), assessment of the underlying role of individual factors is limited by interactions inherent to the coupled climate system. For example, polar feedback processes are coupled and influenced by warming at lower latitudes (Screen et al., 2012; Alexeev and Jackson, 2013; Graversen et al., 2014; Graversen and Burtu, 2016; Rose and Rencurrel, 2016; Feldl et al., 2017a, 2020; Yoshimori et al., 2017; Garuba et al., 2018; Po-Chedley et al., 2018b; Stuecker et al., 2018; Dai et al., 2019), while atmospheric heat transport changes are in turn influenced by the latitudinal structure of regional feedbacks, radiative forcing, and ocean heat uptake (Hwang et al., 2011; Zelinka and Hartmann, 2012; Feldl and Roe, 2013; Huang and Zhang, 2014; Merlis, 2014; Rose et al., 2014; Roe et al., 2015; Feldl et al., 2017b; Stuecker et al., 2018; Armour et al., 2019). The use of different feedback definitions, such as a lapse-rate feedback partitioned into upper and lower tropospheric components (Feldl et al., 2020) or including the influence of water vapour at constant relative humidity (Held and Shell, 2012; Section 7.4.2), would also change the interpretation of which feedbacks contribute most to polar amplification. The energy budget analyses (Figure 7.12) suggest that greater surface warming in the Arctic than the Antarctic under greenhouse gas forcing arises from two main processes. The first is large surface heat uptake in the Southern Ocean (Figure 7.12c) driven by the upwelling of deep waters that have not yet felt the effects of the radiative forcing; the heat taken up is predominantly transported away from Antarctica by northward-flowing surface waters (Section 9.2.1; Marshall et al., 2015; Armour et al., 2016). Strong surface heat uptake also occurs in the subpolar North Atlantic Ocean under global warming (Section 9.2.1). However, this heat is partially transported northward into the Arctic, which leads to increased heat fluxes into the Arctic atmosphere (Figure 7.12b; Rugenstein et al., 2013; Jungclaus et al., 2014; Koenigk and Brodeau, 2014; Marshall et al., 2015; Nummelin et al., 2017; Singh et al., 2017; Oldenburg et al., 2018). The second main process contributing to differences in Arctic and Antarctic warming is the asymmetry in radiative feedbacks between the poles (Yoshimori et al., 2017; Goosse et al., 2018). This primarily reflects the weaker lapse-rate and surface-albedo feedbacks and more-negative cloud feedbacks in the SH high latitudes (Figure 7.12). However, note the SH cloud feedbacks are uncertain due to possible biases in the treatment of mixed phase clouds (Hyder et al., 2018). Idealized modelling suggests that the asymmetry in the polar lapse-rate feedback arises from the height of the Antarctic Ice Sheet precluding the formation of deep atmospheric inversions that ",
    "new_id": 495
  },
  {
    "id": 45295,
    "question": "Which factor is most likely to contribute to narrowing the uncertainty range of tropical high-cloud amount feedback, according to the Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Working Group I Contribution to the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Improved understanding of cloud feedback mechanisms involving co-dependent high and low-cloud interactions.",
      "A": "Increased precision in observational estimates derived solely from CERES satellite data for tropical regions.",
      "B": "Reduction in the very likely range of net cloud feedback as compared to AR5 through enhanced atmospheric reanalyses.",
      "C": "Elimination of the small probability of a net negative cloud feedback by focusing on extratropical cloud optical depth changes.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "992",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 WGI.pdf",
    "source_text": "975 The Earth’s Energy Budget, Climate Feedbacks and Climate Sensitivity Chapter 77of –0.10 to +0.94 W m–2 °C–1 (Table 7.10). This approach potentially misses feedbacks from cloud regimes that are not assessed, but almost all the major cloud regimes were taken into consideration (Gettelman and Sherwood, 2016) and therefore additional uncertainty will be small. This argument is also supported by an agreement between the net cloud feedback assessed here and the net cloud feedback directly estimated using observations. The observational estimate, which is sensitive to the period considered and is based on two atmospheric reanalyses (ERA-Interim and MERRA) and TOA radiation budgets derived from the CERES satellite observations for the years 2000–2010, is 0.54 ± 0.7 W m –2 °C–1 (one standard deviation; Dessler, 2013). The observational estimate overlaps with the assessed range of the net cloud feedback. The assessed very likely range is reduced by about 50% compared to AR5, but is still wide compared to those of other climate feedbacks (Table 7.10). The largest contribution to this uncertainty range is the estimate of tropical high-cloud amount feedback which is not yet well quantified using models. In reality, different types of cloud feedback may occur simultaneously in one cloud regime. For example, an upward shift of high-clouds associated with the altitude feedback could be coupled to an increase/decrease of cirrus/anvil cloud fractions associated with the cloud amount feedback. Alternatively, slowdown of the tropical circulation with surface warming (Section 4.5.3 and Figure 7.9) could affect both high and low-clouds so that their feedbacks are co-dependent. Quantitative assessments of such covariances require further knowledge about cloud feedback mechanisms, which will further narrow the uncertainty range. In summary, deepened understanding of feedback processes in individual cloud regimes since AR5 leads to an assessment of the positive net cloud feedback with high confidence. A small probability (less than 10%) of a net negative cloud feedback cannot be ruled out, but this would require an extremely large negative feedback due to decreases in the amount of tropical anvil clouds or increases in optical depth of extratropical clouds over the Southern Ocean; neither is supported by current evidence. 7.4.2.5 Biogeophysical and Non-CO 2 Biogeochemical Feedbacks The feedbacks presented in the previous sections (Sections 7.4.2.1–7.4.2.4) are directly linked to physical climate variables (for example temperature, water vapour, clouds, or sea ice). The central role of climate feedbacks associated with these variables has been recognized since early studies of climate change. However, in addition to these physical climate feedbacks, the Earth system includes feedbacks for which the effect of global mean surface temperature change on the TOA energy budget is mediated through other mechanisms, such as the chemical composition of the atmosphere, or by vegetation changes. Among these additional feedbacks, the most important is the CO 2 feedback that describes how a change of the global surface temperature affects the atmospheric CO 2 concentration. In ESM simulations in which CO 2 emissions are prescribed, changes in surface carbon fluxes affect the CO 2 concentration in the atmosphere, the TOA radiative energy budget, and eventually the global mean surface temperature. In ESM simulations in which the CO 2 concentration is prescribed, changes in the carbon cycle allow compatible CO 2 emissions to be calculated, that is, the CO 2 emissions that are compatible with both the prescribed CO 2 concentration and the representation of the carbon cycle in the ESM. The CO 2 feedback is assessed in Chapter 5 (Section 5.4). The framework presented in this chapter assumes that the CO 2 concentration is prescribed, and our assessment of the net feedback parameter, α, does not include carbon cycle feedbacks on the atmospheric CO 2 concentration (Section 7.1 and Box 7.1). However, our assessment of α does include non-CO 2 biogeochemical feedbacks (including effects due to changes in atmospheric methane concentration; Section 7.4.2.5.1) and biogeophysical feedbacks (Section 7.4.2.5.2). A synthesis of the combination of biogeophysical and non-CO 2 biogeochemical feedbacks is given in Section 7.4.2.5.3. 7.4.2.5.1 Non-CO 2 biogeochemical feedbacks The chemical composition of the atmosphere (beyond CO 2 and water vapour changes) is expected to ch",
    "new_id": 496
  },
  {
    "id": 45300,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the implications of using different emissions metrics for achieving net zero GHG emissions, as described in the Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Working Group I Contribution to the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Alternative metrics like CGTP or GWP* reduce ambiguity in warming trajectories by accounting for the distinct behavior of cumulative emissions from short-lived gases compared to long-lived gases.",
      "B": "The GWP-100 metric ensures a direct correlation between cumulative CO2 equivalent emissions and global surface temperature stabilization when short-lived GHG emissions are reduced but remain above zero.",
      "C": "Ambiguity in future warming trajectories can be entirely eliminated by applying the GWP-100 metric alone, regardless of the specific mix of greenhouse gases involved.",
      "D": "Net zero GHG emissions defined through any metric guarantees a decline in global surface temperatures due to the balance of emissions and removals over a specified period.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "1035",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 WGI.pdf",
    "source_text": "1018 Chapter 7 The Earth’ s Energy Budget, Climate Feedbacks and Climate Sensitivity77.6.2 Applications of Emissions Metrics One prominent use of emissions metrics is for comparison of efforts measured against climate change goals or targets. One of the most commonly discussed goals is in Article 2 of the Paris Agreement which aims to limit the risks and impacts of climate change by setting temperature goals. In addition, the Paris Agreement has important provisions which relate to how the goals are to be achieved, including making emissions reductions in a manner that does not threaten food production (Article 2), an early emissions peaking target, and the aim to ‘achieve a balance between anthropogenic emissions by sources and removals by sinks of greenhouse gases in the second half of this century’ (Article 4). Article 4 also contains important context regarding international equity, sustainable development, and poverty reduction. Furthermore, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) sets out as its ultimate objective, the ‘stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system.’ How the interpretation of the Paris Agreement and the meaning of ‘net zero’ emissions, reflects on the appropriate choice of metric is an active area of research (Schleussner et al., 2016, 2019; Fuglestvedt et al., 2018; Collins et al., 2020). Several possible scientific interpretations of the Article 2 and 4 goals can be devised, and these, along with emissions metric choice, have implications both for when a balance in GHG emissions, net zero CO 2 emissions or net zero GHG emissions are achieved, and for their meaning in terms of temperature outcome (Fuglestvedt et al., 2018; Rogelj et al., 2018; Wigley, 2018). In AR6 net zero GHG emissions is defined as the condition in which metric-weighted anthropogenic GHG emissions are balanced by metric-weighted anthropogenic GHG removals over a specified period (see Box 1.4 and Appendix VII: Glossary). The quantification of net zero GHG emissions depends on the GHG emissions metric chosen to compare emissions and removals of different gases, as well as the time horizon chosen for that metric. As the choice of emissions metric affects the quantification of net zero GHG emissions, it therefore affects the resulting temperature outcome after net zero emissions are achieved (Lauder et al., 2013; Rogelj et al., 2015; Fuglestvedt et al., 2018; Schleussner et al., 2019). Schleussner et al. (2019) note that declining temperatures may be a desirable outcome of net zero. Rogelj and Schleussner (2019) also point out that the use of physical metrics raises questions of equity and fairness between developed and developing countries.Box 7.3 (continued) If global surface temperature stabilization goals are considered, cumulative CO 2 equivalent emissions computed with the GWP-100 emissions metric would continue to rise when short-lived GHG emissions are reduced but remain above zero (Figure 7.22b). Such a rise would not match the expected global surface temperature stabilization or potential decline in warming that comes from a reduction in emissions of short-lived greenhouse gases (Pierrehumbert, 2014; Allen et al., 2018b; Cain et al., 2019; Collins et al., 2020; Lynch et al., 2020, 2021). This is relevant to net zero GHG emissions goals (Section 7.6.2 and Box 1.4). When individual gases are treated separately in climate model emulators (Cross-Chapter Box 7.1), or weighted and aggregated using an emissions metric approach (such as CGTP or GWP*) which translate the distinct behaviour from cumulative emissions of short-lived gases, ambiguity in the future warming trajectory of a given emissions scenario can be substantially reduced (Cain et al., 2019; Denison et al., 2019; Collins et al., 2020; Lynch et al., 2021). The degree of ambiguity varies with the emissions scenario. For mitigation pathways that limit warming to 2°C with an even chance, the ambiguity arising from using GWP-100 as sole constraint on emissions of a mix of greenhouse gases (without considering their economic implications or feasibility) could be as much as 0.17°C, which represents about one-fifth of the remaining global warming in those pathways (Denison et al., 2019). If the evolution of the individual GHGs is not known, this can make it difficult to evaluate how a given global multi-gas emissions pathway specified ",
    "new_id": 497
  },
  {
    "id": 45301,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes the relationship between global warming levels (GWL) and the frequency of extreme sea level events, considering the differences in projections under RCP4.5 and RCP8.5, as outlined in the Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Working Group I Contribution to the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Under RCP8.5, the 1-in-100 year extreme sea level event will occur multiple times per year, whereas under RCP4.5 it will become a one-in-five-year event.",
      "A": "Under RCP4.5, the 1-in-100 year extreme sea level event will occur annually, while under RCP8.5 it will happen multiple times per year.",
      "C": "The frequency of the 1-in-100 year extreme sea level event is projected to decrease globally under both RCP4.5 and RCP8.5 scenarios due to adaptation measures.",
      "D": "Both RCP4.5 and RCP8.5 project that extreme sea level events will stabilize by mid-century, with no significant increases thereafter.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "1788",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 WGI.pdf",
    "source_text": "1771 Climate Change Information for Regional Impact and for Risk Assessment Chapter 1212and storms. Agricultural and ecological drought changes are generally of higher confidence than hydrological drought changes, with increases projected in North and Southern Africa, Madagascar, Southern and Eastern Australia, some regions of Central and South America, Mediterranean Europe, Western North America and North Central America (medium to high confidence ). Fire weather conditions will increase by 2050 under RCP4.5 or above in several regions in Africa, Australia, several regions of South America, Mediterranean Europe, and North America ( medium to high confidence ). Extreme precipitation and pluvial flooding will increase in many regions around the world (high confidence). Increases in river flooding are also expected in Western and Central Europe and in polar regions (high confidence), most of Asia, Australasia, North America, the South American Monsoon region and South-Eastern South America (medium confidence). Mean winds are projected to slightly decrease by 2050 over much of Europe, Asia and Western North America, and increase in many parts of South America except Patagonia, West and South Africa and the eastern Mediterranean ( medium confidence). Extratropical storms are expected to have a decreasing frequency but increasing intensity over the Mediterranean, increasing intensity over most of North America, and an increase in both intensity and frequency over most of Europe (medium confidence). Enhanced convective conditions are expected in North America ( medium confidence). Tropical cyclones are expected to increase in intensity despite a decrease in frequency in most tropical regions ( medium confidence). Climate change will modify multiple CIDs over Small Islands in all ocean basins, most notably those related to heat, aridity and droughts, tropical cyclones and coastal impacts. {12.4} The level of confidence in the projected direction of change in CIDs and the intensity of the signal depend on mitigation efforts over the 21st century, as reflected by the differences between end-century projections for different climate scenarios. Dangerous humid heat thresholds, such as the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Heat Index (NOAA HI) of 41°C, will be exceeded much more frequently under the SSP5 -8.5 scenario than under SSP1 -2.6 and will affect many more regions (high confidence). In many tropical regions, the number of days per year where an HI of 41°C is exceeded will increase by more than 100 days relative to the recent past under SSP5 -8.5, while this increase will be limited to less than 50 days under SSP1 -2.6 ( high confidence ). The number of days per year where temperature exceeds 35°C will increase by more than 150 days in many tropical areas, such as the Amazon basin and South East Asia under SSP5 -8.5, while it is expected to increase by less than two months in these areas under SSP1 -2.6 (except for the Amazon Basin). There is high confidence that sandy shorelines will retreat in most regions of the world, in the absence of additional sediment sources or physical barriers to shoreline retreat. The total length of sandy shorelines around the world that are projected to retreat by more than 100 m by the end of the century is about 35% greater under RCP8.5 (about 130,000 km) compared to that under RCP 4.5 (about 95,000 km). The frequency of the present-day 1-in-100 year extreme sea level event (represented here by extreme total water level) is also projected to increase substantially in most regions (high confidence). In a globally averaged sense, the 1-in-100 year extreme sea level is projected to become an event that occurs multiple times per year under RCP8.5, while under RCP4.5 it is projected to become a one-in-five-year event, representing at least a five fold increase from RCP4.5 to RCP8.5. {12.4, 12.5} There is low confidence in past and future changes of several CIDs. In nearly all regions there is low confidence in changes in hail, ice storms, severe storms, dust storms, heavy snowfall and avalanches, although this does not indicate that these CIDs will not be affected by climate change. For such CIDs, observations are short term or lack homogeneity, and models often do not have sufficient resolution or accurate parametrization to adequately simulate them over climate change time scales. {12.4} Many global- and regional-scale CIDs have a direct relation to global warming levels (GWL",
    "new_id": 498
  },
  {
    "id": 45308,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between high-warming storylines under SSP5-8.5 and their implications for precipitation changes, as described in the Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Working Group I Contribution to the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Models projecting extreme warming under SSP5-8.5 indicate that regions like the Mediterranean may experience annual mean precipitation reductions exceeding 30%, depending on seasonal dynamics.",
      "A": "High-warming storylines are associated with uniform precipitation increases globally, particularly over tropical and Arctic regions.",
      "B": "Precipitation changes under high-warming storylines show a consistent amplification of seasonal patterns, with no significant regional variability.",
      "D": "The most pronounced global surface temperature (GSAT) warming consistently correlates with the strongest precipitation increases in all subtropical and mid-latitude regions.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "654",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 WGI.pdf",
    "source_text": "637 Future Global Climate: Scenario-based Projections and Near-term Information Chapter 44For the high-emissions scenarios SSP3 -7.0 and SSP5 -8.5, a high-warming storyline is associated with wide-spread warming that exceeds the already high best-estimate warming by another 35–50%. For SSP5 -8.5, this corresponds to a warming of 1°C–3°C in addition to the best estimate over most land regions, which implies more than 6°C relative to 1995–2014 over most extratropical land regions and Amazonia. Over large parts of the Arctic, annual mean temperatures increase by more than 10°C relative to 1995–2014 in such a high-warming storyline under SSP5 -8.5. The two lines of evidence yield more consistent patterns for SSP5 -8.5 than for SSP1 -2.6, but there are substantial differences concerning whether the strongest warming above the best estimate occurs over the tropics or extratropical land regions. While individual models project even stronger warming over extratropical land regions (Figure 4.41 bottom row), their projected GSAT warming exceeds the assessed very likely 5–95% range and thus correspond to an extremely unlikely (below 5% likelihood) storyline. While all the models consistent with such a storyline tend to overestimate the observed warming trend over the historical period (Brunner et al., 2020; Liang et al., 2020; Nijsse et al., 2020; Tokarska et al., 2020; Ribes et al., 2021), some of them show a good representation of several aspects of the present-day climate (Andrews et al., 2019; Sellar et al., 2019; Swart et al., 2019). Such a very high- warming storyline implies widespread warming of more than 1.5°C and 3°C above the best-estimate warming pattern under SSP1 -2.6 and SSP5 -8.5, respectively. Under SSP1 -2.6, this corresponds to more than 3°C warming relative to 1995–2014 over land regions in the northern mid- to high latitudes and more than 6°C in the Arctic (Figure 4.41g). Under SSP5 -8.5, such a very high-warming storyline implies more than 8°C warming over parts of Amazonia and more than 6°C over most other tropical land regions (Figure 4.41h). High-warming storylines are very likely also associated with substantial changes in the hydrological cycle due to strong thermodynamic changes, which can be amplified or offset by dynamical changes (Emori and Brown, 2005; Seager et al., 2014b; Chavaillaz et al., 2016; Kröner et al., 2017; Chen et al., 2019). Here the assessment of the hydrological cycle in high-warming storylines is limited to changes in annual mean precipitation, but changes in seasonal mean precipitation can be even stronger due to enhanced seasonality in many regions (Box 8.2). Quantifying precipitation changes associated with high-warming storylines is challenging since models show the largest changes in precipitation over different regions (Sections 4.5.1 and 4.6.1). In some areas, models project opposing signals in different seasons or a combination of decreasing mean and increasing extreme precipitation (Kendon et al., 2014; Ban et al., 2015; Giorgi et al., 2016; Pendergrass et al., 2017). Models with the most pronounced GSAT warming are not necessarily associated with the strongest precipitation response in all regions, in part due to projected changes in atmospheric dynamics (Madsen et al., 2017; Zappa and Shepherd, 2017; Li et al., 2018).Different alternative estimates of changes in annual mean precipitation patterns consistent with high-warming levels are compared here. The first estimate (Figure 4.42b) is based on a linear pattern scaling of the multi-model mean precipitation pattern for SSP5 -8.5 (Figure 4.42a) to be consistent with the upper bound of the assessed very likely GSAT range (see above). This estimate is reasonably consistent with the average response of the five models with GSAT warming most consistent with the upper bound of the very likely warming range (Figure 4.42c) except for Australia. Both estimates show about 30–40% larger changes in annual mean precipitation than the response pattern consistent with the best GSAT estimate. In a high-warming storyline, widespread increases of more than 30% occur in many regions north of 50°N and over parts of the tropics. Around the Mediterranean and other parts of the subtropics, a high-warming storyline is associated with a reduction in annual mean precipitation of more than 30% depending on the season. Both the multi-model mean and the pattern-scaled responses show a smoother pattern than in individual simulations (Tebaldi and Kn",
    "new_id": 499
  },
  {
    "id": 45785,
    "question": "Which scenario demonstrates a company failing to meet the requirements for disclosing third-party certification of products under the Multiline and Specialty Retailers & Distributors – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The company provides detailed information about products certified by an independent organization but excludes products certified under a scheme not listed in the text, despite compliance with equivalent standards.",
      "A": "The company discloses revenue from products certified by the Forestry Stewardship Council but does not specify whether the certification pertains to environmental or social standards.",
      "B": "The company reports total revenue from products certified through a government program without mentioning the specific tier of certification achieved.",
      "C": "The company aggregates revenue from all certified products, including those verified by ASTM International and Fair Trade Certified, without distinguishing between environmental and social certifications.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "19-20",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Multiline and Specialty Retailers & Distributors.pdf",
    "source_text": "5.2 disability discrimination, which involves treating an applicant or employee with a disability unfavourably because they have a disability; 5.3 genetic information discrimination, which involves treating an applicant or employee unfavourably based on their genetic information; 5.4 national origin discrimination, which involves treating an applicant or employee unfavourably because they are from a particular country or part of the world, because they are (or appear to be) of a particular ethnicity, or because they have (or appear to have) an accent; 5.5 pregnancy discrimination, which involves treating an applicant or employee unfavourably because of pregnancy, childbirth or a medical condition associated with pregnancy or childbirth; 5.6 race or colour discrimination, which involve treating an applicant or employee unfavourably because they are of a certain race or because of characteristics associated with race; 5.7 religious discrimination, which involves treating an applicant or employee unfavourably because of their religious beliefs; 5.8 gender discrimination, which involves treating an applicant or employee unfavourably because of their gender. Note to CG-MR-330a.2 1The entity shall briefly describe the nature (for example, judgement or order issued after trial, settlement, guilty plea, deferred prosecution agreement or non-prosecution agreement) and context (for example, unfair hiring or promotion practices or biased compensation practices) of all monetary losses resulting from legal proceedings. 2The entity shall describe any corrective actions implemented in response to the legal proceedings. This may include specific changes in operations, management, processes, products, business partners, training or technology. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |MULTILINE AND SPECIALTY RETAILERS & DISTRIBUTORS |19\n\n[Page 20]\nProduct Sourcing, Packaging & Marketing Topic Summary Entities in the Multiline and Specialty Retailers & Distributors industry sell a wide array of products including electronics, clothing, furnishings and cosmetics, all of which have environmental and social impacts throughout their lifecycles. The size and buying power of many entities in this industry allow them to work with their suppliers to source products and packaging with lower lifecycle environmental and social impacts. Entities that perform well in this regard may benefit from increased customer demand and improved margins. To take a proactive approach to engaging suppliers, entities in the industry may employ strategies such as using certification standards and reducing the environmental impacts of packaging. Metrics CG-MR-410a.1. Revenue from products third-party certified to environmental or social sustainability standards 1The entity shall disclose its total revenue from products third-party certified to an environmental or social sustainability standard. 1.1 Third-party certification is defined as review by an independent organisation that determines to what extent the final product complies with specific standards. 1.2 A product is considered to be certified to an environmental or social sustainability standard if: 1.2.1 it has achieved certification through a government programme; or 1.2.2 it has achieved certification to third-party environmental or social sustainability standards set by organisations such as the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) or ASTM International, Fair Trade Certified, the Forestry Stewardship Council (FSC), the Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI), Rainforest Alliance, BPI, Cradle to Cradle, Green Seal or the Marine Stewardship Council. 1.3 A product with third-party certification shall be considered certified regardless of the level or tier of certification it received. 1.4 The scope of the disclosure includes third-party certifications based on either environmental or social best practices, or both environmental and social best practices. 1.5 If an entity uses a third-party verification or certification scheme, it shall disclose which verifications or schemes are relevant. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |MULTILINE AND SPECIALTY RETAILERS & DISTRIBUTORS |20",
    "new_id": 500
  },
  {
    "id": 45786,
    "question": "Which of the following statements accurately reflects the relationship between workforce diversity metrics and an entity's potential to mitigate legal risks while improving market positioning, as described in the Multiline and Specialty Retailers & Distributors – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Workforce diversity metrics, including gender and diversity group representation, may indirectly reduce legal and regulatory risks by aligning hiring practices with demographic shifts.",
      "B": "Entities are required to report on workforce diversity as a direct measure to eliminate all forms of legal proceedings.",
      "C": "The disclosure of workforce diversity percentages is mandated solely to enhance the reputation of entities without any connection to mitigating legal risks.",
      "D": "Legal risks can be fully mitigated by achieving proportional gender and diversity group representation across all employee categories.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "15-16",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Multiline and Specialty Retailers & Distributors.pdf",
    "source_text": "2The legal proceedings shall include any adjudicative proceeding in which the entity was involved, whether before a court, a regulator, an arbitrator or otherwise. 3The losses shall include all monetary liabilities to the opposing party or to others (whether as the result of settlement, verdict after trial or otherwise), including fines and other monetary liabilities incurred during the reporting period as a result of civil actions (for example, civil judgements or settlements), regulatory proceedings (for example, penalties, disgorgement or restitution) and criminal actions (for example, criminal judgements, penalties or restitution) brought by any entity (for example, governmental, business or individual). 4The scope of monetary losses shall exclude legal and other fees and expenses incurred by the entity in its defence. Note to CG-MR-310a.3 1The entity shall briefly describe the nature (for example, judgement or order issued after trial, settlement, guilty plea, deferred prosecution agreement or non-prosecution agreement) and context (for example, improper working conditions or unfair compensation) of all monetary losses resulting from legal proceedings. 2The entity shall describe any corrective actions implemented in response to the legal proceedings. This may include specific changes in operations, management, processes, products, business partners, training or technology. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |MULTILINE AND SPECIALTY RETAILERS & DISTRIBUTORS |15\n\n[Page 16]\nWorkforce Diversity & Inclusion Topic Summary The Multiline and Specialty Retailers & Distributors industry is consumer-facing and relies on communicating effectively with customers during the sales process and adapting to changing consumer demands for products. As many developed markets undergo massive demographic shifts, including increases in minority populations, entities in this industry can benefit from ensuring that their culture and hiring and promotion practices embrace building a diverse workforce for management and junior staff. Retailers that respond to this demographic shift and employ staff who can recognise the needs of diverse populations may be better positioned to capture demand from consumer markets whose members have traditionally been overlooked, providing entities a competitive advantage. Furthermore, such entities may benefit from improved reputations among consumers, as well as decreased legal and regulatory risks. Metrics CG-MR-330a.1. Percentage of (1) gender and (2) diversity group representation for (a) executive management, (b) non-executive management and (c) all other employees 1The entity shall disclose (1) the percentage of gender representation among its employees for (a) executive management, (b) non-executive management and (c) all other employees. 1.1 The entity shall categorise the gender of its employees as women, men or not disclosed. 1.1.1 The entity may disclose additional categories of gender identity or expression. 1.2 The entity shall use these employee categories: (a) executive management, (b) non-executive management and (c) all other employees. 1.3 Executive management is defined as chief executives and senior officials who formulate and review the entity’s policies, and plan, direct, coordinate and evaluate the overall activities of the entity with the support of other managers. 1.3.1 The entity may refer to the International Standard Classification of Occupations (ISCO) Sub-Major Group 11 or an applicable jurisdictional occupation classification system for a definition of executive management. In such cases, the entity shall disclose the occupation classification standard used to classify executive management. 1.4 Non-executive management is defined as those who plan, direct, coordinate and evaluate the activities of the entity, or of organisational units within it, and formulate and review its policies, rules and regulations, other than executive management. 1.4.1 The entity may refer to the ISCO Major Group 1 (excluding Sub-Major Group 11) or an applicable jurisdictional occupational classification system for a definition of non-executive management. In such cases, the entity shall disclose the occupation classification standard used to classify non- executive management. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |MULTILINE AND SPECIALTY RETAILERS & DISTRIBUTORS |16",
    "new_id": 501
  },
  {
    "id": 45787,
    "question": "Which of the following accurately reflects a logical implication of the entity's strategies to reduce the environmental impact of packaging, as described in the Multiline and Specialty Retailers & Distributors – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Strategies such as optimizing cube utilization and reducing noxious constituents are discussed in relation to both primary and tertiary packaging.",
      "A": "The entity is required to use Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) analysis for all its private-label products and vendor-packaged goods.",
      "C": "Minimization of packaging weight excludes considerations of consumer acceptance and safety, focusing solely on environmental efficiency.",
      "D": "Performance metrics from The Consumer Goods Forum’s Global Protocol exclude evaluations of hazardous substances.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "23-24",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Multiline and Specialty Retailers & Distributors.pdf",
    "source_text": "11If chemicals management policies and practices vary significantly by business unit, product category or region, the entity shall describe those variations. CG-MR-410a.3. Discussion of strategies to reduce the environmental impact of packaging 1The entity shall discuss its strategies to reduce the environmental impacts of the packaging, of its products such as optimising packaging weight and volume for a given application or using alternative materials, including those that are renewable, recycled, recyclable, reusable, compostable or degradable. 2 Relevant disclosure may include discussion of: 2.1 design innovations, including strategies to optimise the quantity of material used; packaging weight, shape and size; product-to-package ratio; cube utilisation; and void fill; 2.2 minimisation of packaging weight and volume to the amount needed for safety, hygiene and consumer acceptance of the packed product; minimisation of noxious or hazardous constituents; and suitability for reuse, material recycling, energy recovery or composting; and 2.3 performance on The Consumer Goods Forum ’s Global Protocol on Packaging Sustainability 2.0 metrics for ‘Packaging Weight and Optimization or Assessment ’ and ‘Minimization of Substances Hazardous to the Environment ’. 3The entity may discuss its strategies as they relate to primary, secondary and tertiary packaging of its private- label products as well as the packaging of products from its vendors. 3.1 Primary packaging is defined as the packaging designed to come into direct contact with the product. 3.2 Secondary packaging is defined as the packaging designed to contain one or more primary packages together with any protective materials, if required. 3.3 Tertiary packaging is defined as the packaging designed to contain one or more articles or packages, or bulk material, for the purposes of transport, handling or distribution. Tertiary packaging is also known as ‘distribution ’ or ‘transport ’ packaging. 3.4 Private-label products include store-branded products packaged for sale with the retailer ’s name, whether manufactured by the retailer or by another manufacturer. 4The entity may discuss its use of Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) analysis to reduce environmental impacts and maximise product efficiency, including weight reduction and transportation efficiency. 4.1 Improvements to the environmental efficiency of packaging products may be discussed in terms of LCA functional unit service parameters (time, extent and quality of function). SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |MULTILINE AND SPECIALTY RETAILERS & DISTRIBUTORS |23\n\n[Page 24]\n| |24 sasb.org/contact",
    "new_id": 502
  },
  {
    "id": 47130,
    "question": "Which condition must be met for companies to disclose the resiliency of their strategies in reports other than financial filings, even if not material, as outlined in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The company belongs to one of four non-financial groups and has annual revenue exceeding one billion USDE.",
      "A": "The company operates exclusively within financial sectors and has significant physical risk exposure.",
      "B": "The company conducts qualitative scenario analysis but avoids any quantitative assessments.",
      "D": "The company identifies a plausible climate-related scenario that could affect its operations within the next fiscal year.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "26-27",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD WS 3.pdf",
    "source_text": "26Strategy c): Disclosing Resilience Using Scenario Analysis Using climate- related scenarios is subject to a few considerations Disclosing Qualitative Versus Quantitative Climate -Related Scenario -Analysis The Task Force believes that all organizations exposed to climate- related risks should consider: 1. using scenario analysis to help inform their strategic and financial planning processes and 2. disclosing how resilient their strategies are to a range of plausible climate- related scenarios. The Task Force recognizes that, for many companies, scenario analysis is or would be a largely qualitative exercise. Scenario quantification should be used if applicable and performed following the qualitative narrative, which should serve as a robust framework and communication tool. Companies with more significant exposure to transition risk (e.g., fossil fuel -based industries, energy -intensive manufacturers, and transportation activities ) and/or physical risk (e.g., agriculture, transportation and building infrastructure, insurance, and tourism) could undertake more rigorous qualitative and, if relevant, quantitative scenario analysis with respect to key drivers and trends that affect their operations. They could also consider disclosing key assumptions and pathways related to the scenarios they use to allow users to understand the analytical process and its limitations. Sources TCFD, Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate -related Financial Disclosures , 2017 TCFD, Guidance on Scenario Analysis for Non- Financial Companies , 2020\n\n[Page 27]\n27Strategy c): Disclosing Resilience Using Scenario Analysis (cont.) Using climate- related scenarios is subject to a few considerations Materiality and Location of Disclosure In the case of disclosures around strategy and forward- looking scenarios, companies should disclose material information in financial filings . To the extent that additional detail and discussion of scenarios and strategy is warranted, which may not rise to the level of the financial filings, companies should consider disclosing additional detail in other public reports , such as sustainability and non -financial reports , with appropriate cross - references to alert investors to such information. The Task Force also encourages certain companies —those in the four non- financial groups that have more than one billion U.S. dollar equivalent (USDE) in annual revenue —to disclose the resiliency of their strategies regardless of materiality in other reports1, if not included in their financial fillings. 1. Other reports include official company reports that are issued at least annually, widely distributed and available to investo rs and others, and subject to internal governance processes that are the same or substantially similar to those used for financial reporting Sources TCFD, Guidance on Scenario Analysis for Non- Financial Companies , 2020 TCFD, Annex : Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate -related Financial Disclosures , 2021",
    "new_id": 503
  },
  {
    "id": 47139,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures an implied relationship between disclosures for banks and insurance companies regarding climate-related risks, as outlined in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Both banks and insurance companies must provide scenario analyses involving a 2°C or lower scenario, but only insurance companies should consider higher temperature scenarios for physical risks.",
      "A": "Banks are required to disclose detailed quantitative data on all climate-related risks, whereas insurance companies only need to describe potential impacts qualitatively.",
      "B": "Insurance companies focus exclusively on underwriting activities in their disclosures, while banks concentrate solely on credit exposure without addressing transition risks.",
      "C": "Banks must disclose significant concentrations of carbon-related assets as part of their resilience strategy, while insurance companies prioritize client selection influenced by climate-related opportunities.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "40-41",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD WS 3.pdf",
    "source_text": "40Financial Sector The supplemental guidance is intended to provide additional context for the financial sector when preparing disclosures consistent with the Task Force’s recommendations, namely for the following four major industries: –Banks –Insurance Companies –Asset Owners –Asset ManagersNon -Financial Groups Similarly, supplemental guidance is included for companies within four non- financial groups. These groups comprise industries in the following four areas: –Energy –Transportation –Materials and Buildings –Agriculture, Food, and Forest Products Overview of the Supplemental Guidance The Task Force identified certain areas where supplemental guidance was warranted, for both the financial sectors and non- financial groups Source: TCFD, Annex : Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate -related Financial Disclosures , 2021\n\n[Page 41]\n41Strategy Disclose the actual and potential impacts of climate -related risks and opportunities on the company’s businesses, strategy, and financial planning where such information is material. Banks Recommended disclosure a) Describe the climate -related risks and opportunities the company has identified over the short, medium, and long termBanks should describe significant concentrations of credit exposure to carbon- related assets . Additionally, banks should consider disclosing their climate -related risks (transition and physical) in their lending and other financial intermediary business activities Insurance Companies Recommended disclosure b) Describe the impact of climate -related risks and opportunities on the company’s businesses, strategy, and financial planningInsurance companies should describe the potential impacts of climate -related risks and opportunities as well as provide supporting quantitative information where available, on their core businesses, products, and services, including: information at the business division, sector, or geography levels; how the potential impacts influence client or broker selection; and whether specific climate -related products or competencies are under development, such as insurance of green infrastructure, specialty climate -related risk advisory services, and climate -related client engagement. Recommended disclosure c) Describe the resilience of the company’s strategy, taking into consideration different climate -related scenarios, including a 2 °C or lower scenario.Insurance companies that perform climate -related scenario analysis on their underwriting activities should provide the following information: description of the climate -related scenarios used, including the critical input parameters, assumptions and considerations, and analytical choices. In addition to a 2 °C scenario, insurance companies with substantial exposure to weather -related perils should consider using a greater than 2 °C scenario to account for physical effects of climate change and time frames used for the climate -related scenarios, including short, medium -, and long- term milestones.Supplemental Strategy Guidance for the Financial Sector Note: For readability, we removed footnote references from these excerpts. Please see the annex referenced below for more inf ormation. Source: TCFD, Annex : Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate -related Financial Disclosures , 2021",
    "new_id": 504
  },
  {
    "id": 47158,
    "question": "Which of the following most accurately reflects the reason why the examples provided in the excerpt are considered insufficient for fully meeting TCFD recommendations, as outlined in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The examples are sector-specific and may not apply universally across all industries.",
      "B": "The examples do not include quantitative financial data, which is required by TCFD standards.",
      "C": "The examples were reformatted and some content was removed, leading to incomplete disclosures.",
      "D": "The companies mentioned are explicitly disclaimed as being preferred or endorsed by TCFD.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "31-32",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD WS 3.pdf",
    "source_text": "31Example Disclosure: Hitachi (Technology) TCFD alignment: the following example highlights the selected businesses that have a relatively high likelihood of being affected by climate change and qualitatively examines the business impact of, and responses to 1.5 °C and 4 °C scenarios, in terms of climate - related risks and opportunities. Example of Disclosure for Strategy c): Scenario Analysis Describe the resilience of the company’s strategy, taking into consideration different climate - related scenarios, including a 2 °C or lower scenario Source: Hitachi, Hitachi Sustainability Report 2021 , September 29, 2021, pp. 51 –52. Note: Some content was reformatted in order to fit the page; and some content has been removed, denoted by […]. The examples included are not intended to represent “best practice” nor demonstrate disclosures that fully meet the associate d recommended disclosure. They may not be applicable to all sectors and should be considered within the framework of the sector in which the company operate s. The mention of specific companies does not imply that they are endorsed by the TCFD or its members in preference to others of a similar nature that a re not mentioned. […]\n\n[Page 32]\n32Example Disclosure: Allianz (Insurance Companies, Asset Managers) TCFD alignment: the following example highlights the impact of two transition risk scenarios —both 2 °C or lower —on the risk exposure (i.e., resilience) of Allianz’s strategy. It shows various time horizons, asset types, risk levels, and factors that may enhance or mitigate potential risk exposures in order to increase resilience (e.g., policy, technology substitutions, and other market forces). Example of Disclosure for Strategy c): Scenario Analysis (continued) Describe the resilience of the company’s strategy, taking into consideration different climate - related scenarios, including a 2 °C or lower scenario Source: Allianz Group, Sustainability Report 2020 , April 29, 2021, p. 86 Note: Some content was reformatted in order to fit the page; and some content has been removed, denoted by […]. The examples included are not intended to represent “best practice” nor demonstrate disclosures that fully meet the associate d recommended disclosure. They may not be applicable to all sectors and should be considered within the framework of the sector in which the company operate s. The mention of specific companies does not imply that they are endorsed by the TCFD or its members in preference to others of a similar nature that a re not mentioned.",
    "new_id": 505
  },
  {
    "id": 47170,
    "question": "Which statement accurately captures the nuanced relationship between climate-related scenario analysis and its implications for financial sector entities, as described in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Asset managers are tasked with describing how each product or strategy might be affected by a low-carbon transition, yet they are not explicitly directed to conduct formal scenario analyses.",
      "A": "Insurance companies are required to use only a 2°C scenario for assessing physical risks, while banks must incorporate both transition and physical risks into their analyses.",
      "C": "Asset owners performing scenario analysis may discuss how these scenarios influence specific asset investments, but they are not expected to provide detailed descriptions of input parameters or assumptions.",
      "D": "Banks are encouraged to describe significant concentrations of credit exposure to carbon-related assets, whereas insurance companies focus exclusively on underwriting activities without addressing product development.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "41-42",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD WS 3.pdf",
    "source_text": "41Strategy Disclose the actual and potential impacts of climate -related risks and opportunities on the company’s businesses, strategy, and financial planning where such information is material. Banks Recommended disclosure a) Describe the climate -related risks and opportunities the company has identified over the short, medium, and long termBanks should describe significant concentrations of credit exposure to carbon- related assets . Additionally, banks should consider disclosing their climate -related risks (transition and physical) in their lending and other financial intermediary business activities Insurance Companies Recommended disclosure b) Describe the impact of climate -related risks and opportunities on the company’s businesses, strategy, and financial planningInsurance companies should describe the potential impacts of climate -related risks and opportunities as well as provide supporting quantitative information where available, on their core businesses, products, and services, including: information at the business division, sector, or geography levels; how the potential impacts influence client or broker selection; and whether specific climate -related products or competencies are under development, such as insurance of green infrastructure, specialty climate -related risk advisory services, and climate -related client engagement. Recommended disclosure c) Describe the resilience of the company’s strategy, taking into consideration different climate -related scenarios, including a 2 °C or lower scenario.Insurance companies that perform climate -related scenario analysis on their underwriting activities should provide the following information: description of the climate -related scenarios used, including the critical input parameters, assumptions and considerations, and analytical choices. In addition to a 2 °C scenario, insurance companies with substantial exposure to weather -related perils should consider using a greater than 2 °C scenario to account for physical effects of climate change and time frames used for the climate -related scenarios, including short, medium -, and long- term milestones.Supplemental Strategy Guidance for the Financial Sector Note: For readability, we removed footnote references from these excerpts. Please see the annex referenced below for more inf ormation. Source: TCFD, Annex : Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate -related Financial Disclosures , 2021\n\n[Page 42]\n42Strategy Disclose the actual and potential impacts of climate -related risks and opportunities on the company’s businesses, strategy, and financial planning where such information is material. Asset Owners Recommended disclosure b) Describe the impact of climate -related risks and opportunities on the company’s businesses, strategy, and financial planningAsset owners should describe how climate -related risks and opportunities are factored into relevant investment strategies . This could be described from the perspective of the total fund or investment strategy or individual investment strategies for various asset classes. Recommended disclosure c) Describe the resilience of the company’s strategy, taking into consideration different climate -related scenarios, including a 2 °C or lower scenario.Asset owners that perform scenario analysis should consider providing a discussion of how climate -related scenarios are used , such as to inform investments in specific assets. Asset Managers Recommended disclosure b) Describe the impact of climate -related risks and opportunities on the company’s businesses, strategy, and financial planningAsset managers should describe how climate -related risks and opportunities are factored into relevant products or investment strategies. Asset managers should also describe how each product or investment strategy might be affected by the transition to a low -carbon economy.Supplemental Strategy Guidance for the Financial Sector (cont.) Source: TCFD, Annex : Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate -related Financial Disclosures , 2021",
    "new_id": 506
  },
  {
    "id": 47172,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between transition plans and financial impacts as described in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The disclosure of transition plans is considered useful for decision-making because it provides insights into how companies will address both physical and transition risks while adapting their business models.",
      "A": "Transition plans are primarily focused on reducing operational costs, which directly mitigates all climate-related financial risks.",
      "B": "Companies are required to include detailed financial projections in their transition plans to demonstrate alignment with low-carbon commitments.",
      "D": "Financial impacts due to climate-related risks are unrelated to transition plans since they focus exclusively on current asset impairments.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "17-18",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD WS 3.pdf",
    "source_text": "17Impact on Financial PerformanceChanges to income and cash flow statements or other financial performance measures as a result of climate -related risks and opportunities may provide insight into management priorities and strategic efforts. Impact on financial performance can include the following: •increases in revenue from new products or services from climate opportunities; •increases in cost due to carbon prices, business interruption, contingency, or repairs; •changes to operating cash flow from changes in upstream costs; •impairment charges due to assets exposed to transition risks; and •changes to total expected losses due to physical risks. Changes to the balance sheet statement as a result of climate -related risks and opportunities can include the following: •changes to the carrying amount of assets due to exposure to physical and transition risks; •changes to the expected portfolio value given climate -related risks and opportunities; and •changes in liability and equity due to increases or decreases in assets (e.g., due to low -carbon capital investments or to sale or write -offs of stranded assets)Impact on Financial PositionIn order to make more informed financial decisions, investors, lenders, and insurance underwriters need to understand how climate -related issues affect a company’s financial performance and position as reflected in its income statement, cash flow statement, and balance sheet. Source: TCFD, Annex : Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate -related Financial Disclosures , 2021 Strategy b): Financial Impacts The Task Force’s guidance for Strategy b) encourages companies to disclose the impacts of climate - related risks and opportunities on financial performance and position, consistent with Strategy b) Category of Impact Description of Impact\n\n[Page 18]\n18Companies’ transition plans are of particular interest to users , especially when they are seeking to verify the credibility of companies’ commitments related to climate change. Users are particularly interested in information on how companies will adjust their strategies or business models, including the specific actions they will take to reduce risks and increase opportunities as they transition to a low - carbon economy. In 2021 the Task Force sought public comment on the Proposed Guidance on Climate -related Metrics, Targets, and Transition Plans . The results of the consultation indicated that 96% of users responded that companies’ disclosure of transition plans would be useful for decision -making .A transition plan is an aspect of a company’s overall business strategy that lays out a set of targets and actions supporting its transition toward a low -carbon economy , including actions and commitments such as reducing its GHG emissions .Strategy b): Transition Plans Describing plans for transitioning to a low -carbon economy is strongly encouraged for companies that have made GHG emissions reduction commitments or operate in jurisdictions that have made such commitments, or have agreed to meet investor expectations regarding their GHG emissions Definition and Importance of Transition Plans Recommended Disclosure and Additional Guidance As described in the guidance for Strategy b) , plans for transitioning to a low -carbon economy should be described by: •companies that have made GHG emissions reduction commitments , •companies that operate in jurisdictions that have made such commitments , and •companies who have agreed to meet investor expectations regarding GHG emissions reductions The transition plan could include GHG emissions targets and specific activities intended to reduce GHG emissions in the company’s operations and value chain or to otherwise support the transition. The Guidance on Metrics, Targets, and Transition Plans , published in 2021, provides additional guidelines on transition plans. Sources TCFD , Guidance on Metrics, Targets, and Transition Plans , 2021 TCFD , Proposed Guidance on Metrics, Targets, and Transition Plans Consultation: Summary of Responses , October 14, 2021. TCFD , Annex : Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate -related Financial Disclosures , 2021",
    "new_id": 507
  },
  {
    "id": 47173,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the implicit relationship between scenario analysis and strategic resilience as demonstrated in the disclosures by Allianz and BHP, as described in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Scenario analysis serves to illustrate how diverse climate-related risks and opportunities inform strategic adjustments, enhancing long-term resilience without guaranteeing specific outcomes.",
      "A": "Scenario analysis is primarily used to predict exact financial outcomes under specific climate scenarios, ensuring precise strategic planning.",
      "B": "Both companies rely on scenario analysis to demonstrate that a 2°C or lower scenario will definitively lead to increased profitability across all commodities.",
      "C": "The disclosures imply that policy and technology substitutions are the sole factors capable of mitigating risks in a 2°C or lower scenario.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "32-33",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD WS 3.pdf",
    "source_text": "32Example Disclosure: Allianz (Insurance Companies, Asset Managers) TCFD alignment: the following example highlights the impact of two transition risk scenarios —both 2 °C or lower —on the risk exposure (i.e., resilience) of Allianz’s strategy. It shows various time horizons, asset types, risk levels, and factors that may enhance or mitigate potential risk exposures in order to increase resilience (e.g., policy, technology substitutions, and other market forces). Example of Disclosure for Strategy c): Scenario Analysis (continued) Describe the resilience of the company’s strategy, taking into consideration different climate - related scenarios, including a 2 °C or lower scenario Source: Allianz Group, Sustainability Report 2020 , April 29, 2021, p. 86 Note: Some content was reformatted in order to fit the page; and some content has been removed, denoted by […]. The examples included are not intended to represent “best practice” nor demonstrate disclosures that fully meet the associate d recommended disclosure. They may not be applicable to all sectors and should be considered within the framework of the sector in which the company operate s. The mention of specific companies does not imply that they are endorsed by the TCFD or its members in preference to others of a similar nature that a re not mentioned.\n\n[Page 33]\n33Example Disclosure: BHP (Energy)Example of Disclosure for Strategy c): Financial Impacts Describe the potential impact of climate -related issues on financial performance (e.g., revenues, costs) and financial position (e.g., assets, liabilities) Source: BHP, Climate Change Report 2020 , September 2020, pp. 19 –21. Note: : Some content was reformatted in order to fit the page; and some content has been removed, denoted by […]. The examples included are not intended to represent “best practice” nor demonstrate disclosures that fully meet the associate d recommended disclosure. They may not be applicable to all sectors and should be considered within the framework of the sector in which the company opera tes. The mention of specific companies does not imply that they are endorsed by the TCFD or its members in preference to others of a similar nature that a re not mentioned. TCFD alignment: the following examples illustrate BHP’s portfolio assessment under different climate scenarios, specifically the cumulative demand predicted in the next 30 years for some of the commodities they provide, as well as the rolling present value of unlevered free cash flows relative to their Central Energy View over time. BHP considered four scenarios in their analysis: 1.5 °C scenario (aligned with the goals of the Paris Agreement), Central Energy View (3 °C increase by 2100), Lower Carbon View: (2.5 °C increase by 2100), and Climate Crisis scenario. BHP’s portfolio analysis demonstrates the resilience of their strategies to climate -related risks and opportunities, taking into consideration a transition to a low -carbon economy consistent with a 2 °C or lower scenario, as it may present greater upside to their current portfolio and create additional opportunities for growth in future -facing commodities.",
    "new_id": 508
  },
  {
    "id": 47175,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the interplay between companies' climate-related disclosures and their financial planning as implied in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Climate-related issues are considered inputs to financial planning, influencing factors such as operations, supply chains, and investments without being limited to specific timeframes.",
      "B": "Companies must prioritize long-term risks over short-term risks when integrating climate-related issues into financial planning.",
      "C": "The inclusion of climate-related scenarios in financial planning is optional unless explicitly mandated by jurisdictional regulations.",
      "D": "Financial planning processes are unaffected by transition activities aimed at reducing GHG emissions unless they directly impact current revenues.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "15-16",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD WS 3.pdf",
    "source_text": "15Example Disclosure: British Land (Real Estate Investment Trust) Example of Disclosure for Strategy a) (continued) Describe the climate- related risks and opportunities the company has identified over the short, medium, and long term Source: British Land , Annual Report and Accounts 2021 , 2021, p. 50. Note: : Some content was reformatted in order to fit the page; and some content has been removed, denoted by […]. The examples included are not intended to represent “best practice” nor demonstrate disclosures that fully meet the associate d recommended disclosure. They may not be applicable to all sectors and should be considered within the framework of the sector in which the company operate s. The mention of specific companies does not imply that they are endorsed by the TCFD or its members in preference to others of a similar nature that a re not mentioned. TCFD alignment: the following example provides an overview of climate -related physical and transition risks, as well as climate -related opportunities identified by British Land over the short term and medium term. This example includes definitions for each time horizon but does not describe long -term risks and opportunities. The impacts on corporate strategy and financial planning are also included for each example provided.\n\n[Page 16]\n16Strategy Disclose the actual and potential impacts of climate -related risks and opportunities on the company’s businesses, strategy, and financial planning where such information is material. All Sectors Recommended Disclosure b) Describe the impact of climate -related risks and opportunities on the company’s businesses, strategy, and financial planningBuilding on recommended disclosure (a), companies should discuss how identified climate -related issues have affected their businesses, strategy, and financial planning. Companies should consider including the impact on their businesses, strategy, and financial planning in the following: Products and services Supply chain and/or value chain Adaptation and mitigation activities Investment in research and development Operations (including types of operations and location of facilities) Acquisitions or divestments Access to capital Companies should describe how climate -related issues serve as an input to the financial planning process , the time period(s) used, and how these risks and opportunities are prioritized. companies’ disclosures should reflect a holistic picture of the interdependencies among the factors that affect their ability to create value over time. Companies should describe the impact of climate -related issues on their financial performance (e.g., revenues, costs) and financial position (e.g., assets, liabilities). If climate -related scenarios were used to inform the company’s strategy and financial planning, such scenarios should be described.Companies that have made GHG emissions reduction commitments, operate in jurisdictions that have made such commitments, or have agreed to meet investor expectations regarding GHG emissions reductions should describe their plans for transitioning to a low -carbon economy , which could include GHG emissions targets and specific activities intended to reduce GHG emissions in their operations and value chain or to otherwise support the transition. Note: For readability, we removed footnote references from these excerpts. Please see the annex referenced below for more inf ormation. Source: TCFD, Annex : Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate -related Financial Disclosures , 2021 Strategy b) Strategy b) asks companies to disclose the impact of climate- related risks and opportunities",
    "new_id": 509
  },
  {
    "id": 47176,
    "question": "Which statement accurately captures the relationship between qualitative and quantitative scenario analysis as implied by the text, as outlined in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Qualitative scenario analysis serves as a foundational step that may lead to quantification if applicable, particularly for companies with significant risk exposure.",
      "A": "Quantitative scenario analysis is considered essential for all organizations, regardless of their exposure to climate-related risks.",
      "C": "The Task Force discourages the use of qualitative scenario analysis in favor of more rigorous quantitative methods across all industries.",
      "D": "Companies with minimal exposure to climate-related risks are required to prioritize quantitative over qualitative scenario analysis.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "25-26",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD WS 3.pdf",
    "source_text": "25Testing a strategy and strategy options against a set of scenariosIdentifying possible future threats or opportunitiesIdentifying signposts to set contingency plans in motionServing as a basis for continuous monitoring and strategy adjustmentStrategy c): Using Scenario Analysis to Assess Resilience Scenario analysis is useful for assessing the business implications of climate change Scenario Analysis Contributes to Greater Strategy Resilience and Flexibility by: Sources TCFD, Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate -related Financial Disclosures , 2017 TCFD, Technical Supplement: The Use of Scenario Analysis in Disclosure of Climate -related Risks and Opportunities , 2017 TCFD, Guidance on Scenario Analysis for Non- Financial Companies , 2020\n\n[Page 26]\n26Strategy c): Disclosing Resilience Using Scenario Analysis Using climate- related scenarios is subject to a few considerations Disclosing Qualitative Versus Quantitative Climate -Related Scenario -Analysis The Task Force believes that all organizations exposed to climate- related risks should consider: 1. using scenario analysis to help inform their strategic and financial planning processes and 2. disclosing how resilient their strategies are to a range of plausible climate- related scenarios. The Task Force recognizes that, for many companies, scenario analysis is or would be a largely qualitative exercise. Scenario quantification should be used if applicable and performed following the qualitative narrative, which should serve as a robust framework and communication tool. Companies with more significant exposure to transition risk (e.g., fossil fuel -based industries, energy -intensive manufacturers, and transportation activities ) and/or physical risk (e.g., agriculture, transportation and building infrastructure, insurance, and tourism) could undertake more rigorous qualitative and, if relevant, quantitative scenario analysis with respect to key drivers and trends that affect their operations. They could also consider disclosing key assumptions and pathways related to the scenarios they use to allow users to understand the analytical process and its limitations. Sources TCFD, Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate -related Financial Disclosures , 2017 TCFD, Guidance on Scenario Analysis for Non- Financial Companies , 2020",
    "new_id": 510
  },
  {
    "id": 49312,
    "question": "Under which circumstance would CDP most likely terminate its relationship with a Scoring partner, and what immediate follow-up action would they take from CDP Full Corporate Scoring Introduction 2024?",
    "options": {
      "C": "If the Scoring partner demonstrates partiality in scoring, CDP would terminate the partnership and review all scores assigned by that partner.",
      "A": "If the Scoring partner accepts funding intended to influence scoring decisions, CDP would terminate the partnership but allow the affected scores to remain unchanged.",
      "B": "If there is any concern about a Scoring partner's impartiality, CDP would terminate the partnership and assign a different Scoring partner to evaluate all responses initially scored by the terminated partner.",
      "D": "If evidence arises that a Scoring partner has amended responses for personal gain, CDP would terminate the partnership and only correct scores flagged during the appeal process.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "18-19",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 2024.pdf",
    "source_text": "Page 18 of 19 @cdp | www.cdp.net c. Where a Scoring partner is working with responding companies in any other capacity that could influence its objectivity, CDP will quality assure all or a proportion of such responses. d. If there is any concern about a Scoring partner’s impartiality, CDP will either apply additional quality assurance checks to such Scoring partner’s scores, or arrange for any affected companies to be scored by a different Scoring partner. e. If CDP discovers that a Scoring partner is not being even -handed in its approach to scoring, CDP will immediately terminate its relationship with that Scoring partner and check and correct any affected scores. Restrictions on funding and attempts to influence scores 6. Neither CDP nor its Scoring partners will accept funding where an objective of such funding is to influence any scoring decisions. This applies equally to grants, sponsorship, sales of services or any other income. 7. Any attempt by any member of CDP’s staff or board of Trustees to amend responses or influence scoring methodologies or scoring results or assist any other party in doing so for personal gain, will be regarded as gross misconduct and will result in instant dismissal without compensation.\n\n[Page 19]\nPage 19 of 19 @cdp | www.cdp.net Annex 2 – Scoring appeal policy If a responding organization has evidence or believe evidence exists that indicates their response has not been evaluated correctly according to CDPs scoring methodology , they may raise this with their local CDP contact in order to initiate the score appeal process. If you do not have a local CDP contact, please contact CDP through our Help Center . The responding organization must follow the instructions provided in the score appeal form to ensure that their appeal is able to be considered by CDP. Completed forms must be submitted to CDP via your local CDP contact by 23:59 (IDLW) March 20th 2025 . Any appeals received after this time will not be considered by CDP. CDP will provide a response to appeals only after the appeal window has shut on March 20th. All organizations that submit an appeal will receive the results of their appeal at the same time, irrespective of when they submitted their appeal. Given uncertainty surrounding the number of appeals received, it is not possible to provide a guaranteed date at this time. However, an expected processing date will be provided to all organizations who have submitted an appeal once the submission window has closed. CDP’s decisions on scores made during the appeal process are final, and there is no right of review. CDP reserves the right to examine the scoring of your entire response (not just any sections highlighted by the appealing organization) during the review process and reminds organizations that your score could increase or decrease during the appeal process .",
    "new_id": 511
  },
  {
    "id": 49313,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the underlying reason for CDP's prohibition on Scoring partners scoring companies they have assisted in response preparation as mentioned in CDP Full Corporate Scoring Introduction 2024?",
    "options": {
      "D": "To prevent potential biases arising from prior relationships affecting the impartiality of the scoring process.",
      "A": "To ensure that all companies receive identical scores regardless of external assistance.",
      "B": "To allow Scoring partners to focus exclusively on companies within their expertise.",
      "C": "To streamline the scoring process by reducing the number of responses each Scoring partner handles.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "16-17",
    "ref_doc": "CDP 2024.pdf",
    "source_text": "Page 16 of 19 @cdp | www.cdp.net Disclaimer surrounding scores The CDP score is based on activities and positions disclosed in the CDP response. The score is not a comprehensive metric of a n organization ’s level of sustainability or 'green -ness', or a specific metric on the environmental footprint, but rather an indication of the level of action taken by the organization to assess and manage its impacts on, and from, environmental related issues during the reporting year. CDP's 2024 scoring methodologies are still evolving. The methodologies have been published to indicate to responding organizations how scores will be awarded this year. CDP reserves the right to make adjustments to the criteria or weighting of questions before and throughout the scoring period, based on emerging risk management strategies and best practice, quality of response data or scoring outcomes. Feedback and support If you would like information about receiving feedback on your score, make suggestions about CDP ’s scoring methodolog ies, or ask a general question, please contact the CDP Help Center .\n\n[Page 17]\nPage 17 of 19 @cdp | www.cdp.net Annex I - Conflict of interest policy Policy on conflicts of interest relating to the scoring of responses Maintaining CDP’s reputation as an independent and unbiased provider of high quality information is of paramount importance. Accordingly, CDP has adopted this policy to minimize the risk of conflicts of interest that might affect the accuracy of the scores we award to companies that respond to our questionnaires. Development of scoring methodologies 1. CDP’s Scoring Team is responsible for developing CDP’s scoring methodologies in a way which furthers CDP’s mission, takes into account scientific knowledge on environmental issues, and treats responding companies fairly. The Scoring Team must balance t hese factors and make an independent decision on them, and to minimize the potential for conflicts of interest none of the team members are responsible for any on -going relationships with companies. Scoring process 2. CDP’s Scoring Team oversees implementation of the scoring process, training Scoring partners (as defined in paragraph 4 below) and validating scores before their release. The Scoring Team may request input from other CDP staff (e.g. to translate an atta chment to check whether it meets specific criteria) but such staff are not granted access to unpublished responses or scores and all staff remain subject to the prohibition in paragraph 7 below at all times. 3. Questionnaire responses submitted by respondents may only be amended by them, or to their instruction by CDP staff. 4. Organizations scoring responses on behalf of CDP (“ Scoring partners ”) must be approved by CDP, and must successfully complete CDP’s training programme, put in place an internal quality assurance process to ensure CDP’s scoring methodology is applied consistently, and submit scores to CDP for final quality assurance before publication. 5. Scoring partners must treat all responders equally, irrespective of whether a responder is their funder, client or competitor. Accordingly: a. Before commencing scoring, Scoring partners must disclose to CDP if any clients, funders or competitors are included within the sample of companies they have been asked to score and if they have provided any companies in the sample with response prepar ation or ‘response check’ services. b. Where a Scoring partner has assisted a responding company in preparing its response or has provided it a ‘response check’ service, such company will be scored by a different Scoring partner.",
    "new_id": 512
  },
  {
    "id": 49604,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why an entity might choose to disclose homes delivered on infill sites separately from those in compact developments, based on the definitions and requirements provided in the Home Builders – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Because infill site disclosures focus on land utilization efficiency, while compact development disclosures emphasize residential density and mixed-use integration.",
      "B": "Because infill sites exclusively include areas with pre-existing infrastructure, while compact developments may occur on previously undeveloped land.",
      "C": "Because homes on infill sites are required to meet jurisdictional designations, whereas compact developments are defined by development density metrics alone.",
      "D": "Because only infill sites allow for cluster developments, whereas compact developments are restricted to single-family dwellings.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "17-18",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Home Builders.pdf",
    "source_text": "3 The entity shall describe, if relevant: 3.1 how its approach may vary by market in the integration of such considerations (including geographical market or target market demographics); 3.2 the development lifecycle stage at which considerations are integrated; and 3.3 risks and opportunities associated with the integration of such considerations. 4The entity shall describe its use of codes, guidelines and standards to incorporate best practices for site selection and development to optimise transportation effectiveness and access to services and economic centres. IF-HB-410b.2. Number of (1) lots and (2) homes delivered on infill sites 1 The entity shall disclose (1) the total number of controlled lots located on infill sites. 1.1 Infill sites are defined as sites that meet jurisdictional designations for the term. 1.1.1 In the absence of jurisdictional definitions, infill sites are defined as vacant or underutilised lots of land, served by existing physical installations such as roads, power lines, sewer and water, and other infrastructure. 1.2 The scope of infill sites includes redevelopment, brownfield or greyfield sites, but only if those sites additionally meet the above definition for infill sites. 1.3 The scope of controlled lots includes all lots owned or contractually available for ownership through option contracts or other equivalent types of contracts. 2The entity shall disclose (2) the total number of homes delivered that were constructed on infill sites. 2.1 The scope of homes shall include single-family dwelling units, whether detached, attached or part of multi- family residential buildings. IF-HB-410b.3. (1) Number of homes delivered in compact developments and (2) average density 1The entity shall disclose (1) the total number of homes delivered in compact developments. 1.1 A compact development is defined as a cluster development, mixed-use development, or traditional neighbourhood development. 1.1.1 A cluster development is defined as a development that makes preserving environmentally sensitive lands such as wetlands and forests easier for developers by grouping lots on specific portions of a site, rather than spread uniformly across a site, so that other areas of the site may remain undisturbed as open space. 1.1.2 A mixed-use development is defined as a development that integrates various uses such as residences, offices and shopping. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |HOME BUILDERS |17\n\n[Page 18]\n1.1.3 A traditional neighbourhood development is defined as a development that has mixed uses and housing types to create communities built for walking, and ideally allows residents to walk to shops, schools, places of worship, parks and eventually transit stops. 1.2 The scope of homes shall include single-family dwelling units, whether detached, attached or part of multi- family residential buildings. 1.3 The entity may use the definitions of compact developments developed under applicable jurisdictional laws or regulations where the homes, or residential developments are located. 1.4 The entity shall disclose the applicable jurisdictional laws or regulations or general industry frameworks it has used, if any, to define compact developments. 2The entity shall disclose (2) the average density of compact developments, in units per hectare, using the net neighbourhood residential dwelling density. 2.1 The average density shall be calculated as the number of residential units in all compact developments divided by the net neighbourhood residential site area of all compact developments. 2.1.1 Defined as the total land area, in hectares, devoted to residential facilities, the net neighbourhood residential site area shall exclude any area where pre-existing protected wetlands and other biodiverse sensitive areas, as determined by relevant authorities, already prohibit development of residential facilities. 2.1.2 The net neighbourhood residential site area may include areas voluntarily rendered to relevant authorities by an entity for easement that prevents future development, whether for tax abatement or other purposes. 2.2 The scope of residential units includes all planned, under-construction or completed residential units in the compact development, regardless of the stage of completion or ownership. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |HOME BUILDERS |18",
    "new_id": 513
  },
  {
    "id": 49961,
    "question": "Which of the following accurately reflects a limitation shared by both the Weighted Average Carbon Intensity metrics for investments and insurance premiums but is not a concern for the Total Carbon Emissions metric, as outlined in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Normalization using revenue disproportionately favors companies with higher pricing levels compared to their industry peers.",
      "A": "The reliance on equity ownership to allocate greenhouse gas emissions introduces significant complexity in cross-asset class applications.",
      "C": "Outliers in carbon intensity data can skew the results, making the metric less reliable for portfolio comparisons.",
      "D": "The calculation requires unavailable gross written premium information, which limits its applicability across various asset classes.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "53",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Implementation.pdf",
    "source_text": "Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Clima te-related Financial Disclosures 52 A. Introduction B. Recommendations C. Guidance for All Sectors D. Supplemental Guidance for the Financial Sector E. Supplemental Guidance for Non -Financial Groups F. Fundamental Principles for Effective Disclosure Appendices Table 3 Common Carbon Footprinting and Exposure Metrics Metric Supporting Information Weighted Average Carbon Intensity : Investments Description Portfolio’s exposure to carbon -intensive companies, expressed in tons CO 2e/$M revenue. Formula ∑ (current value of investment i current portfolio value×issue r's Scope 1 and Scope 2 GHG emissions i issue r's $M revenue i)i n Methodology Scope 1 and Scope 2 GHG emissions are allocated based on portfolio weights (the current value of the investment relative to the current portfolio value ), rather than the equity ownership approach ( as described under methodology for Total Carbon Emissions ). Gross values should be used. Key Points + / - + Metric can be more easily applied across asset classes since it does not rely on equity ownership approach. + The calculation of this metric is fairly simple and easy to communicate to investors. + Metric allows for portfolio decomposition and attribution analysis. − Metric is sensitive to outliers. − Using revenue (instead of physical or other metrics) to normalize th e data tends to favor companies with higher pricing levels relative to their peers. Weighted Average Carbon Intensity: Insurance Premiums100 Description Portfolio of insurance trans actions’ exposure to carbon -intensive companies, expressed in tons CO 2e/$M revenue . Formula ∑ (gross written premium of insurance transaction total GWP volume of insurance portfolio×insu red's Scope 1 and Scope 2 GHG emissions i insu red's $M revenue i)i n Methodology The methodology measures the intensity of a portfolio of insurance transactions using carbon intensity information for each legal entity or company (commercial insurance) or individual insured (personal lines insurance) should be used. Where GH G emission s on a company level are not available, industry or country information can be used. Where gross written premium information is not available, information on capital required, capacity, or expected loss can be used. Key Points + / - + Metric can be more easily applied across asset classes since it does not rely on equity ownership approach. - Using revenue to normalize the data tends to favor companies with higher pricing levels relative to their peers . Total Carbon Emissions Description The absolute greenhouse gas emissions associated with a portfolio, expressed in tons CO 2e. Formula ∑ (current value of investment i issue r's market capitalization i×issuer's Scope 1 and Scope 2 GHG emissions i)i n Methodology Scope 1 and Scope 2 GHG emissions are allocated to investors based on an equity ownership approach. Under this approach, if an investor owns 5 percent of a company’s total market capitaliz ation, then the investor owns 5 percent of the company as well as 5 percent of the company’s GHG (or carbon) emissions. While this metric is generally used for public equities, it can be used for other asset classes by allocating GHG emissions across the total capital structure of the investee (debt and equity). 100 Source: CRO Forum, “Carbon footprinting methodology for underwriting portfolios ,” May 1 2020.",
    "new_id": 514
  },
  {
    "id": 49978,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why the Weighted Average Carbon Intensity metric for both investments and insurance premiums avoids using an equity ownership approach, while Total Carbon Emissions does not, as described in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Guidance on Metrics, Targets, and Transition Plans?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The equity ownership approach is too complex to apply across multiple asset classes, whereas revenue-based normalization simplifies cross-asset comparisons.",
      "A": "Using revenue instead of equity ownership ensures that companies with higher pricing power are accurately represented in carbon exposure metrics.",
      "B": "Equity ownership data is not always available for all entities within a portfolio, making it unsuitable for metrics requiring broad asset applicability.",
      "D": "Revenue-based normalization provides a more accurate reflection of absolute greenhouse gas emissions compared to the equity ownership allocation method.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "53",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Implementation.pdf",
    "source_text": "Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Clima te-related Financial Disclosures 52 A. Introduction B. Recommendations C. Guidance for All Sectors D. Supplemental Guidance for the Financial Sector E. Supplemental Guidance for Non -Financial Groups F. Fundamental Principles for Effective Disclosure Appendices Table 3 Common Carbon Footprinting and Exposure Metrics Metric Supporting Information Weighted Average Carbon Intensity : Investments Description Portfolio’s exposure to carbon -intensive companies, expressed in tons CO 2e/$M revenue. Formula ∑ (current value of investment i current portfolio value×issue r's Scope 1 and Scope 2 GHG emissions i issue r's $M revenue i)i n Methodology Scope 1 and Scope 2 GHG emissions are allocated based on portfolio weights (the current value of the investment relative to the current portfolio value ), rather than the equity ownership approach ( as described under methodology for Total Carbon Emissions ). Gross values should be used. Key Points + / - + Metric can be more easily applied across asset classes since it does not rely on equity ownership approach. + The calculation of this metric is fairly simple and easy to communicate to investors. + Metric allows for portfolio decomposition and attribution analysis. − Metric is sensitive to outliers. − Using revenue (instead of physical or other metrics) to normalize th e data tends to favor companies with higher pricing levels relative to their peers. Weighted Average Carbon Intensity: Insurance Premiums100 Description Portfolio of insurance trans actions’ exposure to carbon -intensive companies, expressed in tons CO 2e/$M revenue . Formula ∑ (gross written premium of insurance transaction total GWP volume of insurance portfolio×insu red's Scope 1 and Scope 2 GHG emissions i insu red's $M revenue i)i n Methodology The methodology measures the intensity of a portfolio of insurance transactions using carbon intensity information for each legal entity or company (commercial insurance) or individual insured (personal lines insurance) should be used. Where GH G emission s on a company level are not available, industry or country information can be used. Where gross written premium information is not available, information on capital required, capacity, or expected loss can be used. Key Points + / - + Metric can be more easily applied across asset classes since it does not rely on equity ownership approach. - Using revenue to normalize the data tends to favor companies with higher pricing levels relative to their peers . Total Carbon Emissions Description The absolute greenhouse gas emissions associated with a portfolio, expressed in tons CO 2e. Formula ∑ (current value of investment i issue r's market capitalization i×issuer's Scope 1 and Scope 2 GHG emissions i)i n Methodology Scope 1 and Scope 2 GHG emissions are allocated to investors based on an equity ownership approach. Under this approach, if an investor owns 5 percent of a company’s total market capitaliz ation, then the investor owns 5 percent of the company as well as 5 percent of the company’s GHG (or carbon) emissions. While this metric is generally used for public equities, it can be used for other asset classes by allocating GHG emissions across the total capital structure of the investee (debt and equity). 100 Source: CRO Forum, “Carbon footprinting methodology for underwriting portfolios ,” May 1 2020.",
    "new_id": 515
  },
  {
    "id": 49994,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between the methodologies for calculating targets and the metrics organizations should disclose, as described in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Methodologies must be disclosed when the calculation of targets is not apparent, but this requirement is waived if stakeholders express no specific interest.",
      "A": "Organizations are only required to disclose methodologies if they pertain to short-term targets, as medium- and long-term targets are self-explanatory.",
      "B": "Methodologies used to calculate targets must always be disclosed, regardless of whether the target's calculation is apparent or aligned with anticipated regulatory requirements.",
      "C": "Disclosure of methodologies is optional unless the organization operates within a financial sector, where such disclosures are mandatory.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "63",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Implementation.pdf",
    "source_text": "Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Clima te-related Financial Disclosures 62 A. Introduction B. Recommendations C. Guidance for All Sectors D. Supplemental Guidance for the Financial Sector E. Supplemental Guidance for Non -Financial Groups F. Fundamental Principles for Effective Disclosure Appendices Metrics and Targets Disclose the metrics and targets used to assess and manage relevant climate -related risks and opportunities where such information is material. Recommended Disclosure c) Describe th e targets used by the organization to manage climate - related risks and opportunities and performance against targets. Guidance for All Sectors Organizations should describe their key climate -related targets such as those related to GHG emissions, water usa ge, energy usage, etc., consistent with the cross -industry, climate -related metric categories in Table A2.1 (p. 79), where relevant, and in line with anticip ated regulatory requirements or market constraints or other goals. Other goals may include efficiency or financial goals, financial loss tolerances, avoided GHG emissions through the entire product life cycle, or net revenue goals for products and services designed for a low-carbon economy. In describing their targets, organizations should consider including the following: ‒ whether the target is absolute or intensity based ; ‒ time frame s over which the target applies ; ‒ base year from which progress is measured ; and ‒ key performance indicators used to assess progress against targets. Organizations disclosing medium -term or long -term targets should also disclose associated interim targets in aggregate or by business line, where available. Where not apparen t, organizations should provide a description of the methodologies used to calculate targets and measures. The following sections provide a description of how each of the four key non -financial group s may be affected by climate -related issues along with a few examples of metrics that may be relevant to the group. The Task Force has also identified cross -industry, climate -related metric categories it believes are relevant for all organizations (Table A2.1 , p. 79). In addition, o rganizations in these groups should define metrics and targets that are tailored to their particular climate -related risks and opportunities. In determining the most relevant and u seful metrics, organizations are encouraged to engage with their key stakeholders, including investors, and review publicly available frameworks.119 119 Existing frameworks provide a range of metrics that an organization may find useful in disclosing various aspects of its climate -related risks and opportunities. See, for example , GHG Protocol, Global Reporting Initiative, ISO Standards, Sustainability Accounting Standards Board , Climate Disclosure Standards Board , World Resources Institute , World Business Council for Susta inable Development , CDP , and various industry -specific guidance.",
    "new_id": 516
  },
  {
    "id": 50134,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the implications of materiality assessments and the Task Force's recommendations regarding GHG emissions disclosures, as outlined in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The Task Force mandates absolute Scope 1 and Scope 2 GHG emissions disclosures without requiring a materiality assessment but leaves Scope 3 disclosures subject to materiality considerations.",
      "B": "Organizations are encouraged to assess materiality for all types of GHG emissions, including Scope 1, Scope 2, and Scope 3, before disclosing them.",
      "C": "Scope 3 GHG emissions must always be disclosed regardless of their materiality, as they represent indirect emissions across the value chain.",
      "D": "Materiality assessments apply uniformly to all recommendations, ensuring consistency in how organizations report climate-related financial risks.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "8",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Implementation.pdf",
    "source_text": "Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Clima te-related Financial Disclosures 7 A. Introduction B. Recommendations C. Guidance for All Sectors D. Supplemental Guidance for the Financial Sector E. Supplemental Guidance for Non -Financial Groups F. Fundamental Principles for Effective Disclosure Appendices The Task Force developed supplemental guidance to assist preparers in the financial sector and non- financial industries potentially most affected by climate change and the transition to a low-carbon economy (referred to as non -financial groups). Figure 2 shows the recommendations ( Governance, Strategy, Risk Management, and Metrics and Targets) and recommend ed disclosures ( a, b, c ) for which supplemental guidance was developed for the financial sector and four non -financial groups. In addition, the Task Force developed additional supporting material s to help preparers implement key components of the TCFD reco mmendations . Section A .5. Summary of Additional Supporting Materials provides more details. Figure 2 Supplemental Guidance for Financial Sector and Non -Financial Groups Governance Strategy Risk Management Metrics and Targets Industries and Groups a) b) a) b) c) a) b) c) a) b) c) Financial Banks Insurance Companies Asset Owners Asset Managers Non -Financial Energy Transportation Materials and Buildings Ag, Food, and Forest Products 3. Application of Recommendations a. Who should disclose? To promote more informed investing, lending, and insurance underwriting decisions, the Task Force recommends all financial and non -financial organizations with public debt or equ ity implement its recommendations. Because climate -related risks and opportunities are relevant for organizations across all sectors, the Task Force encourages all organizations to implement these recommendations. In ad dition, the Task Force believes that asset managers and asset owners, including public - and private -sector pension plans, endowments, and foundations, should implement its recommendations. b. Which recommendations involve an assessment of materiality? The disclosures related to the Strategy and Metrics and Targets recommendations involve an assessment of materiality , with the exception of Scope 1 and Scope 2 GHG emissions under the Metrics and Targets recommendation . The Task Force believes all organizatio ns should disclose absolute Scope 1 and Scope 2 GHG emissions independent of a materiality assessment . The disclosure of Scope 3 GHG emissions is subject to materiality ; however , the Task Force encourages organizations to disclose such emissions. c. Where should preparers disclose? Preparers of climate -related financial disclosures should provide such disclosures in their mainstream (i.e., public) annual financial filings.10 Certain organizations —those in the four non -financial groups that 10 Financial filings refer to the annual reporting packages in which organizations are required to deliver their audited financi al results under the corporate, compliance, or securities laws of the jurisdictions in which they operate.",
    "new_id": 517
  },
  {
    "id": 50209,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the relationship between an organization’s management of climate-related risks and its potential contingent liabilities, as implied by the text in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "B": "An organization's proactive approach to managing climate-related risks can mitigate but not entirely prevent contingent liabilities.",
      "A": "Effective management of climate-related risks eliminates the possibility of contingent liabilities due to evolving regulations.",
      "C": "Contingent liabilities arise exclusively from physical climate impacts, such as weather events, rather than regulatory or reputational factors.",
      "D": "The likelihood of contingent liabilities increases as laws and regulations evolve, regardless of how well an organization manages climate-related risks.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "79",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Implementation.pdf",
    "source_text": "Appendices 78 136 Contingent liabilities are liabilities that may be incurred depending on the outcome of an uncertain future event . Like lihood of loss is often described as probable, reasonably possible, or remote; ability to estimate loss is described as known, reasonably estimable, or not reasonably estimable. Table A 1.3 Examples of Potential Climate -Related Impacts by Financial Category (continued ) Category and Definition Climate -Related Implications56 Examples of Potential Impacts Impacts Rationale and Illustrative Metrics Assets : Tangible Land, equipment, facilities, reserves, cash, etc. Changes in the value of a n organization’s assets, or the acquisition or sale of assets, as a result of climate -related risks and opportunities . +/- Value of assets based on emissions, energy or water intensity; carbon price; demand - Write -offs/early retirement of existing assets due to high emissions, energy, or water intens ity - Physical damage or impairment of assets due to weather events and other acute or chronic physical climate effects Climate change, especially the transition to a low -carbon economy, may affect the value of a n organization’s assets (either positively o r negatively) depending on how the organization is positioned regarding emissions, energy, water, and land use. Example Metric s: • Value, and percent by value, of assets located in coastal or flood zones • Breakdown of assets by associated current or potential future emissions (MT CO 2e), water intensity, or energy intensity Assets : Intangible Brand, copyrights, goodwill Changes in a n organization ’s reputation as a result of perceptions about its management of climate -related risks and opportunities . +/- Brand value +/- Value of copyrights - Reduction or disruption in production capacity ( e.g., shutdowns, delayed planning approvals, interruptions to supply chain) - Impacts on workforce management (e.g., employee attraction and retention) How a n organization plans and invests in a transition to a low -carbon economy may positively or negatively affect perceptions about the organization and its reputation, which in turn may affect its future earning capacity, market valuation, employee relationships , and relationships with regulators and customers. Climate -related risks and opportunities also may positively or negatively affect the value of technology patents or copyrights. Liabilities Contingent liabilities136 The potential for liability or civil/criminal penalties for the organization’s climate - related activities . + Legal liability for climate -related risks + Compliance penalties As laws, regulations, and case law related to an organization’s preparedness for climate change evolves, the incident or probability of contingent liabilities arising for a n organization may increase . Example Metric: Amount reserved for pending legal actions Liabilities Current liabilities (<= 1 year) Changes in cost and level of current liabilities as a result of climate -related risks and opportunities . Drivers of climate changes, such as water usage, emissions, and land use, are expected to be the focus of regulations ( e.g., standards, emission limits, carbon prices), technology development, and market changes . These policy, market and technology changes may result in a significant shift in a n organization ’s revenues, cost of supply/materials/pro duction, and capital expenses. An organization’s demonstrated ability to manage these changes (positively or poorly) may affect: • Access to capital and debt markets • Equity price and risk premium on debt • Creditworthiness • Exposure to dive stment risk • Ability/flexibility in responding to climate -related risks and opportunities by being able to competitively tap financing markets Financing Long -term debt liabilities (> 1 year ) Changes in co st and level of long -term debt as a result of climate -related risks and opportunities . +/- Amount of debt +/- Amount of equity capital +/- Credit rating +/- Stock price +/- Debt interest rates Financing Equity capital Changes in the co st and level of equity capital as a result of climate -related risks and opportunities .",
    "new_id": 518
  },
  {
    "id": 50211,
    "question": "Which statement accurately captures the relationship between an organization’s strategy and its transition plan as implied by the text, as outlined in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "C": "A transition plan is a subset of an organization’s strategy, specifically addressing actions toward reducing GHG emissions in alignment with broader strategic goals.",
      "A": "An organization’s strategy is primarily concerned with short-term financial gains, while a transition plan focuses exclusively on long-term sustainability initiatives.",
      "B": "The strategy establishes the operational framework for day-to-day activities, whereas the transition plan dictates the overall purpose and scope of the organization.",
      "D": "A transition plan replaces the need for a comprehensive organizational strategy by focusing solely on adapting to a low-carbon economy.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "85",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Implementation.pdf",
    "source_text": "Appendices 84 A. Introduction B. Recommendations C. Guidance for All Sectors D. Supplemental Guidance for the Financial Sector E. Supplemental Guidance for Non -Financial Groups F. Fundamental Principles for Effective Disclosure Appendices SECTOR refers to a segment of companies performing similar business activities in an economy. A sector generally refers to a large segment of th e economy or grouping of business types, while “industry” is used to describe more specific groupings of companies within a sector. STRATEGY refers to a n organization’s desired future state . An organization’s strategy establishes a foundation against which it can monitor and measure its progress in reaching that desired state. Strategy formulation generally involves establishing the purpose and scope of the organization ’s activities and the nature of its businesses, taking into account the risks and opportu nities it faces and the environment in which it operates. TRANSITION PLAN refers to an aspect of an organization’s overall business strategy that lays out a set of targets and actions supporting its transition toward a low -carbon economy, including action s such as reducing its GHG emissions. VALUE CHAIN refers to the upstream and downstream life cycle of a product, process, or service, including material sourcing, production, consumption, and disposal/recycling. Upstream activities include operations that relate to the initial stages of producing a good or service ( e.g., material sourcing, material processing, supplier activities). Downstream activities include operations that relate to processing the materials into a finished product and de livering it to the end user ( e.g., transportation, distribution, and consumption). Abbreviations CO 2—Carbon dioxide PCAF —Partnership for Carbon Accounting Financials CO 2e —Carbon dioxide equivalent R&D —Research and development EEDI —Energy Efficiency Design Index R&DDD —Research, development, demonstration, and deployment EVIC —Enterprise Value Including Cash SASB —Sustainability Accounting Standards Board FSB—Financial Stability Board SBTi —Science Based Targets initiative G20—Group of 20 TCFD —Task Force on Climate -related Financial Disclosures GHG —Greenhouse gas USDE —U.S. Dollar Equivalent GMO —Genetically modified organism WACI —Weighted Average Carbon Intensity IEA—International Energy Agency WBCSD — World Business Council for Sustainable Development IPCC —Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change WRI —World Resources Institute MT—Metric ton",
    "new_id": 519
  },
  {
    "id": 50212,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why disclosing internal carbon prices is considered critical for assessing an organization's resilience to climate-related transition risks, as outlined in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "D": "It reveals whether an organization’s business model accounts for potential future policy responses to climate change.",
      "A": "It directly measures the financial exposure of assets vulnerable to physical climate risks.",
      "B": "It provides insight into how executive remuneration aligns with climate objectives.",
      "C": "It quantifies the proportion of revenue aligned with climate-related opportunities.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "81",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Implementation.pdf",
    "source_text": "Appendices 80 A. Introduction B. Recommendations C. Guidance for All Sectors D. Supplemental Guidance for the Financial Sector E. Supplemental Guidance for Non -Financial Groups F. Fundamental Principles for Effective Disclosure Appendices Table A2.1 Cross -Industry, Climate -Related Metric Categories (continued) Metric Category Example Unit of Measure140 Rationale for Inclusion Physical Risks Amount and extent of assets or business activities vulnerable to physical risks* Amount or percentage Disclosure of the amount or extent of an organization’s assets or business activities vulnerable to material climate -related physical risks allows users to better understand potential financial exposure regarding such issues as impairment or stranding of assets, effects on the value of assets and liabilities, and cost of business interruptions. Climate -Related Opportunities Proportion of revenue, assets, or other business activities aligned with climate -related opportunities Amount or percentage Disclosure of the proportion of revenue, assets, or business activities aligned with climate -related opportunities provides insight into the position of organizations relative to their peers and allows users to understand likely transition pathways and potential changes in revenue and profitability over time. Capital Deployment Amount of capital expenditure, financing, or investment deployed toward climate - related risks and opportunities Reporting currency Capital investment disclosure by non -financial organizations and financing by financial organizations gives an indication of the extent to whic h long -term enterprise value might be affected. Internal Carbon Prices Price on each ton of GHG emissions used internally by an organization Price in reporting currency, per MT of CO 2e Internal carbon prices provide users with an understanding of the reas onableness of an organization’s risk and opportunity assessment and strategy resilience. The disclosure of internal carbon prices can help users identify which organizations have business models that are vulnerable to future policy responses to climate cha nge and which are adapting their business models to ensure resilience to transition risks. Remuneration Proportion of executive management remuneration linked to climate considerations** Percentage, weighting, description, or amount in reporting currency Remuneration policies are important incentives for achieving an organization’s goals and objectives and may provide insight on an organization’s governance, oversight, and accountability for managing climate -related issues. 140 The Task Force has noted the most common unit of measure. There are multiple ways to measure and disclose metrics, and different jurisdictions or industries may follow different practices. Allowing for differences in units of measure can help provide organizations with flexibility without significantly impacting comparability as long as units are clearly stated.",
    "new_id": 520
  },
  {
    "id": 50213,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why climate-related opportunities and risks are described as varying depending on specific organizational contexts, according to the implicit reasoning in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Because the nature of greenhouse gas emissions inherently differs across industries, regions, and markets.",
      "B": "Because organizations must always prioritize physical risks over transition risks when developing strategies.",
      "C": "Because resource efficiency and cost savings are universally applicable benefits that apply equally to all organizations.",
      "D": "Because the impacts of climate change create uniformly distributed effects across all sectors and geographies.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "83",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Implementation.pdf",
    "source_text": "Appendices 82 A. Introduction B. Recommendations C. Guidance for All Sectors D. Supplemental Guidance for the Financial Sector E. Supplemental Guidance for Non -Financial Groups F. Fundamental Principles for Effective Disclosure Appendices Appendix 3: Glossary and Abbreviat ions Glossary BOARD OF DIRECTORS ( or BOARD) refers to a body of elected or appointed members who jointly oversee the activities of a company or organization. Some countries use a two -tiered system where “board” refers to the “supervisory board” while “key executives” refers to the “management board.”142 CARBON FOOTPRINTING refers to the calculation of the total greenhouse gas emissions caused by an individual, event, organization, service, or product expressed as a carbon dioxide equivalent. CLIMATE -RELATED OPPORTUNITY refers to t he potential positive impacts related to climate chang e on an organization. Efforts to mitigate and adapt to climate change can produce opportunities for organizations, such as through resource efficiency and cost savings, the adoption and utilization of low-emission energy sources, the development of new pro ducts and services, and building resilience along the supply chain. Climate -related opportunities will vary depending on the region, market, and industry in which an organization operates. CLIMATE -RELATED RISK refers to the potential negative impacts of cl imate change on an organization. Physical risks emanating from climate change can be event -driven (acute) such as increased severity of extreme weather events ( e.g., cyclones, droughts, floods, and fires). They can also relate to longer -term shifts (chroni c) in precipitation and temperature and increased variability in weather patterns ( e.g., sea level rise). Climate -related risks can also be associated with the transition to a lower -carbon global economy, the most common of which relate to policy and legal actions, technology changes, market responses, and reputational considerations. ENTERPRISE VALUE INCLUDING CASH refers to the sum of the market capitalization of ordinary shares at fiscal year -end, the market capitalization of preferred shares at fiscal y ear-end, and the book values of total debt and minorities’ interests. No deductions of cash or cash equivalents are made to avoid the possibility of negative enterprise values143 FINANCIAL FILINGS refer to the annual reporting packages in which organization s are required to deliver their audited financial results under the corporate, compliance , or securities laws of the jurisdictions in which they operate. While reporting requirements differ internationally, financial filings generally contain financial sta tements and other information such as governance statements and management commentary.144 FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE refers to an organization’s income and expenses as reflected on its income and cashflow statements (actual) or potential income and expenses under different climate -related scenarios. FINANCIAL PLANNING refers to an organization’s consideration of how it will achieve and fund its objectives and strategic goals. The process of financial planning allows organizations to assess future financial positions and determine how resources can be utilized in pursuit of short - and long -term objectives. As part of financial planning, organizations often create “financial plans” that outline the specific actions, assets, and resources (including cap ital) necessary to achieve these objectives over a 1–5 year period. However, financial planning is broader than the development of a financial plan as it includes long -term capital allocation and other considerations that may extend beyond the typical 3–5 year financial plan ( e.g., investment, research and development, manufacturing, and markets). 142 OECD , G20/OECD Principles of Corporate Governance , 2015 . 143 EU Technical Expert Group on Sustainable Finance, Financing a Sustainable European Economy: Report on Benchmarks: Handbook of Climate Transition Benchmarks, Paris Aligned Benchmark, and Benchmarks’ ESG Disclosure , 2019. 144 Based on Climate Disclosure Standards Board, CDSB Framework for Reporting Environm ental and Climate Change Information , December 2019.",
    "new_id": 521
  },
  {
    "id": 50214,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why the Task Force developed supplemental guidance specifically for non-financial groups, and how this guidance interacts with the broader framework provided in the document, as outlined in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "B": "The supplemental guidance for non-financial groups complements the general guidance by addressing specific transition and physical risks tied to greenhouse gas emissions, energy, or water dependencies, which are more pronounced in these industries.",
      "A": "The supplemental guidance was created to replace the general guidance for all sectors, as non-financial industries face unique risks that cannot be addressed through universal recommendations.",
      "C": "Non-financial groups were given supplemental guidance because they are less likely to experience climate-related financial impacts, requiring tailored advice to encourage their participation in disclosures.",
      "D": "The Task Force prioritized non-financial groups due to their dominance in global markets, ensuring that their disclosures would overshadow those from the financial sector.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "56-57",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Implementation.pdf",
    "source_text": "Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Clima te-related Financial Disclosures 55 A. Introduction B. Recommendations C. Guidance for All Sectors D. Supplemental Guidance for the Financial Sector E. Supplemental Guidance for Non -Financial Groups F. Fundamental Principles for Effective Disclosure Appendices E. Supplemental Guidance for Non-Financial Groups\n\n[Page 57]\nImplementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Clima te-related Financial Disclosures 56 A. Introduction B. Recommendations C. Guidance for All Sectors D. Supplemental Guidance for the Financial Sector E. Supplemental Guidance for Non -Financial Groups F. Fundamental Principles for Effective Disclosure Appendices E. Supplemental Guidance for Non-Financial Groups While every industry could experience potential financial impacts from climate -related risks and opportunities, the Task Force developed supplemental guidance for non-financial industries (and their related s upply and distribution chains) more likely to be financially impacted than others due to their exposure to certain transition and physical risks around greenhouse gas ( GHG ) emissions, energy, or water dependencies associated with th eir operations and products.102 These non -financial industries are grouped into four key areas (referred to as non -financial groups) : Energy; Transportation; Materials and Buil dings; and Agriculture, Food, and Forest Products.103 The industries within each group are provided in Table 4.104 Table 4 Industries Associated with the Four Non -Financial Groups Energy Transportation Materials and Buildings Agriculture, Food, and Forest Products − Oil and Gas − Coal − Electric Utilities − Air Freight − Passenger Air Transportation − Maritime Transportation − Rail Transportation − Trucking Services − Automobiles and Components − Metals and Mining − Chemicals − Construction Materials − Capital Goods − Real Estate Management and Development − Beverages − Agriculture − Packaged Food and Meats − Paper and Forest Products Supplemental guidance for the non -financial groups is provided for select recommended disclosures related to strategy and metrics and targets , as shown in Figure 8 . Figure 8 Supplemental Guidance for Non -Financial Groups Governance Strategy Risk Management Metrics and Targets Groups a) b) a) b) c) a) b) c) a) b) c) Energy Transportation Materials and Buildings Ag, Food, and Forest Products The Task Force developed supplemental guidance for the non-financial groups to provide such organizations further background and information to consider when developing disclosure s consistent with the Task Force’s recommendations. This supplemental guidance should be read and applied in conjunction with the guidance for all sectors. 102 SASB, SASB Climate Risk Technical Bulletin #: TB001 -10182016 , October 2016. 103 These four groups and their associated i ndustries are intended to be indicative of the economic activities associated with these industries rather than definitive industry categories. 104 Box 2 of the 2017 report provides more details on the selection of these four groups.",
    "new_id": 522
  },
  {
    "id": 50215,
    "question": "Which statement accurately captures the relationship between materiality assessments and the Task Force's recommendations on climate-related financial disclosures, as described in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "C": "While governance and risk management disclosures are recommended for inclusion in financial filings irrespective of materiality, strategy and metrics-related disclosures should only be included if deemed material.",
      "A": "The Task Force mandates that all climate-related disclosures, regardless of materiality, must be included in annual financial filings to ensure comprehensive reporting.",
      "B": "Organizations are encouraged to exclude governance and risk management disclosures from financial filings unless they pass a materiality assessment, as these elements are considered less critical by investors.",
      "D": "Materiality assessments are irrelevant to the Task Force’s framework, as climate-related risks are inherently non-diversifiable and thus require universal disclosure standards across all sectors.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "14-15",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Implementation.pdf",
    "source_text": "Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Clima te-related Financial Disclosures 13 A. Introduction B. Recommendations C. Guidance for All Sectors D. Supplemental Guidance for the Financial Sector E. Supplemental Guidance for Non -Financial Groups F. Fundamental Principles for Effective Disclosure Appendices B. Recommen dations\n\n[Page 15]\nImplementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Clima te-related Financial Disclosures 14 A. Introduction B. Recommendations C. Guidance for All Sectors D. Supplemental Guidance for the Financial Sector E. Supplemental Guidance for Non -Financial Groups F. Fundamental Principles for Effective Disclosure Appendices B. Recommendations The Task Force ’s recommendations are structured around four thematic areas that are core elements of how organizations operate —governance, strategy, risk management, and metrics and target s (Figure 5). The four overarching recommendations are supported by key climat e-related financial disclosures —referred to as recommended disclosures —that build out the framework with information that will help investor s and others understan d how reporting organizations assess climate -related issues (Figure 6, p. 15). The Task Force recommends that organizations provide climate -related financial disclosures in their mainstream (i.e., public) annu al financial filings and recognizes that most information included in financial filings is subject to a materiality assessment. However, because climate -related risk is a non - diversifiable risk that affects nearly all industries, many investors believe it requires special attention. For example, in assessing organizations’ financial and operating results, many investors want insight into the governance and risk management context in which such results are achieved. The Task Force believes disclosures relate d to its Governance and Risk Management recommendations directly address this need for context and should be included in financial filings. For disclosures related to the Strategy and Metrics and Targets recommendations, the Task Force believes organizati ons should provide such information in annual financial filings when the information is deemed material. Certain organizations —those in the four non -financial groups that have more than one billion U.S. dollar equivalent (USDE) in annual revenue —should consider disclos ing such information in other reports when the information is not deemed material and not included in financial filings.22 Because these organizations are more likely than others to be financially impacted over time, investors are interested in monitoring how these organizations’ strategies evolve. Importantly, t he recommendations were developed to apply broadly across sectors and jurisdictions and should not be seen as superseding national disclosure requirements. Organizati ons should make financial disclosures in accordance with their na tional disclosure requirements for financial filings . 22 The Ta sk Force chose a one billion USDE annual revenue threshold because it captures organiz ations responsible for over 90% of Scope 1 and 2 GHG emissions in the industries represented by the four non -financial groups (about 2,250 organizations out of roughly 15,000). Figure 5 Core Elements of Recommended Climate -Related Financial Disclosures Governance Strategy Risk Management Metrics and Targets Governance The organization’s governance around climate -related risks and opportunities Strategy The actual and potential impacts of climate -related risks and opportunities on the organization’s businesses, strategy, and financial planning Risk Management The processes used by the organization to identi fy, assess, and manage climate -related risks Metrics and Targets The metrics and targets used to assess and manage relevant climate -related risks and opportunities",
    "new_id": 523
  },
  {
    "id": 50216,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the primary purpose of using scenario analysis as described in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "D": "To explore a range of assumptions and uncertainties to inform strategic planning regarding climate risks and opportunities.",
      "A": "To predict precise future financial outcomes under specific climate-related conditions.",
      "B": "To retroactively assess the effectiveness of an organization's past responses to climate risks.",
      "C": "To replace traditional risk management processes with forward-looking analytical tools.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "13-14",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Implementation.pdf",
    "source_text": "Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Clima te-related Financial Disclosures 12 A. Introduction B. Recommendations C. Guidance for All Sectors D. Supplemental Guidance for the Financial Sector E. Supplemental Guidance for Non -Financial Groups F. Fundamental Principles for Effective Disclosure Appendices advantage of climate -related opportunities may establish an internal target for revenues associated with sales of the new products to ga uge effectiveness. d. Linking It All Together Determining the financial impacts of climate -related risks and opportunities generally involves an organization assessing (1) its exposures, (2) its planned responses, and (3) its response effectiveness. Analys es should focus on the following: ▪ the exposure and potential financial impact if no action is undertaken and ▪ the financial implications of managing risks and maximizing opportunities in the context of an organization’s overall business strategy and enviro nment. Forward -looking analys es are especially important, but challenging. E fforts to mitigate and adapt to climate change a re without historical precedent, and many aspects about the timing and magnitude of climate change in specific contexts are uncerta in. For these reasons, the Task Force believes scenario analysis is an important tool for organizations to use in their strategic planning processes. Scenario analysis and other strategic planning tools can help organizations consider a broader range of assumptions, uncertainties, and potential future states when assessing financial implications of climate change. 5. Summary of Additional Supporting Materials Since the Task Force issued its final recommendations in June 2017, it has monitored climate -related financial disclosure practices and sought to identify and address implementation challenges raised by preparers. In this regard, the Task Force has published guidance on specific topics intended to help address identified challenges and bet ter support implementation, as described below. The Use of Scenario Analysis in Disclosure of Climate -Related Risks and Opportunities (2017) provides information on types of climate -related scenario s, the application of scenario analysis, and the key challenges in implementing scenario analysis to support an organization’s disclosure of the resilience of its strategy, taking into consideration different climate -related scenarios .18 Guidance on Scenario Analysis for Non -Financial Companies (2020) provides practical, process - oriented ways for organizations to use climate -related scenario a nalysis and ideas for disclosing the resilience of their strategies under different climate -related scenarios.19 Guidance on Risk Management Integration and Disclosure (2020) describes considerations for organizations interested in integrating climate -related risks into their existing risk management processes and disclosing information on their risk management processes in alig nment with the Task Force’s recommendations.20 Guidance on Metrics, Targets, and Transition Plans (2021 ) describes recent developments around climate -related metrics and users’ increasing focus on information describing organizations’ plans for transitioning to a low-carbon economy. The guidance also describes a set of cross -industry, climate - related metric categories (described in Appendix 2: Cross -Industry, Climate -Related Metric Categories ) that the Task Force believes are applicable to all organizations.21 18 TCFD, The Use of Scenario Analysis in Disclosure of Climate -Related Risks and Opportunities , June 29, 2017. 19 TCFD, Guidance on Scenario Analysis for Non -Financial Companies , October 29, 2020. 20 TCFD, Guidanc e on Risk Management Integration and Disclosure , October 29, 2020. 21 TCFD, Guidance on Metrics, Targets, and Transition Plans , October 14, 2021.\n\n[Page 14]\nImplementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Clima te-related Financial Disclosures 13 A. Introduction B. Recommendations C. Guidance for All Sectors D. Supplemental Guidance for the Financial Sector E. Supplemental Guidance for Non -Financial Groups F. Fundamental Principles for Effective Disclosure Appendices B. Recommen dations",
    "new_id": 524
  },
  {
    "id": 50217,
    "question": "Which statement accurately captures the Task Force's rationale for highlighting specific cross-industry metric categories while acknowledging variability in their applicability and disclosure timelines, as described in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The highlighted metrics serve as critical proxies for assessing climate risks and opportunities but allow flexibility due to differing organizational contexts and data maturity levels.",
      "B": "The highlighted metrics are universally mandatory across all sectors, ensuring uniformity in climate-related financial disclosures.",
      "C": "The metrics were newly introduced in 2021 to address gaps in earlier recommendations, requiring immediate adoption by all organizations.",
      "D": "The Task Force prioritizes these metrics solely for asset owners, given the complexity of measuring investment income impacts.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "80",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Implementation.pdf",
    "source_text": "Appendices 79 A. Introduction B. Recommendations C. Guidance for All Sectors D. Supplemental Guidance for the Financial Sector E. Supplemental Guidance for Non -Financial Groups F. Fundamental Principles for Effective Disclosure Appendices Appendix 2: Cross -Industry , Climate -Related Metric Categories As part of the Task Force’s work to monitor and promote organizations’ adoption of its recommendations , it has periodically published guidance to support preparers in their implementation efforts (see Section A .5. Summary of Additional Supporting Materials ). In October 2021, the Task Force published Guidance on Metrics, Targets, and Transition Plans , which includes seven metric categories (Table A2.1 ) the Task Force believes are generally applicable to all organizations .137 Importantly, the seven metric categories are not additions to the Metrics and Targets recommendation as they relate to metrics that have been part of the Task Force’s guidance for all sectors since the release of its 2017 report. The Task Force is highlighting these specific metric categories because they are important proxies for measuring climate -related risks and opportun ities, form the basis for estimating climate -related financial impact, and are important inputs into investment, lending, and insurance underwriting decisions. While these metric categories are relevant across organizations, they may be operationalized dif ferently to reflect industry -specific risks and opportunities. More information regarding the cross -industry, climate -related metric categories can be found in the Guidance on Metrics, Targets, and Transition Plans . While some organizations already disclose metrics consistent with the cross -industry, climate -related metric categories, the Task Force recognizes others —especially those in the early stages of d isclosing climate -related financial information —may need time to adjust internal processes before disclosing such information. In addition, some of the metric categories may be less applicable to certain organizations. For example, data and methodologies f or certain metrics for asset owners ( e.g., impact of climate change on investment income) are in early stages of development. In such cases, the Task Force recognizes organizations will need time before such metrics are disclosed to their stakeholders. Table A2.1 Cross -Industry, Climate -Related Metric Categories Metric Category Example Unit of Measure138 Rationale for Inclusion GHG Emissions Absolute Scope 1, Scope 2, and Scope 3; emissions intensity139 MT of CO 2e Disclosure of GHG emissions is crucial for users to understand an organization’s exposure to climate -related risks and opportunities. Disclosure of both absolute emissions across an organization’s value chain and relevant emissions intensity provides insig ht into how a given organization may be affected by policy, regulatory, market, and technology responses to limit climate change. Transition Risks Amount and extent of assets or business activities vulnerable to transition risks* Amount or percentage Disclosure of the amount and extent of an organization’s assets or business activities vulnerable to climate -related transition risks allows users to better understand potential financial exposure regarding such issues as possible impairment or stranding of assets, effects on the value of assets and liabilities, and changes in demand for products or services. 137 TCFD, Guidance on Metrics, Targets, and Transition Plans , October 14, 2021. 138 The Task Force has noted the most common unit of measure. There are multiple ways to measure and disclose metrics, and different jurisdictions or industr ies may follow different practices. Allowing for differences in units of measure can help provide organizations with flexibility without significantly impacting comparability as long as units are clearly stated. 139 The Task Force believes Scope 3 GHG emissions are an important metric reflecting an organization’s exposure to climate -related risks and opportunities and recognizes the dat a and methodological challenges associated with calculating such emissions. The Task Force encourages organizations to refer to the GHG Protocol’s The Corporate Value Chain (Scope 3) Accounting and Reporting Standard for guidance on reportin g these emissions.",
    "new_id": 525
  },
  {
    "id": 50218,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the nuanced relationship between asset managers and their clients regarding climate-related risks and opportunities, as outlined in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Guidance on Metrics, Targets, and Transition Plans?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Clients bear the majority of climate-related risks and opportunities, but asset managers must provide detailed disclosures to help clients understand these exposures within their portfolios.",
      "A": "Asset managers are solely responsible for managing climate-related risks because they directly control investment decisions.",
      "C": "Asset managers’ primary obligation is to mitigate climate-related risks at the enterprise level, ensuring that all client investments align with a low-carbon economy.",
      "D": "Clients rely exclusively on asset managers to determine which climate-related risks and opportunities are material to their investment strategies.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "45",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Implementation.pdf",
    "source_text": "Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Clima te-related Financial Disclosures 44 A. Introduction B. Recommendations C. Guidance for All Sectors D. Supplemental Guidance for the Financial Sector E. Supplemental Guidance for Non -Financial Groups F. Fundamental Principles for Effective Disclosure Appendices 4. Asset Managers Asset managers , also known as investment managers, are hired by clients to invest assets on their behalf. In this role , asset managers act as fiduciaries . Asset managers invest within the guidelines specified by their clients for a given mandate set out in an investment management agreement or product specification. Importantly, the investment results, whether positive or negative, belong to the client .83 Asset managers’ clients, as owners of the underlying assets, bear the major portion of the potential transition and physical risks to which their investments are exposed. Similarly, asset managers’ clients will benefit from the potential returns on the investment opportunities associated w ith the transition to a low-carbon economy . The relevance of climate -related risks and opportunities to an asset manager and its asset owner clients will depend on a number of variables , including its investment styles and objectives, the asset classes in which it invests, the investment mandates , as well as other factors . In the case where an asset manager is a public company, it has two distinct audiences for its climate - related financial disclosures . The first audience is its shareholders, who need to u nderstand enterprise -level risks and opportunities and how these are managed. The s econd is its clients, for whom product -, investment strategy -, or client -specific disclosures are more relevant. Asset managers’ clients rely on reporting from asset manage rs to understand how climate -related risks and opportunities are managed within each of their portfolios. The guidance provided below addresses considerations for asset managers wh en reporting to their clients. 83 Introductory language sourced from Blackrock, “ BlackRock Worldwid e Leader in Asset and Risk Management ,” February 2019. Governance Disclose the organization’s governance around climate -related risks and opportunities. Recommended Disclosure a) Describe the board’s oversight of climate -related risks and opportunities. Guidance for All Sectors In describing the board’s oversight of climate -related issues, organizations should consider including a discussion of the following: ‒ processes and frequency by which the board and/or board committees ( e.g., audit, risk, or other committees) are informed about climate -related issues ; ‒ whether the board and/or board committees consider climate -related issues when reviewing and guiding strategy, major plans of action, risk management policies, annual budgets, and business plans as well as setting the organization’s performance objectives, monitoring implementation and performance, and overseeing major capital expenditures, acquisitions , and divestitures ; and ‒ how the board monitors and oversees progress against go als and targets for addressing climate -related issues. Recommended Disclosure b) Describe management’s role in assessing and managing climate - related risks and opportunities. Guidance for All Sectors In describing management’s role related to the assessment and management of climate - related issues, organizations should consider including the following information: ‒ whether the organization has assigned climate -related responsibilities to management -level positions or committees; and, if so, whether such management positions or committees report to the board or a committee of the board and whether those responsibilities include assessing and/or managing climate -related issues ; ‒ a description of the associated organizational structure(s) ; ‒ processes by which management is informed about climate -related issues, and ‒ how management (through specific positions and/or management committees) monitors climate -related issues.",
    "new_id": 526
  },
  {
    "id": 50219,
    "question": "Which scenario best illustrates a compounded financial impact stemming from both transition risks and physical risks, as described in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "C": "A company faces increased operating costs due to higher compliance obligations while simultaneously experiencing reduced revenue from supply chain interruptions caused by extreme weather events.",
      "A": "A firm writes off assets because of policy changes but benefits from re-pricing fossil fuel reserves due to shifting market signals.",
      "B": "An organization reduces its workforce due to stigmatization of its sector, while also encountering abrupt shifts in energy costs unrelated to climate-related factors.",
      "D": "A business incurs R&D expenditures for new technologies while facing delayed planning approvals solely due to reputational concerns.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "76",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Implementation.pdf",
    "source_text": "Appendices 75 A. Introduction B. Recommendations C. Guidance for All Sectors D. Supplemental Guidance for the Financial Sector E. Supplemental Guidance for Non -Financial Groups F. Fundamental Principles for Effective Disclosure Appendices Table A 1.1 Examples of Climate -Related Risks and Potential Financial Impacts 133 The sub -category risks described under each major category are not mutually exclusive, and some overlap exists. Type Climat e-Related Risks133 Potential Financial Impacts Transition Risks Policy and Legal ‒ Increased pricing of GHG emissions ‒ Enhanced emissions -reporting obligations ‒ Mandates on and regulation of existing products and services ‒ Exposure to litigation ‒ Increased operating costs ( e.g., higher compliance costs , increased insurance premiums) ‒ Write -offs, asset impairment, and early retirement of existing assets due to policy change s ‒ Increased costs and/or r educed demand for products and services resulting from fines and judgment s Technology ‒ Substitution of existing products and services with lower emissions options ‒ Unsuccessful investment in new technologies ‒ Costs to transition to lower emissions technology ‒ Write -offs and early retirement of existing assets ‒ Reduced demand for products and services ‒ Research and development (R&D) expenditures in new and alternative technologies ‒ Capital investments in technology development ‒ Costs to adopt/deploy new practices and processes Market ‒ Changing customer behavior ‒ Uncertainty in market signals ‒ Increased cost of raw materials ‒ Reduced demand for good s and services due to shift in consumer preferences ‒ Increased production costs due to changing input prices (e.g., energy, water) and output requirements (e.g., waste treatment) ‒ Abrupt and unex pected shifts in energy costs ‒ Chang e in revenue mix and sources , resulting in decreased revenues ‒ Re-pricing of assets (e.g., fossil fuel reserves, land valuations, securities valuations) Reputation ‒ Shift s in consumer preferences ‒ Stigmatization of sector ‒ Increased stakeholder concern or negative stakeholder feedback ‒ Reduced revenue from decreased demand for goods/services ‒ Reduced revenue from decreased production capacity (e.g., delayed planning approvals, supply chain interruptions) ‒ Reduced revenue from negative i mpacts on workforce management and planning ( e.g., employee attraction and retention) ‒ Reduction in capital availability Physical Risks Acute ‒ Reduced revenue from decreased production capacity (e.g., transport difficulties, supply chain interruptions) ‒ Reduced revenue and higher costs from negative impacts on workforce ( e.g., health, safety, absenteeism) ‒ Write -offs and early retirement of existing assets (e.g., damage to property and assets in “high -risk” locations) ‒ Increased operating costs ( e.g., inadequate water supply for hydroelectric plants or to cool nuclear and fossil fuel plants) ‒ Increased capital costs ( e.g., damage to facilities) ‒ Reduced revenues from lower sales/output ‒ Increased insurance p remiums and potential for reduced availability of insurance on assets in “high -risk” locations ‒ Increased severity of extreme weather events such as cyclones and floods Chronic ‒ Changes in precipitation patterns and extreme variability in weather patterns ‒ Rising mean temperatures ‒ Risin g sea level s",
    "new_id": 527
  },
  {
    "id": 50220,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between an organization's financial planning process and its climate-related disclosures, as outlined in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Guidance on Metrics, Targets, and Transition Plans?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Climate-related issues serve as one input into the financial planning process, which should include prioritization of risks and opportunities and may involve scenario analysis to enhance resilience.",
      "A": "Organizations must exclusively rely on quantitative data to describe how climate-related issues influence their financial planning, as qualitative assessments are considered insufficient.",
      "B": "An organization’s financial planning process is deemed complete only when it incorporates specific activities aimed at reducing GHG emissions in all operational areas.",
      "C": "The impact of climate-related risks and opportunities on financial performance is optional to disclose unless explicitly requested by regulatory bodies or investors.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "59",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Implementation.pdf",
    "source_text": "Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Clima te-related Financial Disclosures 58 A. Introduction B. Recommendations C. Guidance for All Sectors D. Supplemental Guidance for the Financial Sector E. Supplemental Guidance for Non -Financial Groups F. Fundamental Principles for Effective Disclosure Appendices Strategy Disclose the actual and potential impacts of climate -related risks and opportunities on the organization’s businesses, s trategy, and financial planning where such information is material. financial planning. ‒ Investment in research and development ‒ Operations (including types of operations and location of facilities) ‒ Acquisitions or divestments ‒ Access to capital Organizations should describe how climate -related issues serve as an input to their financial planning process, the time period(s) used, and how these risks and opportunities are prioritized. Organizations’ disclosures should reflect a holistic picture of the interdependencies among the factors that affect their ability to create value over time. Organizations should describe the impact of climate -related issues on their financial performance ( e.g., revenues, costs) and financial position ( e.g., assets, l iabilities).105 If climate -related scenarios were used to inform the organization’s strategy and financial planning, such scenarios should be described. Organizations that have made GHG emissions reduction commitments, operate in jurisdictions that have mad e such commitments , or have agreed to meet investor expectations regarding GHG emissions reductions should describe their plans for transitioning to a low -carbon economy, which could include GHG emissions targets and specific activities intended to reduce GHG emissions in their operations and value chain or to otherwise support the transition.106 Supplemental Guidance for Non -Financial Groups Organizations should consider discussing how climate -related risks and opportunities are integrated into their (1) current decision -making and (2) strategy formulation, including planning assumptions and objectives around climate change mitigation, adaptation , or opportunities such as: ‒ Research and development (R&D) and adoption of new technology. ‒ Existing a nd committed future activities such as investments, restructuring, write - downs, or impairment of assets. ‒ Critical planning assumptions around legacy assets, for example, strategies to lower carbon -, energy -, and/or water -intensive operations. ‒ How GHG emiss ions, energy, and water and other physical risk exposure s, if applicable, are considered in capital planning and allocation; this could include a discussion of major acquisitions and divestments, joint -ventures, and investments in technology, innovation, a nd new business areas in light of changing climate - related risks and opportunities. ‒ The organization’s flexibility in positioning/repositioning capital to address emerging climate -related risks and opportunities. Recommended Disclosure c) Describe the resilience of the organization’s strategy, taking into consideration different climate - related scenarios, Guidance for All Sectors Organizations should describe how resilient their strategies are to climate -related risks and opportunities, taking into consideration a transition to a low -carbon economy consistent with a 2°C or lower scenario and, where relevant to the organization, scen arios consistent with increased physical climate -related risks.107 Organizations should consider discussing: ‒ where they believe their strategies may be affected by climate -related risks and opportunities; 105 These impacts may be described in qualitative, quantitative, or a combination of both qualitative and quantitative terms. The Task Force encourages organizations to include qua ntitative information, where data and methodologies allow. 106 Organizations may agree to meet investor expectations regarding GHG emissions reductions for various reasons, including concerns about access to or the cost of capital if they fail to do so . 107 In interpreting the phrase “2 °C or lower,” organizations should consider aligning their scenario analysis with Article Two of the 2015 Paris Agreement which commits parties to “holding the increasing in the global average temperature to well below 2 °C above pre -industrial levels and pursuing efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5 °C above pre -industrial levels.”",
    "new_id": 528
  },
  {
    "id": 50221,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the implicit relationship between an organization’s GHG emissions reduction commitments and its strategic resilience under climate-related scenarios, as outlined in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Commitments to reduce GHG emissions may influence an organization’s strategic resilience by prompting consideration of low-carbon transitions and associated risks within specific scenarios.",
      "B": "Organizations with GHG emissions reduction commitments are required to align all financial planning exclusively with 1.5°C scenarios, as stated in the Paris Agreement.",
      "C": "An organization’s GHG emissions reduction plans inherently guarantee its strategic resilience against both transition and physical climate-related risks.",
      "D": "The inclusion of GHG emissions targets is primarily a regulatory formality and does not affect how organizations assess or address climate-related risks.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "28",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Implementation.pdf",
    "source_text": "Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Clima te-related Financial Disclosures 27 A. Introduction B. Recommendations C. Guidance for All Sectors D. Supplemental Guidance for the Financial Sector E. Supplemental Guidance for Non -Financial Groups F. Fundamental Principles for Effective Disclosure Appendices Strategy Disclose the actual and potential impacts of climate -related risks and opportunities on the organization’s businesses, s trategy, and financial planning where such information is material. Organizations that have made GHG emissions reduction commitments, operate in jurisdictions that have made such commitments , or have agreed to meet investor expectations regarding GHG emissions reductions should describe their plans for transitioning to a low -carbon economy, which could include GHG emissions targets and specific activities intended to reduce GHG emissions in their operations and value chain or to otherwise support the transition .39 Recommended Disclosure c) Describe the resilience of the organization’s strategy, taking into consideration different climate - related scenarios, including a 2°C or lower scenario. Guidance for All Sectors Organizations should describe how resilient their strategies are to climate -related risks and opportunities, taking into consideration a transition to a low -carbon economy consistent with a 2°C or lower scenario and, where relevant to the organization, scen arios consistent with increased physical climate -related risks.40 Organizations should consider discussing: ‒ where they believe their strategies may be affected by climate -related risks and opportunities; ‒ how their strategies might change to address such potential risks and opportunities; ‒ the potential impact of climate -related issues on financial performance (e.g., revenues, costs) and financial position ( e.g., assets, liabilities);41 and ‒ the climate -related scenarios and asso ciated time horizon(s) considered. Refer to Section D in the Task Force’s report for information on applying scenarios to forward -looking analysis. Risk Management Disclose how the organization identifies, assesses, and manages climate -related risks. Recommended Disclosure a) Describe the organization’s processes for identifying and assessing climate - related risks. Guidance for All Sectors Organizations should describe their risk management processes for identifying and assessing climate -related risks. An important aspect of this description is how organizations determine the relative significance of climate -related risks in relation to othe r risks. Organizations should describe whether they consider existing and emerging regulatory requirements related to climate change ( e.g., limits on emissions) as well as other relevant factors considered. Organizations should also consider disclosing th e following: ‒ processes for assessing the potential size and scope of identified climate -related risks and ‒ definitions of risk terminology used or references to existing risk classification frameworks used. Supplemental Guidance for Banks Banks should consider characterizing their climate -related risks in the context of traditional banking industry risk categories such as credit risk, market risk, liquidity risk, and operational risk. 39 Organizations may agree to meet inve stor expectations regarding GHG emissions reductions for various reasons, including concerns about access to or the cost of capital if they fail to do so . 40 In interpreting the phrase “2 °C or lower,” organizations should consider aligning their scenario a nalysis with Article Two of the 2015 Paris Agreement which commits parties to “holding the increasing in the global average temperature to well below 2 °C above pre -industrial levels and pursuing efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5 °C above pre -industrial levels.” 41 These impacts may be described in qualitative, quantitative, or a combination of both qualitative and quantitative terms. The Task Force encourages organizations to include quantitative information, where data and methodologies allow.",
    "new_id": 529
  },
  {
    "id": 50222,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the reason why financial organizations may face unique challenges in disclosing climate-related risks, and how they are advised to address these challenges, as described in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Challenges such as portfolio aggregation and third-party data sourcing make quantifying exposure to climate risks difficult; therefore, financial organizations are encouraged to provide both qualitative and quantitative information where available.",
      "A": "Financial organizations are exempt from disclosing Scope 3 GHG emissions due to insufficient data methodologies, and thus need only focus on qualitative descriptions of risks.",
      "C": "The complexity of portfolio aggregation and data sourcing forces financial organizations to rely solely on quantitative disclosures, even when such metrics are underdeveloped.",
      "D": "Financial organizations must prioritize remuneration disclosures over climate risk assessments because executive compensation frameworks are more advanced than risk measurement tools.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "82",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Implementation.pdf",
    "source_text": "Appendices 81 A. Introduction B. Recommendations C. Guidance for All Sectors D. Supplemental Guidance for the Financial Sector E. Supplemental Guidance for Non -Financial Groups F. Fundamental Principles for Effective Disclosure Appendices Table A2.1 Cross -Industry, Climate -Related Metric Categories (continued) Metric Category Example Unit of Measure140 Rationale for Inclusion Note: While some organizations already disclose metrics consistent with these categories, the Task Force recognizes others —especially those in the early stages of disclosing climate -related financial information —may need time to adjust internal processes before disclosing such information.141 In addition, some of the metric categories may be less applicable to certain organizations. For example, data and methodologies for certain metrics for asset owners ( e.g., impact of climate change on investment income) are in early stag es of development. In such cases, the Task Force recognizes organizations will need time before such metrics are disclosed to their stakeholders. On the application of materiality, t he Task Force believes all organizations should disclose absolute Scope 1 and Scope 2 GHG emissions independent of a materiality assessment. The disclosure of Scope 3 GHG emissions is subject to materiality; however, the Task Force encourages organizations to disclose such emissions. The other cross -industry, climate -related metric categories remain subject to materiality. Organizations should determine materiality for climate -related metrics consistent with how they determine the materiality of other information included in their financial filings. *Transition and Physical Risks: Due to challenges related to portfolio aggregation and sourcing data from companies or third -party fund managers, financial organizations may find it more difficult to quantify exposure to climate -related risks. The Task Force suggests that financial organizations provide qualitative and quantitative information, when available. **Remuneration: While the Task Force encourages quantitative disclosure, organizations may include descriptive language on remuneration policies and practices, such as how climate change issues are included in balanced scorecards for executive remuneration. 141 Organizations may need time to evaluate and determine which metrics are relevant to disclose, identify and collect data and other information needed for the calculation of metrics, implement new or update existing processes to address or include relevant metrics, etc. The Task Force recognizes the amount of time needed to disclose certain metrics ( e.g., physical risks) consiste nt with the categories identified in Table A2.1 .",
    "new_id": 530
  },
  {
    "id": 50224,
    "question": "As outlined in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures, when assessing the resilience of their strategies to climate-related risks, organizations should consider all of the following EXCEPT: ",
    "options": {
      "C": "A transition to a low-carbon economy aligned strictly with a 3°C scenario rather than a 2°C or lower scenario.",
      "A": "The potential financial impact on elements such as revenues, costs, assets, and liabilities.",
      "B": "Scenarios consistent with increased physical climate-related risks, but only if those risks are deemed material to the organization.",
      "D": "How their strategies might evolve in response to investor expectations regarding GHG emissions reductions, even if these expectations are informal.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "20",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Implementation.pdf",
    "source_text": "Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Clima te-related Financial Disclosures 19 A. Introduction B. Recommendations C. Guidance for All Sectors D. Supplemental Guidance for the Financial Sector E. Supplemental Guidance for Non -Financial Groups F. Fundamental Princi ples for Effective Disclosure Appendices Strategy Disclose the actual and potential impacts of climate -related risks and opportunities on the organization’s businesses, strategy, and financial planning where such information is material . Organizations that have made GHG emissions reduction commitments, operate in jurisdictions that have made such commitments , or have agreed to meet investor expectations regarding GHG emissions reductions should describe their plans for transitioning to a low -carbon economy, which could include GHG emissions targets and specific activities intended to reduce GHG emissions in their operations and value chain or to otherwise support the transition.25 Recommended Disclosure c) Describe the resilience of the organization’s strategy, taking into consideration different climate - related scenarios, including a 2°C or lower scenario. Guidance for All Sectors Organizations should describe how resilient their strategies are to climate -related risks and opportunities, taking into consideration a transition to a low -carbon economy consistent with a 2°C or lower scenario and, where relevant to the organization, scenarios consistent with increased physical climate -related risks.26 Organizations should consider discussing: ‒ where they believe their strategies may be affected by climate -related risks and opportunities; ‒ how their strategies might change to address such potential risks and opportunities; ‒ the potential impact of climate -related issues on financial performance (e.g., revenues, costs) and financial position ( e.g., assets, liabilities);27 and ‒ the climate -related scenarios and associated time horizon(s) considered. Refer to Section D in the Task Force’s report for information on applying scenarios to forward -looking analysis. 25 Organizations may agree to meet inves tor expectations regarding GHG emissions reductions for various reasons, including concerns about access to or the cost of capital if they fail to do so . 26 In interpreting the phrase “2 °C or lower,” organizations should consider aligning their scenario an alysis with Article Two of the 2015 Paris Agreement which commits parties to “holding the increasing in the global average temperature to well below 2 °C above pre -industrial levels and pursuing efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5 °C above pre -industrial levels.” 27 These impacts may be described in qualitative, quantitative, or a combination of both qualitative and quantitative terms. The Task Force encourages org anizations to include quantitative information, where data and methodologies allow.",
    "new_id": 531
  },
  {
    "id": 50731,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between a company’s governance practices and its approach to managing climate-related risks, based on the implicit connections between oversight, processes, and metrics, as described in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "D": "A company’s governance around climate-related risks integrates board oversight, management’s risk assessment processes, and specific metrics like greenhouse gas emissions to holistically address potential impacts.",
      "A": "The board’s oversight of climate-related risks is sufficient to ensure that all material risks are effectively managed without additional processes or metrics.",
      "B": "Management’s role in assessing climate-related risks eliminates the need for disclosing greenhouse gas emissions as these are implicitly covered under their assessment strategies.",
      "C": "Disclosing Scope 1, Scope 2, and Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions alone demonstrates comprehensive governance over climate-related risks without requiring detailed board or management involvement.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "5-6",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD WS 2.pdf",
    "source_text": "5Core Elements of the TCFD Recommendations Governance Strategy Risk Management Metrics and TargetsStrategy Disclose the actual and potential impacts of climate -related risks and opportunities on the company’s businesses, strategy, and financial planning Risk Management Disclose the processes used by the company to identify, assess, and manage climate -related risks Metrics and Targets Disclose the metrics and targets used to assess and manage relevant climate -related risks and opportunitiesGovernance Disclose the company’s governance around climate -related risks and opportunitiesIntroduction to the Governance Recommendation In this session, we will discuss the Governance recommendation Note: The Task Force uses the term “companies” to refer to entities with public debt or equity as well as asset managers and asset owners, including public - and private -sector pension plans, endowments, and foundations. Source: TCFD, Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate -related Financial Disclosures , 2017\n\n[Page 6]\n6Source: TCFD, Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate -related Financial Disclosures , 2017 Introduction to the Governance Recommendation (continued) The Task Force’s Governance recommendation is supported by two recommended disclosures Governance Strategy Risk Management Metrics and Targets Disclose the company’s governance around climate -related risks and opportunities.Disclose the actual and potential impacts of climate -related risks and opportunities on the company’s businesses, strategy, and financial planning where such information is material.Disclose how the company identifies, assesses, and manages climate -related risks.Disclose the metrics and targets used to assess and manage relevant climate -related risks and opportunities where such information is material. Recommended Disclosures Recommended Disclosures Recommended Disclosures Recommended Disclosures a)Describe the board’s oversight of climate -related risks and opportunities.a)Describe the climate -related risks and opportunities the company has identified over the short, medium, and long term.a)Describe the company’s processes for identifying and assessing climate -related risks.a)Disclose the metrics used by the company to assess climate - related risks and opportunities in line with its strategy and risk management process. b)Describe management’s role in assessing and managing climate - related risks and opportunities.b)Describe the impact of climate - related risks and opportunities on the company’s businesses, strategy, and financial planning.b)Describe the company’s processes for managing climate - related risks.b)Disclose Scope 1, Scope 2, and, if appropriate, Scope 3 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and the related risks. c) Describe the resilience of the company’s strategy, taking into consideration different climate - related scenarios, including a 2 °C or lower scenario.c)Describe how processes for identifying, assessing, and managing climate -related risks are integrated into the company’s overall risk management.c)Describe the targets used by the company to manage climate - related risks and opportunities and performance against targets.",
    "new_id": 532
  },
  {
    "id": 50742,
    "question": "Which scenario would require an entity to include a work-related incident in its safety disclosure, considering the interplay between the definitions of 'work environment' and 'employee categories' in the Oil & Gas – Refining & Marketing – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "An independent contractor develops a repetitive strain injury while operating machinery at a third-party warehouse managed by the entity.",
      "B": "A full-time employee suffers from heat exhaustion during a mandatory team-building retreat held outdoors offsite.",
      "C": "A part-time worker employed through a temp agency experiences a slip-and-fall accident at home while preparing for a remote meeting with the entity.",
      "D": "A traveling sales executive sustains a minor injury while commuting to a client site unrelated to their employer's business interests.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "21",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Oil & Gas – Refining & Marketing.pdf",
    "source_text": "4.1 The ‘200,000’ in the rate calculation represents the total number of hours 100 full-time workers working 40 hours per week for 50 weeks per year can provide annually. 5 The scope of the disclosure includes work-related incidents only. 5.1 Work-related incidents are injuries and illnesses resulting from events or exposures in the work environment. 5.2 The work environment is the establishment and other locations where one or more employees are working or are present as a condition of their employment. 5.3 The work environment includes not only physical locations, but also the equipment or materials used by the employee during the course of work. 5.4 Incidents that occur while an employee is travelling are work-related if, at the time of the injury or illness, the employee was engaged in work activities in the interest of the employer. 5.5 A work-related incident must be a new case, not a previously recorded injury or illness being updated. 6The entity shall disclose the rates for each of these employee categories: 6.1 direct employees, defined as individuals on the entity ’s payroll, whether they are full-time, short service, part-time, executive, labour, salary, seasonal, migrant or hourly employees; and 6.2 contract employees, defined as individuals who are not on the entity ’s payroll, but whom the entity supervises or manages, including independent contractors and those employed by third parties (for example, temp agencies and labour brokers). 7The scope of the disclosure includes all employees regardless of employee location or type of employment. EM-RM-320a.2. Discussion of management systems used to integrate a culture of safety 1The entity shall discuss its management systems used to integrate a culture of safety. 1.1 The discussion shall include how the entity integrates a culture of safety throughout its value chain, such as through technology, training, corporate culture, regulatory compliance, monitoring and testing, and personal protective equipment. 1.2 The scope of discussion may focus broadly on safety management systems, but it shall address specifically the systems used to maintain a safe working environment, including preventing incidents, fatalities and illnesses. 2The entity shall include a description of how workforce safety management is coordinated among business partners (for example, contractors and subcontractors). SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |OIL & GAS – REFINING & MARKETING |21",
    "new_id": 533
  },
  {
    "id": 50776,
    "question": "Under what circumstances might an entity in the Refining & Marketing industry report a recordable incident that does not involve days away from work, restricted work, job transfer, or medical treatment beyond first aid, according to the Oil & Gas – Refining & Marketing – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "When a licensed healthcare professional diagnoses a significant injury or illness, regardless of other outcomes.",
      "A": "When the incident results in environmental damage classified as significant by local regulatory authorities.",
      "C": "When the incident involves a near miss with potential for severe injury but no actual harm occurred.",
      "D": "When the entity identifies systemic safety culture failures leading to repeated first-aid-only cases.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "19-20",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Oil & Gas – Refining & Marketing.pdf",
    "source_text": "4The entity may describe its effort to maintain jurisdictional UST regulatory compliance, including its method or process to prevent UST spills, overfills and corrosion. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |OIL & GAS – REFINING & MARKETING |19\n\n[Page 20]\nWorkforce Health & Safety Topic Summary Hazards associated with the operations of entities in the Refining & Marketing (R&M) industry may present risks to employee health and safety. Such hazards include the handling and processing of hydrocarbons, frequently at high temperatures and pressures during refining operations. Accidents or inadvertent exposures to chemicals and other hazards such as heat or noise may result in fatalities, severe injuries or illnesses. Releases of hydrocarbons or other hazardous substances resulting from accidents or leaks also can have negative consequences for neighbouring communities. An entity ’s ability to protect employee health and safety, and to create a culture of safety and well-being among employees at all levels, can help prevent accidents, mitigate costs and operational downtime, and enhance workforce productivity. Metrics EM-RM-320a.1. (1) Total recordable incident rate (TRIR), (2) fatality rate, and (3) near miss frequency rate (NMFR) for (a) direct employees and (b) contract employees 1The entity shall disclose (1) its total recordable incident rate (TRIR) for work-related injuries and illnesses. 1.1 An injury or illness is considered a recordable incident if it results in death, days away from work, restricted work or transfer to another job, medical treatment beyond first aid, or loss of consciousness. Additionally, a significant injury or illness diagnosed by a physician or other licensed health care professional is considered a recordable incident, even if it does not result in death, days away from work, restricted work or job transfer, medical treatment beyond first aid, or loss of consciousness. 1.1.1 First aid is defined as emergency care or treatment for an ill or injured person before regular medical aid can be provided. 1.1.2 The entity may use applicable jurisdictional criteria for definitions of a recordable incident and a non-recordable incident such as first aid. The entity shall disclose the legal, regulatory or industry framework used as the source for these criteria and definitions. 2The entity shall disclose (2) its fatality rate for work-related fatalities. 3 The entity shall disclose (3) its near miss frequency rate (NMFR) for work-related near misses. 3.1 A near miss is defined as an unplanned or uncontrolled event or chain of events that has not resulted in a recordable injury, illness, physical damage or environmental damage, but had the potential to do so in other circumstances. 3.2 The entity may disclose its process for classifying, identifying and reporting near misses. 4All disclosed rates shall be calculated as: (statistic count × 200,000) / total number of hours worked by all employees in the year reported. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |OIL & GAS – REFINING & MARKETING |20",
    "new_id": 534
  },
  {
    "id": 50777,
    "question": "Which scenario would most likely represent a Tier 1 Process Safety Event (PSE) under the definitions provided in the Oil & Gas – Refining & Marketing – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "A loss of primary containment involving flammable material leading to a third-party hospital admission and a community evacuation order.",
      "A": "An unplanned release of steam causing temporary discomfort to employees but no serious injuries or fatalities.",
      "B": "A controlled release of nitrogen into secondary containment that results in minor environmental impact but no injuries.",
      "D": "A near-miss incident where hot condensate nearly caused an employee injury but was contained without consequence.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "27",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Oil & Gas – Refining & Marketing.pdf",
    "source_text": "Critical Incident Risk Management Topic Summary The operations of Refining & Marketing (R&M) entities are often characterised by a high number of hazards, including the handling of flammable, volatile substances, the use of highly reactive chemicals, and the processing of fluids at high temperature and pressure. Accidental releases of hydrocarbons or other hazardous substances can have significant consequences for an entity ’s workforce, as well as external social and environmental consequences. In addition to effective process safety management practices, entities frequently prioritise developing a culture of safety to reduce the probability that accidents and other health and safety incidents will occur. If accidents and other emergencies do occur, entities with a strong safety culture often can detect and respond effectively to such incidents. A culture that engages and empowers employees and contractors to work with management to safeguard their own health, safety and well-being and prevent accidents may help entities reduce production downtime, mitigate costs, ensure workforce productivity and maintain their licence to operate. Metrics EM-RM-540a.1. Process Safety Event (PSE) rates for Loss of Primary Containment (LOPC) of greater consequence (Tier 1) and lesser consequence (Tier 2) 1The entity shall disclose Tier 1 process safety event (PSE) rates and Tier 2 PSE rates for instances of loss of primary containment (LOPC). 1.1 The entity shall refer to the terms and definitions from the ANSI/API Recommended Practice 754 – Process Safety Performance Indicators for the Refining and Petrochemical Industries (hereafter, ANSI/API RP-754). 2A PSE is defined as an unplanned or uncontrolled LOPC of any material including non-toxic and non-flammable materials (for example, steam, hot condensate, nitrogen, compressed CO 2 or compressed air) from a process, or an undesired event or condition that, under slightly different circumstances, could have resulted in an LOPC of a material. 2.1 LOPC is a type of event. 2.2 An unplanned or uncontrolled release is an LOPC irrespective of whether the material is released into the environment, or into secondary containment, or into other primary containment not intended to contain the material released under normal operating conditions. 3A Tier 1 PSE is defined as an LOPC of the greatest consequence, resulting in one or more of these consequences: 3.1 an employee, contractor or subcontractor experiencing a ‘days away from work ’ injury or fatality; 3.2 a hospital admission or fatality of a third party; 3.3 an officially declared community evacuation or community shelter-in-place; SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |OIL & GAS – REFINING & MARKETING |27",
    "new_id": 535
  },
  {
    "id": 50778,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the implicit relationship between the disclosure requirements for recordable incidents and near misses, based on their definitions and reporting processes in the Oil & Gas – Refining & Marketing – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Both recordable incidents and near misses require detailed tracking and analysis since they reflect potential systemic safety vulnerabilities, even if only one category results in tangible outcomes.",
      "A": "Recordable incidents and near misses are both always reported to legal authorities as part of jurisdictional compliance.",
      "B": "The process for identifying near misses is less rigorous than for recordable incidents because near misses do not result in actual harm or damage.",
      "C": "Near misses are classified as a subset of recordable incidents when they involve exposure to hazardous substances like hydrocarbons.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "19-20",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Oil & Gas – Refining & Marketing.pdf",
    "source_text": "4The entity may describe its effort to maintain jurisdictional UST regulatory compliance, including its method or process to prevent UST spills, overfills and corrosion. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |OIL & GAS – REFINING & MARKETING |19\n\n[Page 20]\nWorkforce Health & Safety Topic Summary Hazards associated with the operations of entities in the Refining & Marketing (R&M) industry may present risks to employee health and safety. Such hazards include the handling and processing of hydrocarbons, frequently at high temperatures and pressures during refining operations. Accidents or inadvertent exposures to chemicals and other hazards such as heat or noise may result in fatalities, severe injuries or illnesses. Releases of hydrocarbons or other hazardous substances resulting from accidents or leaks also can have negative consequences for neighbouring communities. An entity ’s ability to protect employee health and safety, and to create a culture of safety and well-being among employees at all levels, can help prevent accidents, mitigate costs and operational downtime, and enhance workforce productivity. Metrics EM-RM-320a.1. (1) Total recordable incident rate (TRIR), (2) fatality rate, and (3) near miss frequency rate (NMFR) for (a) direct employees and (b) contract employees 1The entity shall disclose (1) its total recordable incident rate (TRIR) for work-related injuries and illnesses. 1.1 An injury or illness is considered a recordable incident if it results in death, days away from work, restricted work or transfer to another job, medical treatment beyond first aid, or loss of consciousness. Additionally, a significant injury or illness diagnosed by a physician or other licensed health care professional is considered a recordable incident, even if it does not result in death, days away from work, restricted work or job transfer, medical treatment beyond first aid, or loss of consciousness. 1.1.1 First aid is defined as emergency care or treatment for an ill or injured person before regular medical aid can be provided. 1.1.2 The entity may use applicable jurisdictional criteria for definitions of a recordable incident and a non-recordable incident such as first aid. The entity shall disclose the legal, regulatory or industry framework used as the source for these criteria and definitions. 2The entity shall disclose (2) its fatality rate for work-related fatalities. 3 The entity shall disclose (3) its near miss frequency rate (NMFR) for work-related near misses. 3.1 A near miss is defined as an unplanned or uncontrolled event or chain of events that has not resulted in a recordable injury, illness, physical damage or environmental damage, but had the potential to do so in other circumstances. 3.2 The entity may disclose its process for classifying, identifying and reporting near misses. 4All disclosed rates shall be calculated as: (statistic count × 200,000) / total number of hours worked by all employees in the year reported. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |OIL & GAS – REFINING & MARKETING |20",
    "new_id": 536
  },
  {
    "id": 50779,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the underlying reason why the entity must disclose safety management practices specifically for maintaining a safe working environment, rather than broader corporate strategies, as outlined in the Oil & Gas – Refining & Marketing – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Because the disclosure focuses on systems directly tied to preventing incidents, fatalities, and illnesses as part of workforce safety.",
      "B": "To demonstrate compliance with mandatory regulatory requirements governing workplace safety.",
      "C": "To ensure that contractors and subcontractors are held accountable for their individual safety protocols.",
      "D": "Because integrating technology and training is more critical than addressing cultural or compliance-related aspects.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "21",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Oil & Gas – Refining & Marketing.pdf",
    "source_text": "4.1 The ‘200,000’ in the rate calculation represents the total number of hours 100 full-time workers working 40 hours per week for 50 weeks per year can provide annually. 5 The scope of the disclosure includes work-related incidents only. 5.1 Work-related incidents are injuries and illnesses resulting from events or exposures in the work environment. 5.2 The work environment is the establishment and other locations where one or more employees are working or are present as a condition of their employment. 5.3 The work environment includes not only physical locations, but also the equipment or materials used by the employee during the course of work. 5.4 Incidents that occur while an employee is travelling are work-related if, at the time of the injury or illness, the employee was engaged in work activities in the interest of the employer. 5.5 A work-related incident must be a new case, not a previously recorded injury or illness being updated. 6The entity shall disclose the rates for each of these employee categories: 6.1 direct employees, defined as individuals on the entity ’s payroll, whether they are full-time, short service, part-time, executive, labour, salary, seasonal, migrant or hourly employees; and 6.2 contract employees, defined as individuals who are not on the entity ’s payroll, but whom the entity supervises or manages, including independent contractors and those employed by third parties (for example, temp agencies and labour brokers). 7The scope of the disclosure includes all employees regardless of employee location or type of employment. EM-RM-320a.2. Discussion of management systems used to integrate a culture of safety 1The entity shall discuss its management systems used to integrate a culture of safety. 1.1 The discussion shall include how the entity integrates a culture of safety throughout its value chain, such as through technology, training, corporate culture, regulatory compliance, monitoring and testing, and personal protective equipment. 1.2 The scope of discussion may focus broadly on safety management systems, but it shall address specifically the systems used to maintain a safe working environment, including preventing incidents, fatalities and illnesses. 2The entity shall include a description of how workforce safety management is coordinated among business partners (for example, contractors and subcontractors). SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |OIL & GAS – REFINING & MARKETING |21",
    "new_id": 537
  },
  {
    "id": 51974,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between an entity's proxy voting approach and its engagement on environmental and social (ES) issues, as described in the Asset Management & Custody Activities – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "While the entity describes its proxy voting approach separately from its engagement activities, both processes may involve distinct staff roles and target different levels within portfolio entities.",
      "A": "The entity’s proxy voting decisions are primarily reactive, focusing on addressing ES issues after they have occurred, while engagements aim to be proactive.",
      "C": "An entity’s proxy voting policy must always align with its engagement objectives, ensuring consistent influence over corporate practices across all asset classes.",
      "D": "Proxy voting and engagement policies are considered interchangeable methods of influencing corporate behavior, with no requirement to differentiate their scope or application.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "17-18",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Asset Management & Custody Activities.pdf",
    "source_text": "10.1 The entity shall describe its oversight/accountability approach to assessing the quality of incorporation of ESG factors by external fund managers and fiduciary managers, which may include: 10.1.1 Formal oversight individuals or bodies involved 10.1.2 Roles and responsibilities of employees involved 10.1.3 Criteria used in assessing the quality of ESG incorporation 11The scope of disclosure shall include investment or wealth management services in which the entity maintains decision-making power, regardless of strategy and asset class. 12The scope of disclosure shall exclude execution or advisory services in which investment decision-making power remains with clients. 13When relevant, the description of the entity ’s approach to incorporation of ESG factors in its investment or wealth management activities shall be broken down by asset class or by style employed. 13.1 The discussion shall include the differences in the entity ’s approaches to incorporation of ESG factors in: 13.1.1 Public equity, fixed income, private equity or alternative asset classes 13.1.2 Passive versus active investment strategies 13.1.3 Fundamental, quantitative and technical analyses of investments FN-AC-410a.3. Description of proxy voting and investee engagement policies and procedures 1The entity shall describe its approach to proxy voting, which may include its process for making proxy voting decisions, including its approach to defining materiality. 1.1 The discussion shall include, but is not limited to, elements highlighted in PRI Reporting Framework 2019 Direct—Listed Equity Active Ownership : 1.1.1 The scope of the entity ’s voting activities 1.1.2 The objectives of the entity ’s voting activities 1.1.3 How, if at all, the entity ’s voting approach differs among markets 1.1.4 Whether the entity has a default position of voting in favour of management in particular markets or on particular issues 1.1.5 Whether and how local regulatory or other requirements influence the entity ’s approach to voting 1.1.6 Whether the entity votes by proxy or in person by attending annual general meetings (AGMs) (or a combination of both) SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |ASSET MANAGEMENT & CUSTODY ACTIVITIES |17\n\n[Page 18]\n1.2 The entity shall describe its approach to determining support for proposals, including its approach to defining materiality. 1.2.1 The scope of disclosure includes proposals addressing environmental and social (ES) issues. 1.3 The entity shall describe how it communicates its proxy voting policy to clients and to the public. 1.3.1 The entity may provide the link to its formal proxy voting policy. 2The entity shall describe its process of making proxy voting decisions. 2.1 The discussion shall include the elements highlighted in PRI Reporting Framework 2019 Direct —Listed Equity Active Ownership , which include: 2.1.1 Use of internal research team or third-party service providers 2.1.2 Review and monitoring process for service provider recommendations 3The entity shall describe its approach to communicating voting decisions to entity management, including the rationale for voting for/against management ’s recommendations. 4The entity shall describe its approach to engagement on ES issues. 4.1 The discussion shall include: 4.1.1 The entity ’s objectives for undertaking engagement activities 4.1.2 Whether the entity ’s engagements related to ES issues are primarily proactive to ensure that ES issues are well-managed in a preventive manner or reactive to address issues that may have already occurred 4.1.3 The outcomes the entity seeks from engaging with entities on ES issues (for example, influencing corporate practice; improving the quality of ES disclosure) 4.1.4 The entity ’s staff that carries out the engagement (for example, specialised in-house engagement teams, fund managers or equity/credit analysts, more senior-level roles) 4.1.5 The roles of individuals at the portfolio entities the entity seeks to engage with (for example, board members, board chair, CEO, corporate secretary, investor relations managers) 4.2 The entity shall describe how it communicates its engagement policy to clients and to the public. 4.2.1 The entity may provide the link to its formal engagement policy. 4.3 The scope of disclosure includes all asset classes, portfolios or strategies in which the entity engages on ES issues. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |ASSET MANAGEMENT & CUSTODY ACTIVITIES |18",
    "new_id": 538
  },
  {
    "id": 51975,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures an implicit relationship between employee compensation structures and the entity's compliance with industry best practices, as described in the Asset Management & Custody Activities – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Compensation structures that link employee rewards to specific product sales may conflict with the entity’s obligation to provide fair advice and transparent information to clients.",
      "A": "Employee compensation structures are directly tied to the entity's adherence to codes of conduct, ensuring transparent communication methods.",
      "B": "The entity’s compliance with industry best practices is independent of how employee incentives for specific product sales are structured.",
      "D": "Industry best practices require fixed salaries for employees to eliminate any potential conflicts of interest related to client communications.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "10",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Asset Management & Custody Activities.pdf",
    "source_text": "2Relevant content may include topics such as risk, suitability, investment alternatives and the disclosure of conflicts of interest. 2.1 Relevant risks include those related to complex or high-yield products that may be subject to volatility, credit risk exposure, interest rate sensitivity, liquidity concerns or otherwise may be misaligned with client risk tolerance. 2.2 Relevant aspects of suitability are those for which the entity must have a reasonable basis to believe that a transaction or investment strategy involving securities recommended are suitable for the customer. This reasonable belief must be based on the information obtained through the reasonable due diligence of the entity to ascertain the customer ’s investment profile. 2.3 Relevant conflicts of interest include those related to services (for example, research) paid for by clients ’ commissions, the allocation of trades among clients and rules for the entity ’s employees ’ personal accounts (PAs). 3The entity shall describe compliance with industry best practices in relation to transparent information and fair advice to customers, including relevant codes of conduct and codes of ethics. 4The entity shall describe how its representatives ’ compensation structures are linked to incentives for specific product sales. 4.1 The discussion shall include any direct linkages between employee compensation and incentives for specific product sales, which may include changes in fixed salaries, bonuses and other awards, and sales volume or quantity targets for specific products or services. 5The entity may disclose the percentage of total compensation that is variable and directly linked to sales targets for the relevant pool of employees. 6The entity shall describe communication methods used to provide information about its products and services to current and prospective clients. 6.1 Communication methods may include client statements, supplementary brochures, product prospectuses, website listings or verbal communications. 7The entity may disclose the style of communication it uses, such as the use of legal disclaimers in plain language. 8If necessary, the entity shall describe differences in communication strategies, content or method between retail customers and institutional clients. 9The entity shall describe how its communication strategy is developed and executed, which may include internal controls the entity has in place to ensure compliance with its communication strategy. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |ASSET MANAGEMENT & CUSTODY ACTIVITIES |10",
    "new_id": 539
  },
  {
    "id": 51976,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why asset managers who fail to integrate ESG factors into their investment decisions might experience a long-term decline in market share, according to the implications of the Asset Management & Custody Activities – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Failure to incorporate ESG considerations could result in reduced performance fees and eventual outflows of assets under management (AUM).",
      "A": "Investors may perceive such managers as prioritizing short-term financial gains over sustainable growth opportunities.",
      "B": "The exclusion of ESG factors inherently leads to higher volatility in portfolio returns due to regulatory penalties.",
      "C": "Asset managers without ESG integration are unable to engage in sustainability-themed investing, which is the fastest-growing segment of AUM.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "13-14",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Asset Management & Custody Activities.pdf",
    "source_text": "Table 3. Gender Representation of Global Employees (%) WOMEN MEN ... N/D* Executive Management Non-Executive Management Professionals All Other Employees N/D = not disclosed Table 4. Diversity Group Representation of Global Employees (%) GROUP A GROUP B GROUP C ... N/A* Executive Management Non-Executive Management Professionals All Other Employees N/A = not available or not disclosed Note to FN-AC-330a.1 1The entity shall describe its policies and programmes for fostering equitable employee representation in its global operations. 1.1 Relevant policies may include maintaining transparency of hiring, promotion and wage practices, ensuring equal employment opportunities, developing and disseminating diversity policies and ensuring management accountability for equitable representation. 1.2 Relevant programmes may include training on diversity, mentorship and sponsorship programmes, partnership with employee resource and advisory groups and provision of flexible work schedules to accommodate the varying needs of employees. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |ASSET MANAGEMENT & CUSTODY ACTIVITIES |13\n\n[Page 14]\nIncorporation of Environmental, Social, and Governance Factors in Investment Management & Advisory Topic Summary Asset Management & Custody Activities entities maintain a fiduciary responsibility to their clients. These entities must consider and incorporate an analysis of all material information into investment decisions, including environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors. The process of ESG investment involves consideration of ESG factors in valuation, modelling, portfolio construction, proxy voting and engagement with investees and, as a result, in investment decision-making by asset and wealth managers. As the management and use of non-financial forms of capital increasingly contribute to market value, incorporation of ESG factors in the analysis of investees has become more relevant. Research has established that an entity ’s management of some ESG factors may impact materially both its accounting and market returns. Therefore, deep understanding of investees ’ ESG performance, integration of ESG factors in valuation and modelling, as well as engagement with investees on sustainability issues allows asset managers to generate superior returns. On the other hand, asset management and custody activities industry entities that fail to consider these risks and opportunities in their investment management activities may witness diminished investment portfolio returns that may result in reduced performance fees. Over the long term, these failures could result in an outflow of assets under management (AUM), the loss of market share and lower management fees. Metrics FN-AC-410a.1. Amount of assets under management, by asset class, that employ (1) integration of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) issues, (2) sustainability themed investing and (3) screening 1The entity shall disclose the amount of assets under management (AUM) that employ (1) integration of environmental, social and governance (ESG) issues, (2) sustainability themed investing, and (3) screening. 1.1 AUM shall be defined broadly as the total market value, expressed in the entity ’s presentation currency, of the assets managed by a financial institution on behalf of clients. 1.2 Integration of ESG issues is defined as the systematic and explicit inclusion of material ESG factors into investment analysis and investment decisions, as aligned with the PRI Reporting Framework – Main definitions 2018 . 1.3 Sustainability themed investing is defined as investment in themes or assets specifically related to sustainability (for example, clean energy, green technology or sustainable agriculture), as aligned with the PRI Reporting Framework —Main definitions 2018 . 1.4 Screening, including (a) negative/exclusionary, (b) positive/best-in-class and (c) norms-based, is defined by the PRI Reporting Framework —Main definitions 2018 . 1.5 The scope of disclosure includes both passive and active strategies. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |ASSET MANAGEMENT & CUSTODY ACTIVITIES |14",
    "new_id": 540
  },
  {
    "id": 52113,
    "question": "Which scenario implicitly demonstrates the most significant reliance on technological innovation as the primary driver for emissions reduction, while simultaneously downplaying the role of societal behavior changes or demand-side reductions, as described in the Global Warming of 1.5°C: An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty?",
    "options": {
      "A": "P3, as it focuses mainly on changing production methods with limited attention to reducing energy demand through behavioral shifts.",
      "B": "P1, because it emphasizes a downsized energy system and rapid decarbonization without detailing societal transformations.",
      "C": "P2, since it integrates low-carbon technology innovation but also incorporates sustainable consumption patterns and land management.",
      "D": "P4, due to its heavy dependence on greenhouse-gas-intensive lifestyles offset by carbon capture technologies like BECCS.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "29",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC 1.5.pdf",
    "source_text": "SPMSummary for Policymakers14Breakdown of contributions to global net CO/two.dnom emissions in four illustrative model pathways P1: A scenario in which social, business and technological innovations result in lower energy demand up to 2050 while living standards rise, especially in the global South. A downsized energy system enables rapid decarbonization of energy supply. Afforestation is the only CDR option considered; neither fossil fuels with CCS nor BECCS are used.P2: A scenario with a broad focus on sustainability including energy intensity, human development, economic convergence and international cooperation, as well as shi/f_ts towards sustainable and healthy consumption patterns, low-carbon technology innovation, and well-managed land systems with limited societal acceptability for BECCS.P3: A middle-of-the-road scenario in which societal as well as technological development follows historical patterns. Emissions reductions are mainly achieved by changing the way in which energy and products are produced, and to a lesser degree by reductions in demand.P4: A resource- and energy-intensive scenario in which economic growth and globalization lead to widespread adoption of greenhouse-gas-intensive lifestyles, including high demand for transportation fuels and livestock products. Emissions reductions are mainly achieved through technological means, making strong use of CDR through the deployment of BECCS. Fossil fuel and industry AFOLU BECCS -2002040 2020 2060 2100-2002040 2020 2060 2100-2002040 2020 2060 2100-2002040 2020 2060 2100 No or limited overshoot -58 -93 -50 -82 -15 -32 60 77 -78 -97 -37 -87 -25 -74 59 150 -11 -16 430 833 0 0 0.2 -24 -33 5 6Pathway classification CO/two.dnom emission change in 2030 (% rel to 2010) in 2050 (% rel to 2010) Kyoto-GHG emissions * in 2030 (% rel to 2010) in 2050 (% rel to 2010) Final energy demand** in 2030 (% rel to 2010) in 2050 (% rel to 2010) Renewable share in electricity in 2030 (%) in 2050 (%) Primary energy from coal in 2030 (% rel to 2010) in 2050 (% rel to 2010) from oil in 2030 (% rel to 2010) in 2050 (% rel to 2010) from gas in 2030 (% rel to 2010) in 2050 (% rel to 2010) from nuclear in 2030 (% rel to 2010) in 2050 (% rel to 2010) from biomass in 2030 (% rel to 2010) in 2050 (% rel to 2010) from non-biomass renewables in 2030 (% rel to 2010) in 2050 (% rel to 2010) Cumulative CCS until 2100 (GtCO/two.dnom) of which BECCS (GtCO/two.dnom) Land area of bioenergy crops in 2050 (million km/two.numr) Agricultural CH/four.dnom emissions in 2030 (% rel to 2010) in 2050 (% rel to 2010) Agricultural N/two.dnomO emissions in 2030 (% rel to 2010) in 2050 (% rel to 2010) No or limited overshoot -47 -95 -49 -89 -5 2 58 81 -61 -77 -13 -50 -20 -53 83 98 0 49 470 1327 348 151 0.9 -48 -69 -26 -26No or limited overshoot -41 -91 -35 -78 17 21 48 63 -75 -73 -3 -81 33 21 98 501 36 121 315 878 687 414 2.8 1 -23 15 0Higher overshoot 4 -97 -2 -80 39 44 25 70 -59 -97 86 -32 37 -48 106 468 -1 418 110 1137 1218 1191 7.2 14 2 3 39No or limited overshoot (-58,-40) (-107,-94) (-51,-39) (-93,-81) (-12,7) (-11,22) (47,65) (69,86) (-78, -59) (-95, -74) (-34,3) (-78,-31) (-26,21) (-56,6) (44,102) (91,190) (29,80) (123,261) (245,436) (576,1299) (550,1017) (364,662) (1.5,3.2) (-30,-11) (-47,-24) (-21,3) (-26,1)Characteristics of four illustrative model pathways Different mitigation strategies can achieve the net emissions reductions that would be required to follow a pathway that limits global warming to 1.5°C with no or limited overshoot. All pathways use Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR), but the amount varies across pathways, as do the relative contributions of Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS) and removals in the Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU) sector. This has implications for emissions and several other pathway characteristics. P1 P2 P3 P4 P1 P2 P3 P4 Interquartile rangeBillion tonnes CO/two.subs per year (GtCO/two.dnom/yr) Global indicatorsBillion tonnes CO/two.subs per year (GtCO/two.dnom/yr) Billion tonnes CO/two.subs per year (GtCO/two.dnom/yr) Billion tonnes CO/two.subs per year (GtCO/two.dnom/yr) NOTE: Indicators have been selected to show global trends identified by the Chapter 2 assessment. National and sectoral characteristics can differ substantially from the global trends shown above.* Kyoto-gas emissions are based on IPCC Second Assessment Report GWP-100 ** Changes in energy demand are associated with improvements in energy efficiency and behaviour change",
    "new_id": 541
  },
  {
    "id": 52171,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why the transition to 1.5°C requires moving beyond the traditional framing of climate as a 'tragedy of the commons', as discussed in the Global Warming of 1.5°C: An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Because equitable access to sustainable development became the central objective, replacing outdated cost-optimal allocation rules.",
      "A": "Because carbon neutrality cannot be achieved through adversarial negotiations focused solely on emissions quotas and historical responsibility.",
      "C": "Because the Paris Agreement introduced a pledge-and-review system that inherently solves the limitations of earlier approaches.",
      "D": "Because industry lobbying has rendered cost-optimal allocation rules ineffective in addressing transboundary climate impacts.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "368",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC 1.5.pdf",
    "source_text": "353 4Strengthening and Implementing the Global Response Chapter 4UNFCCC, the Paris Agreement and the Montreal Protocol. Other multilateral and bilateral agreements, such as trade agreements, also have a bearing on climate change. There are significant differences between global mitigation and adaptation governance frames. Mitigation tends to be global by its nature and based on the principle of the climate system as a global commons (Ostrom et al., 1999). Adaptation has traditionally been viewed as a local process, involving local authorities, communities, and stakeholders (Khan, 2013; Preston et al., 2015), although it is now recognized to be a multi-scaled, multi-actor process that transcends scales from local and sub-national to national and international (Mimura et al., 2014; UNEP , 2017a). National governments provide a central pivot for coordination, planning, determining policy priorities and distributing resources. National governments are accountable to the international community through international agreements. Yet, many of the impacts of climate change are transboundary, so that bilateral and multilateral cooperation are needed (Nalau et al., 2015; Donner et al., 2016; Magnan and Ribera, 2016; Tilleard and Ford, 2016; Lesnikowski et al., 2017). The Kigali Amendment to the Montreal Protocol demonstrates that a global environmental agreement facilitating common but differentiated responsibilities is possible (Sharadin, 2018). This was operationalized by developed countries acting first, with developing countries following and benefiting from leap-frogging the trial-and-error stages of innovative technology development. Work on international climate governance has focused on the nature of ‘climate regimes’ and coordinating the action of nation-states (Aykut, 2016) organized around a diverse set of instruments: (i) binding limits allocated by principles of historical responsibility and equity, (ii) carbon prices, emissions quotas, (iii) pledges and review of policies and measures or (iv) a combination of these options (Stavins, 1988; Grubb, 1990; Pizer, 2002; Newell and Pizer, 2003). Literature on the Kyoto Protocol provides two important insights for the 1.5°C transition: the challenge of agreeing on rules to allocate emissions quotas (Shukla, 2005; Caney, 2012; Winkler et al., 2013; Gupta, 2014; Méjean et al., 2015) and a climate-centric vision (Shukla, 2005; BASIC experts, 2011), separated from development issues which drove resistance from many developing nations (Roberts and Parks, 2006). For the former, a burden-sharing approach led to an adversarial process among nations to decide who should be allocated ‘how much’ of the remainder of the emissions budget (Caney, 2014; Ohndorf et al., 2015; Roser et al., 2015; Giménez-Gómez et al., 2016). Industry group lobbying further contributed to reducing space for manoeuvre of some major emitting nations (Newell and Paterson, 1998; Levy and Egan, 2003; Dunlap and McCright, 2011; Michaelowa, 2013; Geels, 2014). Given the political unwillingness to continue with the Kyoto Protocol approach a new approach was introduced in the Copenhagen Accord, the Cancun Agreements, and finally in the Paris Agreement. The transition to 1.5°C requires carbon neutrality and thus going beyond the traditional framing of climate as a ‘tragedy of the commons’ to be addressed via cost-optimal allocation rules, which demonstrated a low probability of enabling a transition to 1.5°C-consistent pathways (Patt, 2017). The Paris Agreement, built on a ‘pledge and review’ system, is thought be more effective in securing trust (Dagnet et al., 2016) and enables effective monitoring and timely reporting on national actions (including adaptation), allowing for international scrutiny and persistent efforts of civil society and non-state actors to encourage action in both national and international contexts (Allan and Hadden, 2017; Bäckstrand and Kuyper, 2017; Höhne et al., 2017; Lesnikowski et al., 2017; Maor et al., 2017; UNEP , 2017a), with some limitations (Nieto et al., 2018). The paradigm shift enabled at Cancun succeeded by focusing on the objective of ‘equitable access to sustainable development’ (Hourcade et al., 2015). The use of ‘pledge and review’ now underpins the Paris Agreement. This consolidates multiple attempts to define a governance approach that relies on Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and on means for a ‘facilitative model’ (Bodansky and Diringer, 2014) to reinforce t",
    "new_id": 542
  },
  {
    "id": 52284,
    "question": "Which factor, when considered in SCC estimation according to the text, most directly challenges the comparability of SCC values derived from CBA-IAMs with shadow prices of carbon in CEA approaches, as discussed in the Global Warming of 1.5°C: An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The treatment of uncertainties in climate response being more stylized in CBA-IAMs compared to the process-based precision of energy and land systems in CEA models.",
      "A": "The inclusion of tipping points in the climate system as a factor inflating SCC estimates beyond levels typically found in CEA-based shadow price calculations.",
      "B": "The assumption of comprehensive representation of climate damages in both CBA-IAMs and detailed process IAMs leading to convergence in their respective outputs.",
      "D": "The use of a high social discount rate that disproportionately affects SCC estimates while leaving shadow price computations unaffected.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "166",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC 1.5.pdf",
    "source_text": "151 2Mitigation Pathways Compatible with 1.5°C in the Context of Sustainable Development Chapter 2Although CBA-based and CEA-based assessment are both subject to large uncertainty about socio-techno-economic trends, policy developments and climate response, the range of estimates for the SCC along an optimal trajectory determined by CBA is far wider than for estimates of the shadow price of carbon in CEA-based approaches. In CBA, the value judgments about inter- and intra- generational equity combined with uncertainties in the climate damage functions assumed, including their empirical basis, are important (Pindyck, 2013; Stern, 2013; Revesz et al., 2014). In a CEA-based approach, the value judgments about the aggregate welfare function matter less, and uncertainty about climate response and impacts can be tied into various climate targets and related emissions budgets (Clarke et al., 2014). The CEA- and CBA-based carbon cost estimates are derived with a different set of tools. They are all summarised as integrated assessment models (IAMs) but in fact are of very different nature (Weyant, 2017). Detailed process IAMs such as AIM (Fujimori, 2017), GCAM (Thomson et al., 2011; Calvin et al., 2017), IMAGE (van Vuuren et al., 2011b, 2017b), MESSAGE-GLOBIOM (Riahi et al., 2011; Havlík et al., 2014; Fricko et al., 2017), REMIND-MAgPIE (Popp et al., 2010; Luderer et al., 2013; Kriegler et al., 2017) and WITCH (Bosetti et al., 2006, 2008, 2009) include a process-based representation of energy and land systems, but in most cases lack a comprehensive representation of climate damages, and are typically used for CEA. Diagnostic analyses across CBA- IAMs indicate important dissimilarities in modelling assembly, implementation issues and behaviour (e.g., parametric uncertainty, damage responses, income sensitivity) that need to be recognized to better understand SCC estimates (Rose et al., 2017a). CBA-IAMs such as DICE (Nordhaus and Boyer, 2000; Nordhaus, 2013, 2017), PAGE (Hope, 2006) and FUND (Tol, 1999; Anthoff and Tol, 2009) attempt to capture the full feedback from climate response to socio-economic damages in an aggregated manner, but are usually much more stylised than detailed process IAMs. In a nutshell, the methodological framework for estimating SCC involves projections of population growth, economic activity and resulting emissions; computations of atmospheric composition and global mean temperatures as a result of emissions; estimations of physical impacts of climate changes; monetization of impacts (positive and negative) on human welfare; and the discounting of the future monetary value of impacts to year of emission (Kolstad et al., 2014; Revesz et al., 2014; NASEM, 2017; Rose et al., 2017a). There has been a discussion in the literature to what extent CBA- IAMs underestimate the SCC due to, for example, a limited treatment or difficulties in addressing damages to human well-being, labour productivity, value of capital stock, ecosystem services and the risks of catastrophic climate change for future generations (Ackerman and Stanton, 2012; Revesz et al., 2014; Moore and Diaz, 2015; Stern, 2016). However, there has been progress in ‘bottom- up’ empirical analyses of climate damages (Hsiang et al., 2017), the insights of which could be integrated into these models (Dell et al., 2014). Most of the models used in Chapter 2 on 1.5°C mitigation pathways are detailed process IAMs and thus deal with CEA. An important question is how results from CEA- and CBA-type approaches can be compared and synthesized. Such synthesis needs to be done with care, since estimates of the shadow price of carbon under the climate goal and SCC estimates from CBA might not be directly comparable due to different tools, approaches and assumptions used to derive them. Acknowledging this caveat, the SCC literature has identified a range of factors, assumptions and value judgements that support SCC values above $100 tCO2−1 that are also found as net present values of the shadow price of carbon in 1.5°C pathways. These factors include accounting for tipping points in the climate system (Lemoine and Traeger, 2014; Cai et al., 2015; Lontzek et al., 2015), a low social discount rate (Nordhaus, 2007a; Stern, 2007) and inequality aversion (Schmidt et al., 2013; Dennig et al., 2015; Adler et al., 2017). The SCC and the shadow price of carbon are not merely theoretical concepts but used in regulation (Pizer et al., 2014; Revesz et al., 2014; Stiglitz et a",
    "new_id": 543
  },
  {
    "id": 52352,
    "question": "Which combination of policies is suggested to be more cost-effective than implementing a carbon tax alone for achieving a 1.5°C pathway in the U.S. electric sector, as discussed in the Global Warming of 1.5°C: An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty?",
    "options": {
      "D": "A combination of stringent energy efficiency policies and a carbon tax increasing from 10 USD2010 tCO2−1 in 2020 to 27 USD2010 tCO2−1 in 2040.",
      "A": "A stringent carbon tax rising from 20 USD2010 tCO2−1 in 2020 to 53 USD2010 tCO2−1 in 2040.",
      "B": "A mix of moderate carbon pricing and subsidies for renewable energy generation capacity.",
      "C": "A policy mix involving only voluntary initiatives and economic incentives without explicit carbon pricing.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "168",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC 1.5.pdf",
    "source_text": "153 2Mitigation Pathways Compatible with 1.5°C in the Context of Sustainable Development Chapter 2is an emerging body of studies (including bottom-up approaches) that focuses on the interaction and performance of various policy mixes (e.g., regulation, subsidies, standards). Assuming global implementation of a mix of regionally existing best-practice policies (mostly regulatory policies in the electricity, industry, buildings, transport and agricultural sectors) and moderate carbon pricing (between 5–20 USD2010 tCO2−1 in 2025 in most world regions and average prices around 25 USD2010 tCO2−1 in 2030), early action mitigation pathways are generated that reduce global CO2 emissions by an additional 10 GtCO2e in 2030 compared to the NDCs (Kriegler et al., 2018a) (see Section 2.3.5). Furthermore, a mix of stringent energy efficiency policies (e.g., minimum performance standards, building codes) combined with a carbon tax (rising from 10 USD2010 tCO2−1 in 2020 to 27 USD2010 tCO2−1 in 2040) is more cost-effective than a carbon tax alone (from 20 to 53 USD2010 tCO2−1) to generate a 1.5°C pathway for the U.S. electric sector (Brown and Li, 2018). Likewise, a policy mix encompassing a moderate carbon price (7 USD2010 tCO2−1 in 2015) combined with a ban on new coal- based power plants and dedicated policies addressing renewable electricity generation capacity and electric vehicles reduces efficiency losses compared with an optimal carbon pricing in 2030 (Bertram et al., 2015b). One study estimates the carbon prices in high energy-intensive pathways to be 25–50% higher than in low energy-intensive pathways that assume ambitious regulatory instruments, economic incentives (in addition to a carbon price) and voluntary initiatives (Méjean et al., 2018). A bottom-up approach shows that stringent minimum performance standards (MEPS) for appliances (e.g., refrigerators) can effectively complement explicit carbon pricing, as tightened MEPS can achieve ambitious efficiency improvements that cannot be assured by carbon prices of 100 USD2010 tCO2−1 or higher (Sonnenschein et al., 2018). In addition, the revenue recycling effect of carbon pricing can reduce mitigation costs by displacing distortionary taxes (Baranzini et al., 2017; OECD, 2017; McFarland et al., 2018; Sands, 2018; Siegmeier et al., 2018), and the reduction of capital tax (compared to a labour tax) can yield greater savings in welfare costs (Sands, 2018). The effect on public budgets is particularly important in the near term; however, it can decline in the long term as carbon neutrality is achieved (Sands, 2018). The literature indicates that explicit carbon pricing is relevant but needs to be complemented with other policies to drive the required changes in line with 1.5°C cost-effective pathways ( low to medium evidence, high agreement ) (see Chapter 4, Section 4.4.5) (Stiglitz et al., 2017; Mehling and Tvinnereim, 2018; Méjean et al., 2018; Michaelowa et al., 2018). In summary, new analyses are consistent with AR5 and show that the price of carbon increases significantly if a higher level of stringency is pursued ( high confidence ). Values vary substantially across models, scenarios and socio-economic, technology and policy assumptions. While an explicit carbon pricing mechanism is central to prompt mitigation scenarios compatible with 1.5°C pathways, a complementary mix of stringent policies is required. 2.5.2.2 Investments Realizing the transformations towards a 1.5°C world would require a major shift in investment patterns (McCollum et al., 2018). Literature on global climate change mitigation investments is relatively sparse, with most detailed literature having focused on 2°C pathways (McCollum Figure 2.26 | Global price of carbon emissions consistent with mitigation pathways. Panels show (a) undiscounted price of carbon (2030–2100) and (b) average price of carbon (2030–2100) discounted at a 5% discount rate to 2020 in USD2010. AC: Annually compounded. NPV: Net present value. Median values in floating black line. The number of pathways included in box plots is indicated in the legend. Number of pathways outside the figure range is noted at the top. et al., 2013; Bowen et al., 2014; Gupta and Harnisch, 2014; Marangoni and Tavoni, 2014; OECD/IEA and IRENA, 2017). Global energy-system investments in the year 2016 are estimated at approximately 1.7 trillion USD2010 (approximately 2.2% of global GDP and 10% of gross capital formation), of which 0.23 trillion USD2010 was",
    "new_id": 544
  },
  {
    "id": 52496,
    "question": "Which factor is the key to ensure high public acceptability of climate policy, according to the relationships described in the Global Warming of 1.5°C: An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty??",
    "options": {
      "A": "Positive effects experienced after policy implementation, regardless of initial public support.",
      "B": "People strongly valuing other people and the environment, alongside left-wing or green political ideologies.",
      "C": "The perception that climate change is real and personally concerning to individuals.",
      "D": "Earmarking revenues from pricing policies for environmental purposes or redistributing them to affected groups.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "383",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC 1.5.pdf",
    "source_text": "368 Chapter 4 Strengthening and Implementing the Global Response 4Werff et al., 2014a; Lacasse, 2015, 2016). Yet some studies suggest that people may feel licensed not to engage in further mitigation actions when they believe they have already done their part (Truelove et al., 2014). 4.4.3.3 Acceptability of policy and system changes Public acceptability can shape, enable or prevent policy and system changes. Acceptability reflects the extent to which policy or system changes are evaluated (un)favourably. Acceptability is higher when people expect more positive and less negative effects of policy and system changes (Perlaviciute and Steg, 2014; Demski et al., 2015; Drews and Van den Bergh, 2016), including climate impacts (Schuitema et al., 2010b). Because of this, policy ‘rewarding’ climate actions is more acceptable than policy ‘punishing’ actions that increase climate risks (Steg et al., 2006; Eriksson et al., 2008). Pricing policy is more acceptable when revenues are earmarked for environmental purposes (Steg et al., 2006; Sælen and Kallbekken, 2011) or redistributed towards those affected (Schuitema and Steg, 2008). Acceptability can increase when people experience positive effects after a policy has been implemented (Schuitema et al., 2010a; Eliasson, 2014; Weber, 2015); effective policy trials can thus build public support for climate policy (see Box 4.8). Climate policy and renewable energy systems are more acceptable when people strongly value other people and the environment, or support egalitarian worldviews, left-wing or green political ideologies (Drews and Van den Bergh, 2016), and less acceptable when people strongly endorse self-enhancement values, or support individualistic and hierarchical worldviews (Dietz et al., 2007; Perlaviciute and Steg, 2014; Drews and Van den Bergh, 2016). Solar radiation modification is more acceptable when people strongly endorse self-enhancement values, and less acceptable when they strongly value other people and the environment (Visschers et al., 2017). Climate policy is more acceptable when people believe climate change is real, when they are concerned about climate change (Hornsey et al., 2016), when Box 4.6 | Bottom-up Initiatives: Adaptation Responses Initiated by Individuals and Communities To effectively adapt to climate change, bottom-up initiatives by individuals and communities are essential, in addition to efforts of governments, organizations, and institutions (Wamsler and Brink, 2014a). This box presents examples of bottom-up adaptation responses and behavioural change. Fiji increasingly faces a lack of freshwater due to decreasing rainfall and rising temperatures (Deo, 2011; IPCC, 2014a). While some villages have access to boreholes, these are not sufficient to supply the population with freshwater. Villagers are adapting by rationing water, changing diets, and setting up inter-village sharing networks (Pearce et al., 2017). Some villagers take up wage employment to buy food instead of growing it themselves (Pearce et al., 2017). In Kiribati, residents adapt to drought by purchasing rainwater tanks and constructing additional wells (Kuruppu and Liverman, 2011). An important factor that motivated residents of Kiribati to adapt to drought was the perception that they could effectively adapt to the negative consequences of climate change (Kuruppu and Liverman, 2011). In the Philippines, seismic activity has caused some islands to flood during high tide. While the municipal government offered affected island communities the possibility to relocate to the mainland, residents preferred to stay and implement measures themselves in their local community to reduce flood damage (Laurice Jamero et al., 2017). Migration is perceived as undesirable because island communities have strong place-based identities (Mortreux and Barnett, 2009). Instead, these island communities have adapted to flooding by constructing stilted houses and raising floors, furniture, and roads to prevent water damage (Laurice Jamero et al., 2017). While inundation was in this case caused by seismic activity, this example indicates how island-based communities may respond to rising sea levels caused by climate change. Adaptation initiatives by individuals may temporarily reduce the impacts of climate change and enable residents to cope with changing environmental circumstances. However, they may not be sufficient to sustain communities’ way of life in the long term. For instance, in Fiji and Kirib",
    "new_id": 545
  },
  {
    "id": 52502,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the implicit relationship between the criticisms of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and their integration of climate change, as discussed in the Global Warming of 1.5°C: An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty?",
    "options": {
      "B": "The complexity of SDGs dilute the potential for meaningful action on climate change and the goals overly focused on 2030 at the expense of longer-term objectives.",
      "A": "The SDGs' focus on short-term objectives like 2030 undermines their ability to address longer-term climate challenges effectively.",
      "C": "Critics argue that the SDGs fail to adequately prioritize climate change, treating it as just one of many equally weighted goals.",
      "D": "The SDGs contradict themselves by promoting economic growth in some goals while simultaneously requiring emission reductions in others.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "89",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC 1.5.pdf",
    "source_text": "74 Chapter 1 Framing and Context 1The SDGs expanded efforts to reduce poverty and other deprivations under the UN Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). There were improvements under the MDGs between 1990 and 2015, including reducing overall poverty and hunger, reducing infant mortality, and improving access to drinking water (UN, 2015a). However, greenhouse gas emissions increased by more than 50% from 1990 to 2015, and 1.6 billion people were still living in multidimensional poverty with persistent inequalities in 2015 (Alkire et al., 2015). The SDGs raise the ambition for eliminating poverty, hunger, inequality and other societal problems while protecting the environment. They have been criticised: as too many and too complex, needing more realistic targets, overly focused on 2030 at the expense of longer-term objectives, not embracing all aspects of sustainable development, and even contradicting each other (Horton, 2014; Death and Gabay, 2015; Biermann et al., 2017; Weber, 2017; Winkler and Satterthwaite, 2017). Climate change is an integral influence on sustainable development, closely related to the economic, social and environmental dimensions of the SDGs. The IPCC has woven the concept of sustainable development into recent assessments, showing how climate change might undermine sustainable development, and the synergies between sustainable development and responses to climate change (Denton et al., 2014). Climate change is also explicit in the SDGs. SDG13 specifically requires ‘urgent action to address climate change and its impacts’. The targets include strengthening resilience and adaptive capacity to climate-related hazards and natural disasters; integrating climate change measures into national policies, strategies and planning; and improving education, awareness- raising and human and institutional capacity. Targets also include implementing the commitment undertaken by developed-country parties to the UNFCCC to the goal of mobilizing jointly 100 billion USD annually by 2020 and operationalizing the Green Climate Fund, as well as promoting mechanisms for raising capacity for effective climate change-related planning and management in least developed countries and Small Island Developing States, including focusing on women, youth and local and marginalised communities. SDG13 also acknowledges that the UNFCCC is the primary international, intergovernmental forum for negotiating the global response to climate change. Climate change is also mentioned in SDGs beyond SDG13, for example in goal targets 1.5, 2.4, 11.B, 12.8.1 related to poverty, hunger, cities and education respectively. The UNFCCC addresses other SDGs in commitments to ‘control, reduce or prevent anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases […] in all relevant sectors, including the energy, transport, industry, agriculture, forestry and waste management sectors’ (Art4, 1(c)) and to work towards ‘the conservation and enhancement, as appropriate, of […] biomass, forests and oceans as well as other terrestrial, coastal and marine ecosystems’ (Art4, 1(d)). This corresponds to SDGs that seek clean energy for all (Goal 7), sustainable industry (Goal 9) and cities (Goal 11) and the protection of life on land and below water (14 and 15). The SDGs and UNFCCC also differ in their time horizons. The SDGs focus primarily on 2030 whereas the Paris Agreement sets out that ‘Parties aim […] to achieve a balance between anthropogenic emissions by sources and removals by sinks of greenhouse gases in the second half of this century’. The IPCC decision to prepare this report on the impacts of 1.5°C and associated emission pathways explicitly asked for the assessment to be in the context of sustainable development and efforts to eradicate poverty. Chapter 1 frames the interaction between sustainable development, poverty eradication and ethics and equity. Chapter 2 assesses how risks and synergies of individual mitigation measures interact with 1.5°C pathways within the context of the SDGs and how these vary according to the mix of measures in alternative mitigation portfolios (Section 2.5). Chapter 3 examines the impacts of 1.5°C global warming on natural and human systems with comparison to 2°C and provides the basis for considering the interactions of climate change with sustainable development in Chapter 5. Chapter 4 analyses strategies for strengthening the response to climate change, many of which interact with sustainable development. Chapter 5 takes sustainab",
    "new_id": 546
  },
  {
    "id": 52513,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why the remaining carbon budget estimates in this report are larger than those reported in the IPCC AR5 SYR, and what implication does this have for non-CO₂ contributions at net zero CO₂ emissions, as discussed in the Global Warming of 1.5°C: An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty?",
    "options": {
      "C": "This report explicitly addresses the level of warming to date, uncertainties in non-CO2 forcing and temperature response, resulting in an estimated non-CO2 contribution of around 0.15¡ãC, which decreases the carbon budget by roughly 320 GtCO2 at net zero CO2 emissions.",
      "A": "The AR5 used only Earth System Models, while this report incorporates additional methodological improvements, leading to a reduced impact of non-CO2 warming by approximately ±0.1°C.",
      "B": "Improved modeling techniques in this report eliminate the influence of non-CO2 emissions entirely, allowing for a straightforward calculation of the carbon budget without considering aerosol cooling effects.",
      "D": "The difference arises from the AR5’s overestimation of historical warming by 0.1°C, directly negating the need to account for variations in non-CO2 contributions such as methane reductions.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "121",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC 1.5.pdf",
    "source_text": "106 Chapter 2 Mitigation Pathways Compatible with 1.5°C in the Context of Sustainable Development 2over land to estimate global surface temperature change since pre- industrial. The global warming from the pre-industrial period until the 2006–2015 reference period is estimated to amount to 0.97°C with an uncertainty range of about ±0.1°C (see Chapter 1, Section 1.2.1). Three methodological improvements lead to these estimates of the remaining carbon budget being about 300 GtCO2 larger than those reported in Table 2.2 of the IPCC AR5 SYR (IPCC, 2014a) ( medium confidence ). The AR5 used 15 Earth System Models (ESM) and 5 Earth-system Models of Intermediate Complexity (EMIC) to derive an estimate of the remaining carbon budget. Their approach hence made implicit assumptions about the level of warming to date, the future contribution of non-CO2 emissions, and the temperature response to CO2 (TCRE). In this report, each of these aspects are considered explicitly. When estimating global warming until the 2006–2015 reference period as a blend of near-surface air temperature over land and sea-ice regions, and sea-surface temperature over open ocean, by averaging the four global mean surface temperature time series listed in Chapter 1 Section 1.2.1, the global warming would amount to 0.87°C ±0.1°C. Using the latter estimate of historical warming and projecting global warming using global near-surface air temperatures from model projections leads to remaining carbon budgets for limiting global warming to 1.5°C of 1080, 770, and 570 GtCO2 for the 33rd, 50th, and 67th percentile of TCRE, respectively. Note that future research and ongoing observations over the next years will provide a better indication as to how the 2006–2015 base period compares with the long-term trends and might affect the budget estimates. Similarly, improved understanding in Earth system feedbacks would result in a better quantification of their impacts on remaining carbon budgets for 1.5°C and 2°C. After TCRE uncertainty, a major additional source of uncertainty is the magnitude of non-CO2 forcing and its contribution to the temperature change between the present day and the time of peak warming. Integrated emissions pathways can be used to ensure consistency between CO2 and non-CO2 emissions (Bowerman et al., 2013; Collins et al., 2013; Clarke et al., 2014; Rogelj et al., 2014b, 2015a; Tokarska et al., 2018). Friedlingstein et al. (2014a) used pathways with limited to no climate mitigation to find a variation due to non-CO2 contributions of about ±33% for a 2°C carbon budget. Rogelj et al. (2016b) showed no particular bias in non-CO2 radiative forcing or warming at the time of exceedance of 2°C or at peak warming between scenarios with increasing emissions and strongly mitigated scenarios (consistent with Stocker et al., 2013). However, clear differences of the non- CO2 warming contribution at the time of deriving a 2°C-consistent carbon budget were reported for the four RCPs. Although the spread in non-CO2 forcing across scenarios can be smaller in absolute terms at lower levels of cumulative emissions, it can be larger in relative terms compared to the remaining carbon budget (Stocker et al., 2013; Friedlingstein et al., 2014a; Rogelj et al., 2016b). Tokarska and Gillett (2018) find no statistically significant differences in 1.5°C-consistent cumulative emissions budgets when calculated for different RCPs from consistent sets of CMIP5 simulations. The mitigation pathways assessed in this report indicate that emissions of non-CO2 forcers contribute an average additional warming of around 0.15°C relative to 2006–2015 at the time of net zero CO2 emissions, reducing the remaining carbon budget by roughly 320 GtCO2. This arises from a weakening of aerosol cooling and continued emissions of non-CO2 GHGs (Sections 2.2.1, 2.3.3). This non-CO2 contribution at the time of net zero CO2 emissions varies by about ±0.1°C across scenarios, resulting in a carbon budget uncertainty of about ±250 GtCO2, and takes into account marked reductions in methane emissions (Section 2.3.3). If these reductions are not achieved, remaining carbon budgets are further reduced. Uncertainties in the non-CO2 forcing and temperature response are asymmetric and can influence the remaining carbon budget by −400 to +200 GtCO2, with the uncertainty in aerosol radiative forcing being the largest contributing factor (Table 2.2). The MAGICC and FAIR models in their respective parameter setups ",
    "new_id": 547
  },
  {
    "id": 52534,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the relationship between mitigation pathways and sustainable development objectives, as described in the Global Warming of 1.5°C: An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty?",
    "options": {
      "D": "While mitigation pathways primarily aim to meet climate targets, they often neglect broader sustainable development goals unless explicitly integrated.",
      "A": "Mitigation pathways are inherently designed to maximize sustainable development benefits, with climate-related damages being a central consideration.",
      "B": "Sustainable development impacts are the primary basis for designing mitigation pathways, ensuring alignment with societal concerns and multiple objectives.",
      "C": "Mitigation pathways consistently incorporate solar radiation modification as a key strategy to balance climate and sustainable development goals.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "113",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC 1.5.pdf",
    "source_text": "98 Chapter 2 Mitigation Pathways Compatible with 1.5°C in the Context of Sustainable Development 22.1 Introduction to Mitigation Pathways and the Sustainable Development Context This chapter assesses the literature on mitigation pathways to limit or return global mean warming to 1.5°C (relative to the pre-industrial base period 1850–1900). Key questions addressed are: What types of mitigation pathways have been developed that could be consistent with 1.5°C? What changes in emissions, energy and land use do they entail? What do they imply for climate policy and implementation, and what impacts do they have on sustainable development? In terms of feasibility (see Cross-Chapter Box 3 in Chapter 1), this chapter focuses on geophysical dimensions and technological and economic enabling factors. Social and institutional dimensions as well as additional aspects of technical feasibility are covered in Chapter 4. Mitigation pathways are typically designed to reach a predefined climate target alone. Minimization of mitigation expenditures, but not climate-related damages or sustainable development impacts, is often the basis for these pathways to the desired climate target (see Cross-Chapter Box 5 in this chapter for additional discussion). However, there are interactions between mitigation and multiple other sustainable development goals (see Sections 1.1 and 5.4) that provide both challenges and opportunities for climate action. Hence there are substantial efforts to evaluate the effects of the various mitigation pathways on sustainable development, focusing in particular on aspects for which integrated assessment models (IAMs) provide relevant information (e.g., land-use changes and biodiversity, food security, and air quality). More broadly, there are efforts to incorporate climate change mitigation as one of multiple objectives that, in general, reflect societal concerns more completely and could potentially provide benefits at lower costs than simultaneous single-objective policies (e.g., Clarke et al., 2014). For example, with carefully selected policies, universal energy access can be achieved while simultaneously reducing air pollution and mitigating climate change (McCollum et al., 2011; Riahi et al., 2012; IEA, 2017d). This chapter thus presents both the pathways and an initial discussion of their context within sustainable development objectives (Section 2.5), with the latter, along with equity and ethical issues, discussed in more detail in Chapter 5. As described in Cross-Chapter Box 1 in Chapter 1, scenarios are comprehensive, plausible, integrated descriptions of possible futures based on specified, internally consistent underlying assumptions, with pathways often used to describe the clear temporal evolution of specific scenario aspects or goal-oriented scenarios. We include both these usages of ‘pathways’ here. 2.1.1 Mitigation Pathways Consistent with 1.5°C Emissions scenarios need to cover all sectors and regions over the 21st century to be associated with a climate change projection out to 2100. Assumptions regarding future trends in population, consumption of goods and services (including food), economic growth, behaviour, technology, policies and institutions are all required to generate scenarios (Section 2.3.1). These societal choices must then be linked to the drivers of climate change, including emissions of well-mixed greenhouse gases and aerosol and ozone precursors as well as land- use and land-cover changes. Deliberate solar radiation modification is not included in these scenarios (see Cross-Chapter Box 10 in Chapter 4). Plausible developments need to be anticipated in many facets of the key sectors of energy and land use. Within energy, these scenarios consider energy resources like biofuels, energy supply and conversion technologies, energy consumption, and supply and end-use efficiency. Within land use, agricultural productivity, food demand, terrestrial carbon management, and biofuel production are all considered. Climate policies are also considered, including carbon pricing and technology policies such as research and development funding and subsidies. The scenarios incorporate regional differentiation in sectoral and policy development. The climate changes resulting from such scenarios are derived using models that typically incorporate physical understanding of the carbon cycle and climate response derived from complex geophysical models evaluated against observations (Sections 2.2 and 2",
    "new_id": 548
  },
  {
    "id": 52584,
    "question": "Which factor is both necessary for enhancing climate action and explicitly linked to the ability to invest in energy-efficient technology, while also being influenced by gender roles and direct experience of climate-related events, as discussed in the Global Warming of 1.5°C: An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Ability to act, which depends on income and knowledge, and is further shaped by adaptive capacity influenced by gender roles and direct climate hazard exposure.",
      "B": "Higher income, as it allows for carbon-intensive lifestyles and is shaped by political views.",
      "C": "Knowledge of climate change causes, as it directly motivates mitigation actions and is unaffected by personal experiences.",
      "D": "Political unity among elites, as it increases public worry about climate change and ensures accurate knowledge dissemination.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "379",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC 1.5.pdf",
    "source_text": "364 Chapter 4 Strengthening and Implementing the Global Response 4Union (EU), individuals worry more about climate change and engage more in climate actions in countries where political party elites are united rather than divided in their support for environmental issues (Sohlberg, 2017). This section discusses how to enable and encourage behaviour and lifestyle changes that strengthen implementation of 1.5°C-consistent pathways by assessing psycho-social factors related to climate action, as well as the effects and acceptability of policy approaches targeting climate actions that are consistent with 1.5°C. Box 4.5 and Box 4.6 illustrate how these have worked in practice. 4.4.3.1 Factors related to climate actions Mitigation and adaptation behaviour is affected by many factors that shape which options are feasible and considered by individuals. Besides contextual factors (see other sub-sections in Section 4.4), these include abilities and different types of motivation to engage in behaviour. Ability to engage in climate action. Individuals more often engage in adaptation (Gebrehiwot and van der Veen, 2015; Koerth et al., 2017) and mitigation behaviour (Pisano and Lubell, 2017) when they are or feel more capable to do so. Hence, it is important to enhance ability to act on climate change, which depends on income and knowledge, among other things. A higher income is related to higher CO2 emissions; higher income groups can afford more carbon-intensive lifestyles (Lamb et al., 2014; Dietz et al., 2015; Wang et al., 2015). Yet low-income groups may lack resources to invest in energy-efficient technology and refurbishments (Andrews-Speed and Ma, 2016) and adaptation options (Wamsler, 2007; Fleming et al., 2015b; Takahashi et al., 2016). Adaptive capacity further depends on gender roles (Jabeen, 2014; Bunce and Ford, 2015), technical capacities and knowledge (Feola et al., 2015; Eakin et al., 2016; Singh et al., 2016b). Knowledge of the causes and consequences of climate change and of ways to reduce GHG emissions is not always accurate (Bord et al., 2000; Whitmarsh et al., 2011; Tobler et al., 2012), which can inhibit climate actions, even when people would be motivated to act. For example, people overestimate savings from low-energy activities, and underestimate savings from high-energy activities (Attari et al., 2010). They know little about ‘embodied’ energy (i.e., energy needed to produce products; Tobler et al., 2011), including meat (de Boer et al., 2016b). Some people mistake weather for climate (Reynolds et al., 2010), or conflate climate risks with other hazards, which can inhibit adequate adaptation (Taylor et al., 2014). More knowledge on adaptation is related to higher engagement in adaptation actions in some circumstances (Bates et al., 2009; van Kasteren, 2014; Hagen et al., 2016). How adaptation is framed in the media can influence the types of options viewed as important in different contexts (Boykoff et al., 2013; Moser, 2014; Ford and King, 2015). Knowledge is important, but is often not sufficient to motivate action (Trenberth et al., 2016). Climate change knowledge and perceptions are not strongly related to mitigation actions (Hornsey et al., 2016). Direct experience of events related to climate change influences climate concerns and actions (Blennow et al., 2012; Taylor et al., 2014), more so than second-hand information (Spence et al., 2011; Myers et al., 2012; Demski et al., 2017); high impact events with low frequency are remembered more than low impact regular events (Meze-Hausken, 2004; Singh et al., 2016b; Sullivan-Wiley and Short Gianotti, 2017). Personal experience with climate hazards strengthens motivation to protect oneself (Jabeen, 2014) and enhances adaptation actions (Bryan et al., 2009; Berrang-Ford et al., 2011; Demski et al., 2017), although this does not always translate into proactive adaptation (Taylor et al., 2014). Collectively constructed notions of risk and expectations of future climate variability shape risk perception and adaptation behaviour (Singh et al., 2016b). People with particular political views and those who emphasize individual autonomy may reject climate science knowledge and believe that there is widespread scientific disagreement about climate change (Kahan, 2010; O’Neill et al., 2013), inhibiting support for climate policy (Ding et al., 2011; McCright et al., 2013). This may explain why extreme weather experiences enhances preparedness to reduce energy use amon",
    "new_id": 549
  },
  {
    "id": 52587,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why Integrated Assessment Model (IAM) pathways and Energy Technology Perspectives (ETP) scenarios differ in their projections for energy consumption, CO₂ emissions, and carbon intensity, as discussed in the Global Warming of 1.5°C: An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty?",
    "options": {
      "B": "ETP scenarios focus more on efficiency improvements and the higher share of biofuels and electricity accelerating the speed of decarbonization.",
      "A": "IAM pathways prioritize biofuel consumption over electricity, while ETP scenarios emphasize electricity exclusively.",
      "C": "IAM pathways assume unprecedented growth rates in electric vehicle sales, which ETP scenarios consider unrealistic.",
      "D": "ETP scenarios disregard land-use transitions, while IAM pathways integrate them as a core component of mitigation.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "159",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC 1.5.pdf",
    "source_text": "144 Chapter 2 Mitigation Pathways Compatible with 1.5°C in the Context of Sustainable Development 2in 1.5°C-overshoot pathways from IAMs and the IEA-B2DS pathway, respectively. The IEA-B2DS scenario is on the more ambitious side, especially in the share of electricity. Hence, there is wide variation among scenarios, including the IAM pathways, regarding changes in the transport fuel mix over the first half of the century. As seen in Figure 2.23, the projections of energy consumption, CO2 emissions and carbon intensity are quite different between IAM and ETP scenarios. These differences can be explained by more weight on efficiency improvements and avoid/shift decreasing energy consumption, and the higher share of biofuels and electricity accelerating the speed of decarbonization in ETP scenarios. Although biofuel consumption and electric vehicle sales have increased significantly in recent years, the growth rates projected in these pathways would be unprecedented and far higher than has been experienced to date. The 1.5°C pathways require an acceleration of the mitigation solutions already featured in 2°C-consistent pathways (e.g., more efficient vehicle technologies operating on lower-carbon fuels), as well as those having received lesser attention in most global transport decarbonization pathways up to now (e.g., mode-shifting and travel demand management). Current-generation, global pathways generally do not include these newer transport sector developments, whereby technological solutions are related to shifts in traveller’s behaviour. 2.4.4 Land-Use Transitions and Changes in the Agricultural Sector The agricultural and land system described together under the umbrella of the AFOLU (agriculture, forestry, and other land use) sector plays an important role in 1.5°C pathways (Clarke et al., 2014; Smith and Bustamante, 2014; Popp et al., 2017). On the one hand, its emissions need to be limited over the course of this century to be in line with pathways limiting warming to 1.5°C (see Sections 2.2-3). On the other hand, the AFOLU system is responsible for food and feed production; for wood production for pulp and construction; for the production of biomass that is used for energy, CDR or other uses; and for the supply of non-provisioning (ecosystem) services (Smith and Bustamante, 2014). Meeting all demands together requires changes in land use, as well as in agricultural and forestry practices, for which a multitude of potential options have been identified (Smith and Bustamante, 2014; Popp et al., 2017) (see also Supplementary Material 2.SM.1.2 and Chapter 4, Section 4.3.1, 4.3.2 and 4.3.7). This section assesses the transformation of the AFOLU system, mainly making use of pathways from IAMs (see Section 2.1) that are based on quantifications of the SSPs and that report distinct land-use evolutions in line with limiting warming to 1.5°C (Calvin et al., 2017; Fricko et al., 2017; Fujimori, 2017; Kriegler et al., 2017; Popp et al., 2017; Riahi et al., 2017; van Vuuren et al., 2017b; Doelman et al., 2018; Rogelj et al., 2018). The SSPs were designed to vary mitigation challenges (O’Neill et al., 2014) (Cross-Chapter Box 1 in Chapter 1), including for the AFOLU sector (Popp et al., 2017; Riahi et al., 2017). The SSP pathway ensemble hence allows for a structured exploration of AFOLU transitions in the context of climate change mitigation in line with 1.5°C, taking into account technological and socio-economic aspects. Other considerations, like food security, livelihoods and biodiversity, are also of importance when identifying AFOLU strategies. These are at present only tangentially explored by the SSPs. Further assessments of AFOLU mitigation options are provided in other parts of this report and in the IPCC Special Report on Climate Change and Land (SRCCL). Chapter 4 provides an assessment of bioenergy (including feedstocks, see Section 4.3.1), livestock management (Section 4.3.1), reducing rates of deforestation and other land-based mitigation options (as mitigation and adaptation option, see Section 4.3.2), and BECCS, afforestation and reforestation options (including the bottom-up literature of their sustainable potential, mitigation cost and side effects, Section 4.3.7). Chapter 3 discusses impacts land-based CDR (Cross-Chapter Box 7 in Chapter 3). Chapter 5 assesses the sustainable development implications of AFOLU mitigation, including impacts on biodiversity (Section 5.4). Finally, the SRCCL will undertake a ",
    "new_id": 550
  },
  {
    "id": 52591,
    "question": "Which factor is both necessary for the feasibility of renewable energy options and explicitly requires technological advances and policy instruments to overcome limitations, as discussed in the Global Warming of 1.5°C: An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Grid adaptations, as they are essential for integrating growing shares of renewable energy into existing energy systems.",
      "A": "Public acceptance, as it directly determines whether renewable energy projects can be implemented without resistance.",
      "B": "Geophysical characteristics, as they dictate the natural potential for renewable energy generation in a given area.",
      "D": "Financial participation, as it ensures community engagement and mitigates opposition to large-scale renewable facilities.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "339",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC 1.5.pdf",
    "source_text": "324 Chapter 4 Strengthening and Implementing the Global Response 44.3.1 Energy System Transitions This section discusses the feasibility of mitigation and adaptation options related to the energy system transition. Only options relevant to 1.5°C and with significant changes since AR5 are discussed, which means that for options like hydropower and geothermal energy, the chapter refers to AR5 and does not provide a discussion. Socio- technical inertia of energy options for 1.5°C-consistent pathways are increasingly being surmounted as fossil fuels start to be phased out. Supply-side mitigation and adaptation options and energy demand- side options, including energy efficiency in buildings and transportation, are discussed in Section 4.3.3; options around energy use in industry are discussed in Section 4.3.4. Section 4.5 assesses the feasibility in a systematic manner based on the approach outlined in Cross-Chapter Box 3 in Chapter 1. 4.3.1.1 Renewable electricity: solar and wind All renewable energy options have seen considerable advances over the years since AR5, but solar energy and both onshore and offshore wind energy have had dramatic growth trajectories. They appear well underway to contribute to 1.5°C-consistent pathways (IEA, 2017c; IRENA, 2017b; REN21, 2017). The largest growth driver for renewable energy since AR5 has been the dramatic reduction in the cost of solar photovoltaics (PV) (REN21, 2017). This has made rooftop solar competitive in sunny areas between 45° north and south latitude (Green and Newman, 2017b), though IRENA (2018) suggests it is cost effective in many other places too. Solar PV with batteries has been cost effective in many rural and developing areas (Pueyo and Hanna, 2015; Szabó et al., 2016; Jimenez, 2017), for example 19 million people in Bangladesh now have solar-battery electricity in remote villages and are reporting positive experiences on safety and ease of use (Kabir et al., 2017). Small-scale distributed energy projects are being implemented in developed and developing cities where residential and commercial rooftops offer potential for consumers becoming producers (called prosumers) (ACOLA, 2017; Kotilainen and Saari, 2018). Such prosumers could contribute significantly to electricity generation in sun-rich areas like California (Kurdgelashvili et al., 2016) or sub-Saharan Africa in combination with micro-grids and mini-grids (Bertheau et al., 2017). It could also contribute to universal energy access (SDG 7) as shown by (IEA, 2017c). The feasibility of renewable energy options depends to a large extent on geophysical characteristics of the area where the option is implemented. However, technological advances and policy instruments make renewable energy options increasingly attractive in other areas. For example, solar PV is deployed commercially in areas with low solar insolation, like northwest Europe (Nyholm et al., 2017). Feasibility also depends on grid adaptations (e.g., storage, see below) as renewables grow (IEA, 2017c). For regions with high energy needs, such as industrial areas (see Section 4.3.4), high-voltage DC transmission across long distances would be needed (MacDonald et al., 2016). Another important factor affecting feasibility is public acceptance, in particular for wind energy and other large-scale renewable facilities (Yenneti and Day, 2016; Rand and Hoen, 2017; Gorayeb et al., 2018) that raise landscape management (Nadaï and Labussière, 2017) and distributional justice (Yenneti and Day, 2016) challenges. Research indicates that financial participation and community engagement can be effective in mitigating resistance (Brunes and Ohlhorst, 2011; Rand and Hoen, 2017) (see Section 4.4.3). Bottom-up studies estimating the use of renewable energy in the future, either at the global or at the national level, are plentiful, especially in the grey literature. It is hotly debated whether a fully renewable energy or electricity system, with or without biomass, is possible (Jacobson et al., 2015, 2017) or not (Clack et al., 2017; Heard et al., 2017), and by what year. Scale-up estimates vary with assumptions about costs and technological maturity, as well as local geographical circumstances and the extent of storage used (Ghorbani et al., 2017; REN21, 2017). Several countries have adopted targets of 100% renewable electricity (IEA, 2017c) as this meets multiple social, economic and environmental goals and contributes to mitigation of climate change (REN21, 2017). 4",
    "new_id": 551
  },
  {
    "id": 52592,
    "question": "Which scenario best illustrates a transformative change that requires both social/cultural and institutional conditions to succeed, as described in the Global Warming of 1.5°C: An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The widespread adoption of LED lighting displaces incandescent bulbs, supported by policy actions fostering rapid industry innovation and public acceptance.",
      "A": "A city implements minor energy-efficiency improvements through smart urban planning without changing its regulatory framework or engaging stakeholders.",
      "B": "Electric cars fail to achieve rapid adoption due to insufficient integration with larger transport and energy systems, despite high demand for sustainable vehicles.",
      "C": "Solar and wind energy transition at an incremental pace because battery storage technology remains underdeveloped and lacks economic viability.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "407",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC 1.5.pdf",
    "source_text": "392 Chapter 4 Strengthening and Implementing the Global Response 4Frequently Asked Questions FAQ 4.1 | What Transitions could Enable Limiting Global Warming to 1.5°C? Summary: In order to limit warming to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels, the world would need to transform in a number of complex and connected ways. While transitions towards lower greenhouse gas emissions are underway in some cities, regions, countries, businesses and communities, there are few that are currently consistent with limiting warming to 1.5°C. Meeting this challenge would require a rapid escalation in the current scale and pace of change, particularly in the coming decades. There are many factors that affect the feasibility of different adaptation and mitigation options that could help limit warming to 1.5°C and with adapting to the consequences. There are actions across all sectors that can substantially reduce greenhouse gas emissions. This Special Report assesses energy, land and ecosystems, urban and infrastructure, and industry in developed and developing nations to see how they would need to be transformed to limit warming to 1.5°C. Examples of actions include shifting to low- or zero-emission power generation, such as renewables; changing food systems, such as diet changes away from land-intensive animal products; electrifying transport and developing ‘green infrastructure’, such as building green roofs, or improving energy efficiency by smart urban planning, which will change the layout of many cities. Because these different actions are connected, a ‘whole systems’ approach would be needed for the type of transformations that could limit warming to 1.5°C. This means that all relevant companies, industries and stakeholders would need to be involved to increase the support and chance of successful implementation. As an illustration, the deployment of low-emission technology (e.g., renewable energy projects or a bio-based chemical plants) would depend upon economic conditions (e.g., employment generation or capacity to mobilize investment), but also on social/cultural conditions (e.g., awareness and acceptability) and institutional conditions (e.g., political support and understanding). To limit warming to1.5°C, mitigation would have to be large-scale and rapid. Transitions can be transformative or incremental, and they often, but not always, go hand in hand. Transformative change can arise from growth in demand for a new product or market, such that it displaces an existing one. This is sometimes called ‘disruptive innovation’. For example, high demand for LED lighting is now making more energy-intensive, incandescent lighting near-obsolete, with the support of policy action that spurred rapid industry innovation. Similarly, smart phones have become global in use within ten years. But electric cars, which were released around the same time, have not been adopted so quickly because the bigger, more connected transport and energy systems are harder to change. Renewable energy, especially solar and wind, is considered to be disruptive by some as it is rapidly being adopted and is transitioning faster than predicted. But its demand is not yet uniform. Urban systems that are moving towards transformation are coupling solar and wind with battery storage and electric vehicles in a more incremental transition, though this would still require changes in regulations, tax incentives, new standards, demonstration projects and education programmes to enable markets for this system to work. Transitional changes are already underway in many systems, but limiting warming to 1.5°C would require a rapid escalation in the scale and pace of transition, particularly in the next 10–20 years. While limiting warming to 1.5°C would involve many of the same types of transitions as limiting warming to 2°C, the pace of change would need to be much faster. While the pace of change that would be required to limit warming to 1.5°C can be found in the past, there is no historical precedent for the scale of the necessary transitions, in particular in a socially and economically sustainable way. Resolving such speed and scale issues would require people’s support, public-sector interventions and private-sector cooperation. Different types of transitions carry with them different associated costs and requirements for institutional or governmental support. Some are also easier to scale up than others, and some need more government support than others. Transitions betw",
    "new_id": 552
  },
  {
    "id": 52596,
    "question": "Which scenario presents the most accurate implication regarding the transition of risk levels for unique and threatened systems in small island states and in systems fed by glacier meltwater, based on the comparison between AR5 findings and newer evidence from the Global Warming of 1.5°C: An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The transition from moderate to high risk occurs at a lower temperature threshold in newer evidence than in AR5, suggesting earlier onset of significant ecological impacts.",
      "B": "New evidence suggests that extreme weather events are the primary driver for shifting risk transitions to lower thresholds compared to AR5.",
      "C": "The transition from high to very high risk has been definitively proven to occur only at 2°C in both AR5 and newer studies, minimizing concerns about lower temperature thresholds.",
      "D": "The revised risk transitions imply that global temperatures below present-day levels eliminate all forms of moderate or higher risk to unique systems.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "270",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC 1.5.pdf",
    "source_text": "255 3Impacts of 1.5°C of Global Warming on Natural and Human Systems Chapter 3owing to the critical role of insects in nutrient cycling, pollination, detritivory and other important ecosystem processes (Section 3.4.3). Unique and threatened systems in small island states and in systems fed by glacier meltwater were also considered to contribute to this RFC in AR5, but there is little new information about these systems that pertains to 1.5°C or 2°C of global warming. Taken together, the evidence suggests that the transition from high to very high risk in unique and threatened systems occurs at a lower level of warming, between 1.5°C and 2°C ( high confidence ), than in AR5, where this transition was located at 2.6°C. The transition from moderate to high risk relocates very slightly from 1.6°C to 1.5°C ( high confidence ). There is also high confidence in the location of the transition from low to moderate risk below present-day global temperatures. 3.5.2.2 RFC 2 – Extreme weather events Reduced risks in terms of the likelihood of occurrence of extreme weather events are discussed in this sub-subsection for 1.5°C as compared to 2°C of global warming, for those extreme events where evidence is currently available based on the assessments of Section 3.3. AR5 assigned a moderate level of risk from extreme weather events at recent temperatures (1986–2005) owing to the attribution of heat and precipitation extremes to climate change, and a transition to high risk beginning below 1.6°C of global warming based on the magnitude, likelihood and timing of projected changes in risk associated with extreme events, indicating more severe and widespread impacts. The AR5 analysis already suggested a significant benefit of limiting warming to 1.5°C, as doing so might keep risks closer to the moderate level. New literature since AR5 has provided greater confidence in a reduced level of risks due to extreme weather events at 1.5°C versus 2°C of warming for some types of extremes (Section 3.3 and below; Figure 3.21). Temperature: It is expected that further increases in the number of warm days/nights and decreases in the number of cold days/nights, and an increase in the overall temperature of hot and cold extremes would occur under 1.5°C of global warming relative to pre-industrial levels ( high confidence ) compared to under the present-day climate (1°C of warming), with further changes occurring towards 2°C of global warming (Section 3.3). As assessed in Sections 3.3.1 and 3.3.2, impacts of 0.5°C of global warming can be identified for temperature extremes at global scales, based on observations and the analysis of climate models. At 2°C of global warming, it is likely that temperature increases of more than 2°C would occur over most land regions in terms of extreme temperatures (up to 4°C–6°C depending on region and considered extreme index) (Section 3.3.2, Table 3.2). Regional increases in temperature extremes can be robustly limited if global warming is constrained to 1.5°C, with regional warmings of up to 3°C–4.5°C (Section 3.3.2, Table 3.2). Benefits obtained from this general reduction in extremes depend to a large extent on whether the lower range of increases in extremes at 1.5°C is sufficient for critical thresholds to be exceeded, within the context of wide-ranging aspects such as crop yields, human health and the sustainability of ecosystems. Heavy precipitation: AR5 assessed trends in heavy precipitation for land regions where observational coverage was sufficient for assessment. It concluded with medium confidence that anthropogenic forcing has contributed to a global-scale intensification of heavy precipitation over the second half of the 20th century, for a global warming of approximately 0.5°C (Section 3.3.3). A recent observation- based study likewise showed that a 0.5°C increase in global mean temperature has had a detectable effect on changes in precipitation extremes at the global scale (Schleussner et al., 2017), thus suggesting that there would be detectable differences in heavy precipitation at 1.5°C and 2°C of global warming. These results are consistent with analyses of climate projections, although they also highlight a large amount of regional variation in the sensitivity of changes in heavy precipitation (Section 3.3.3). Droughts: When considering the difference between precipitation and evaporation (P–E) as a function of global temperature changes, the subtropics generally display an overall trend towards",
    "new_id": 553
  },
  {
    "id": 52598,
    "question": "Which statement accurately captures the relationship between global warming levels and biome shifts in the Mediterranean region, alongside implications for other ecosystems mentioned in the Global Warming of 1.5°C: An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Limiting warming to 1.5°C avoids unprecedented biome shifts in the Mediterranean, but a 12–15% decrease in biome area occurs at 2°C warming.",
      "A": "A warming of 1.5°C is projected to cause biome shifts unprecedented in the last 10,000 years, with negligible additional impacts at 2°C.",
      "C": "Biome shifts can be entirely avoided if global warming is constrained to 2°C, though significant decreases in Mediterranean biome area will still occur.",
      "D": "The Amazon tropical forest faces no significant risk from climate change below 2°C of warming, ensuring stability across all biomes until that threshold.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "236",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC 1.5.pdf",
    "source_text": "221 3Impacts of 1.5°C of Global Warming on Natural and Human Systems Chapter 3approximately 3.5°C.6 The values in Table 26-1 in a recent paper by Romero-Lankao et al. (2014) also indicate significantly lower wildfire risks in North America for near-term warming (2030–2040, considered a proxy for 1.5°C of warming) than at 2°C ( high confidence ). The Amazon tropical forest has been shown to be close to its climatic limits (Hutyra et al., 2005), but this threshold may move under elevated CO2 (Good et al., 2011). Future changes in rainfall, especially dry season length, will determine responses of the Amazon forest (Good et al., 2013). The forest may be especially vulnerable to combined pressure from multiple stressors, namely changes in climate and continued anthropogenic disturbance (Borma et al., 2013; Nobre et al., 2016). Modelling (Huntingford et al., 2013) and observational constraints (Cox et al., 2013) suggest that large-scale forest dieback is less likely than suggested under early coupled modelling studies (Cox et al., 2000; Jones et al., 2009). Nobre et al. (2016) estimated a climatic threshold of 4°C of warming and a deforestation threshold of 40%. In many places around the world, the savanna boundary is moving into former grasslands. Woody encroachment, including increased tree cover and biomass, has increased over the past century, owing to changes in land management, rising CO2 levels, and climate variability and change (often in combination) (Settele et al., 2014). For plant species in the Mediterranean region, shifts in phenology, range contraction and health decline have been observed with precipitation decreases and temperature increases ( medium confidence ) (Settele et al., 2014). Recent studies using independent complementary approaches have shown that there is a regional-scale threshold in the Mediterranean region between 1.5°C and 2°C of warming (Guiot and Cramer, 2016; Schleussner et al., 2016b). Further, Guiot and Cramer (2016) concluded that biome shifts unprecedented in the last 10,000 years can only be avoided if global warming is constrained to 1.5°C (medium confidence ) – whilst 2°C of warming will result in a decrease of 12–15% of the Mediterranean biome area. The Fynbos biome in southwestern South Africa is vulnerable to the increasing impact of fires under increasing temperatures and drier winters. It is projected to lose about 20%, 45% and 80% of its current suitable climate area under 1°C, 2°C and 3°C of global warming, respectively, compared to 1961–1990 ( high confidence ) (Engelbrecht and Engelbrecht, 2016). In Australia, an increase in the density of trees and shrubs at the expense of grassland species is occurring across all major ecosystems and is projected to be amplified (NCCARF , 2013). Regarding Central America, Lyra et al. (2017) showed that the tropical rainforest biomass would be reduced by about 40% under global warming of 3°C, with considerable replacement by savanna and grassland. With a global warming of close to 1.5°C in 2050, a biomass decrease of 20% is projected for tropical rainforests of Central America (Lyra et al., 2017). If a linear response is assumed, this decrease may reach 30% ( medium confidence ). Freshwater ecosystems are considered to be among the most threatened on the planet (Settele et al., 2014). Although peatlands cover only about 3% of the land surface, they hold one-third of the world’s soil carbon stock (400 to 600 Pg) (Settele et al., 2014). When drained, this carbon is released to the atmosphere. At least 15% of peatlands have drained, mostly in Europe and Southeast Asia, and are responsible for 5% of human derived CO2 emissions (Green and Page, 2017). Moreover, in the Congo basin (Dargie et al., 2017) and in the Amazonian basin (Draper et al., 2014), the peatlands store the equivalent carbon as that of a tropical forest. However, stored carbon is vulnerable to land-use change and future risk of drought, for example in northeast Brazil ( high confidence ) (Figure 3.12, Section 3.3.4.2). At the global scale, these peatlands are undergoing rapid major transformations through drainage and burning in preparation for oil palm and other crops or through unintentional burning (Magrin et al., 2014). Wetland salinization, a widespread threat to the structure and ecological functioning of inland and coastal wetlands, is occurring at a high rate and large geographic scale (Section 3.3.6; Herbert et al., 2015). Settele et al. (2014) found that rising wa",
    "new_id": 554
  },
  {
    "id": 52601,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures a potential conflict between achieving energy efficiency goals and sustainable development objectives, as implied in the Global Warming of 1.5°C: An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Premature obsolescence of appliances driven by consumer preferences undermines resource use efficiency despite potential energy savings.",
      "A": "Energy efficiency improvements inherently lead to sustainable consumption and production without trade-offs.",
      "B": "The deployment of small-scale renewables always aligns with affordability and access to energy for low-income populations.",
      "D": "Increased physical activity and reduced motorized travel have no significant impact on sustainable urban infrastructure development.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "476",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC 1.5.pdf",
    "source_text": "Sustainable Development, Poverty Eradication and Reducing Inequalities Chapter 5 5 5461Other behavioural responses will affect the interplay between energy efficiency and sustainable development. Building occupants reluctant to change their habits may miss out on welfare-enhancing energy efficiency opportunities (Zhao et al., 2017). Preferences for new products and premature obsolescence for appliances is expected to adversely affect sustainable consumption and production (SDG 12) with ramifications for resource use efficiency (Echegaray, 2016). Changes in user behaviour towards increased physical activity, less reliance on motorized travel over short distances and the use of public transport would help to decarbonize the transport sector in a synergetic manner with SDGs 3, 11 and 12 (Shaw et al., 2014; Ajanovic, 2015; Chakrabarti and Shin, 2017), while reducing inequality in access to basic facilities (SDG 10) (Lucas and Pangbourne, 2014; Kagawa et al., 2015). However, infrastructure design and regulations would need to ensure road safety and address risks of road accidents for pedestrians (Hwang et al., 2017; Khreis et al., 2017) to ensure sustainable infrastructure growth in human settlements (SDGs 9 and 11) (Lin et al., 2015; SLoCaT, 2017). 5.4.1.2 Energy Supply: Accelerated Decarbonization Decreasing the share of coal in energy supply in line with 1.5ºC-compatible scenarios (see Chapter 2, Section 2.4.2) reduces adverse impacts of upstream supply-chain activities, in particular air and water pollution and coal mining accidents, and enhances health by reducing air pollution, notably in cities, showing synergies with SDGs 3, 11 and 12 (Yang et al., 2016; UNEP , 2017). Fast deployment of renewables such as solar, wind, hydro and modern biomass, together with the decrease of fossil fuels in energy supply (see Chapter 2, Section 2.4.2.1), is aligned with the doubling of renewables in the global energy mix (SDG 7.2). Renewables could also support progress on SDGs 1, 10, 11 and 12 and supplement new technology (robust evidence, high agreement ) (Chaturvedi and Shukla, 2014; Rose et al., 2014; Smith and Sagar, 2014; Riahi et al., 2015; IEA, 2016; van Vuuren et al., 2017a; McCollum et al., 2018a). However, some trade- offs with the SDGs can emerge from offshore installations, particularly SDG 14 in local contexts (McCollum et al., 2018a). Moreover, trade- offs between renewable energy production and affordability (SDG 7) (Labordena et al., 2017) and other environmental objectives would need to be scrutinised for potential negative social outcomes. Policy interventions through regional cooperation-building (SDG 17) and institutional capacity (SDG 16) can enhance affordability (SDG 7) (Labordena et al., 2017). The deployment of small-scale renewables, or off-grid solutions for people in remote areas (Sánchez and Izzo, 2017), has strong potential for synergies with access to energy (SDG 7), but the actualization of these potentials requires measures to overcome technology and reliability risks associated with large-scale deployment of renewables (Giwa et al., 2017; Heard et al., 2017). Bundling energy- efficient appliances and lighting with off-grid renewables can lead to substantial cost reduction while increasing reliability (IEA, 2017). Low-income populations in industrialized countries are often left out of renewable energy generation schemes, either because of high start-up costs or lack of home ownership (UNRISD, 2016). Nuclear energy, the share of which increases in most of the 1.5ºC-compatible pathways (see Chapter 2, Section 2.4.2.1), can increase the risks of proliferation (SDG 16), have negative environmental effects (e.g., for water use; SDG 6) and have mixed effects for human health when replacing fossil fuels (SDGs 7 and 3) (see Table 5.2). The use of fossil CCS, which plays an important role in deep mitigation pathways (see Chapter 2, Section 2.4.2.3), implies continued adverse impacts of upstream supply-chain activities in the coal sector, and because of lower efficiency of CCS coal power plants (SDG 12), upstream impacts and local air pollution are likely to be exacerbated (SDG 3). Furthermore, there is a non-negligible risk of carbon dioxide leakage from geological storage and the carbon dioxide transport infrastructure (SDG 3) (Table 5.2). Economies dependent upon fossil fuel-based energy generation and/or export revenue are expected to be disproportionally affected by future restrictions on the use of fo",
    "new_id": 555
  },
  {
    "id": 52602,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why food security becomes a more prioritized issue than environmental conservation in this scenario, leading to significant ecosystem losses, as described in the Global Warming of 1.5°C: An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The decline in tropical crop yields and prolonged famines force countries to prioritize immediate human survival over long-term ecological sustainability.",
      "A": "Food insecurity arises primarily due to rising sea levels and intensifying storms, which directly damage agricultural infrastructure.",
      "B": "Countries deliberately choose to abandon environmental goals in favor of economic growth, driven by the need to recover from financial crises.",
      "C": "Bioenergy production competes with agriculture for land and water resources, causing governments to redirect funding exclusively toward energy initiatives.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "295",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC 1.5.pdf",
    "source_text": "280 Chapter 3 Impacts of 1.5°C of Global Warming on Natural and Human Systems 3Cross-Chapter Box 8, Table 2 (continued)Cross-Chapter Box 8 (continued) Scenario 2 [one possible storyline among mid-case scenarios]: Mitigation: delayed action (ambitious targets reached only after warmer decade in the 2020s due to internal climate variability), overshoot at 2°C, decrease towards 1.5°C afterward, no efforts to minimize the land and water footprints of bioenergy Internal climate variability: 10% worst-case outcome (2020s) followed by normal internal climate variabilityTemperature peaks at 2°C of warming by the middle of the century before decreasing again owing to intensive implementation of bioenergy plants with carbon capture and storage (Chapter 2), without efforts to minimize the land and water footprint of bioenergy production (Cross-Chapter Box 7 in Chapter 3). Reaching 2°C of warming for several decades eliminates or severely damages key ecosystems such as coral reefs and tropical forests (Chapter 3, Section 3.4). The elimination of coral reef ecosystems and the deterioration of their calcified frameworks, as well as serious losses of coastal ecosystems such as mangrove forests and seagrass beds (Chapter 3, Boxes 3.4 and 3.5, Sections 3.4.4.10 and 3.4.5), leads to much reduced levels of coastal defence from storms, winds and waves. These changes increase the vulnerability and risks facing communities in tropical and subtropical regions, with consequences for many coastal communities (Cross-Chapter Box 12 in Chapter 5). These impacts are being amplified by steadily rising sea levels (Chapter 3, Section 3.3.9) and intensifying storms (Chapter 3, Section 3.4.4.3). The intensive area required for the production of bioenergy, combined with increasing water stress, puts pressure on food prices (Cross-Chapter Box 6 in Chapter 3), driving elevated rates of food insecurity, hunger and poverty (Chapter 4, Section 4.3.2; Cross-Chapter Box 6 in Chapter 3; Cross-Chapter Box 11 in Chapter 4). Crop yields decline significantly in the tropics, leading to prolonged famines in some African countries (Chapter 3, Section 3.4; Chapter 4, Section 4.3.2). Food trumps environment in terms of importance in most countries, with the result that natural ecosystems decrease in abundance, owing to climate change and land-use change (Cross-Chapter Box 7 in Chapter 3). The ability to implement adaptive action to prevent the loss of ecosystems is hindered under the circumstances and is consequently minimal (Chapter 3, Sections 3.3.6 and 3.4.4.10). Many natural ecosystems, in particular in the Mediterranean, are lost because of the combined effects of climate change and land-use change, and extinction rates increase greatly (Chapter 3, Section 3.4 and Box 3.2). By 2100, warming has decreased but is still stronger than 1.5°C, and the yields of some tropical crops are recovering (Chapter 3, Section 3.4.3). Several of the remaining natural ecosystems experience irreversible climate change-related damages whilst others have been lost to land-use change, with very rapid increases in the rate of species extinctions (Chapter 3, Section 3.4; Cross-Chapter Box 7 in Chapter 3; Cross-Chapter Box 11 in Chapter 4). Migration, forced displacement, and loss of identity are extensive in some countries, reversing some achievements in sustainable development and human security (Chapter 5, Section 5.3.2). Aggregate economic impacts of climate change damage are small, but the loss in ecosystem services creates large economic losses (Chapter 4, Sections 4.3.2 and 4.3.3). The health and well-being of people generally decrease from 2020, while the levels of poverty and disadvantage increase considerably (Chapter 5, Section 5.2.1). Scenario 3 [one possible storyline among worst-case scenarios]: Mitigation: uncoordinated action, major actions late in the 21st century, 3°C of warming in 2100 Internal climate variability: unusual (ca. 10%) best-case scenario for one decade, followed by normal internal climate variabilityIn 2020, despite past pledges, the international support for the Paris Agreement starts to wane. In the years that follow, CO2 emissions are reduced at the local and national level but efforts are limited and not always successful. Radiative forcing increases and, due to chance, the most extreme events tend to happen in less populated regions and thus do not increase global concerns. Nonetheless, there are more frequent heatwaves in several cities and less sno",
    "new_id": 556
  },
  {
    "id": 52603,
    "question": "Which statement best captures the underlying reason why integrating indigenous knowledge with meteorological forecasts is emphasized for communities in Tanzania, as discussed in the Global Warming of 1.5°C: An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The combination of both knowledge systems enhances community understanding and adaptive capacity amidst rising climate unpredictability.",
      "B": "Indigenous knowledge alone has proven sufficient to address increased climate variability.",
      "C": "Meteorological forecasts are considered unreliable and require supplementation by traditional practices.",
      "D": "Local communities prefer indigenous knowledge due to distrust of modern scientific methods.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "375",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC 1.5.pdf",
    "source_text": "360 Chapter 4 Strengthening and Implementing the Global Response 4communities (Romero-Lankao et al., 2013), and draws upon diverse knowledge sources including indigenous and local knowledge (Nakashima et al., 2012; Smith and Sharp, 2012; Mistry and Berardi, 2016; Tschakert et al., 2017). Examples of successful local institutional processes and the integration of local knowledge in climate-related decision-making are provided in Box 4.3 and Box 4.4. Implementing 1.5°C-consistent strategies would require well- functioning legal frameworks to be in place, in conjunction with clearly defined mandates, rights and responsibilities to enable the institutional capacity to deliver (Romero-Lankao et al., 2013). As an example, current rates of urbanization occurring in cities with a lack of institutional capacity for effective land-use planning, zoning and infrastructure development result in unplanned, informal urban settlements which are vulnerable to climate impacts. It is common for 30–50% of urban populations in low-income nations to live in informal settlements with no regulatory infrastructure (Revi et al., 2014b). For example, in Huambo (Angola), a classified ‘urban’ area extends 20 km west of the city and is predominantly made up of ‘unplanned’ urban settlements (Smith and Jenkins, 2015). Internationally, the Paris Agreement process has aimed at enhancing the capacity of decision-making institutions in developing countries to support effective implementation. These efforts are particularly reflected in Article 11 of the Paris Agreement on capacity building (the creation of the Paris Committee on Capacity Building), Article 13 (the creation of the Capacity Building Initiative on Transparency), and Article 15 on compliance (UNFCCC, 2016). Box 4.3 | Indigenous Knowledge and Community Adaptation Indigenous knowledge refers to the understandings, skills and philosophies developed by societies with long histories of interaction with their natural surroundings (UNESCO, 2017). This knowledge can underpin the development of adaptation and mitigation strategies (Ford et al., 2014b; Green and Minchin, 2014; Pearce et al., 2015; Savo et al., 2016). Climate change is an important concern for the Maya, who depend on climate knowledge for their livelihood. In Guatemala, the collaboration between the Mayan K’iché population of the Nahualate river basin and the Climate Change Institute has resulted in a catalogue of indigenous knowledge, used to identify indicators for watershed meteorological forecasts (López and Álvarez, 2016). These indicators are relevant but would need continuous assessment if their continued reliability is to be confirmed (Nyong et al., 2007; Alexander et al., 2011; Mistry and Berardi, 2016). For more than ten years, Guatemala has maintained an ‘Indigenous Table for Climate Change’, to enable the consideration of indigenous knowledge in disaster management and adaptation development. In Tanzania, increased variability of rainfall is challenging indigenous and local communities (Mahoo et al., 2015; Sewando et al., 2016). The majority of agro-pastoralists use indigenous knowledge to forecast seasonal rainfall, relying on observations of plant phenology, bird, animal, and insect behaviour, the sun and moon, and wind (Chang’a et al., 2010; Elia et al., 2014; Shaffer, 2014). Increased climate variability has raised concerns about the reliability of these indicators (Shaffer, 2014); therefore, initiatives have focused on the co-production of knowledge by involving local communities in monitoring and discussing the implications of indigenous knowledge and meteorological forecasts (Shaffer, 2014), and creating local forecasts by utilizing the two sources of knowledge (Mahoo et al., 2013). This has resulted in increased documentation of indigenous knowledge, understanding of relevant climate information amongst stakeholders, and adaptive capacity at the community level (Mahoo et al., 2013, 2015; Shaffer, 2014). The Pacific Islands and small island developing states (SIDS) are vulnerable to the effects of climate change, but the cultural resilience of Pacific Island inhabitants is also recognized (Nunn et al., 2017). In Fiji and Vanuatu, strategies used to prepare for cyclones include building reserve emergency supplies and utilizing farming techniques to ensure adequate crop yield to combat potential losses from a cyclone or drought (McNamara and Prasad, 2014; Granderson, 2017; Pearce et al., 2017). Social cohesion and ki",
    "new_id": 557
  },
  {
    "id": 52607,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the nuanced relationship between global warming levels, economic impacts, and regional disparities, as described in the Global Warming of 1.5°C: An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Low- and middle-income countries in tropical regions face disproportionately higher economic risks with an increase from 1.5°C to 2°C of warming compared to other regions.",
      "A": "Economic growth risks are projected to be uniform across all regions at both 1.5°C and 2°C of warming.",
      "C": "Global aggregated economic growth risks are expected to decrease significantly if warming is limited to 2°C instead of 1.5°C.",
      "D": "The African continent, Southeast Asia, India, Brazil, and Mexico are projected to experience negligible economic impacts even with warming beyond 2°C.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "54",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC 1.5.pdf",
    "source_text": "TS Technical Summary39holistic policy for sustainable land management were adopted, and if increased mitigation efforts were employed to strongly limit the demand for land, energy and material resources, including through lifestyle and dietary changes ( medium confidence ). In particular, reforestation could be associated with significant co-benefits if implemented in a manner than helps restore natural ecosystems ( high confidence ). {Cross-Chapter Box 7 in this chapter} Human Health, Well-Being, Cities and Poverty Any increase in global temperature (e.g., +0.5°C) is projected to affect human health, with primarily negative consequences (high confidence ). Lower risks are projected at 1.5°C than at 2°C for heat-related morbidity and mortality ( very high confidence ), and for ozone-related mortality if emissions needed for ozone formation remain high ( high confidence ). Urban heat islands often amplify the impacts of heatwaves in cities ( high confidence ). Risks for some vector-borne diseases, such as malaria and dengue fever are projected to increase with warming from 1.5°C to 2°C, including potential shifts in their geographic range ( high confidence ). Overall for vector- borne diseases, whether projections are positive or negative depends on the disease, region and extent of change ( high confidence ). Lower risks of undernutrition are projected at 1.5°C than at 2°C ( medium confidence ). Incorporating estimates of adaptation into projections reduces the magnitude of risks ( high confidence ). {3.4.7, 3.4.7.1, 3.4.8, 3.5.5.8} Global warming of 2°C is expected to pose greater risks to urban areas than global warming of 1.5°C ( medium confidence ). The extent of risk depends on human vulnerability and the effectiveness of adaptation for regions (coastal and non-coastal), informal settlements and infrastructure sectors (such as energy, water and transport) ( high confidence ). {3.4.5, 3.4.8} Poverty and disadvantage have increased with recent warming (about 1°C) and are expected to increase for many populations as average global temperatures increase from 1°C to 1.5°C and higher ( medium confidence ). Outmigration in agricultural- dependent communities is positively and statistically significantly associated with global temperature ( medium confidence ). Our understanding of the links of 1.5°C and 2°C of global warming to human migration are limited and represent an important knowledge gap. {3.4.10, 3.4.11, 5.2.2, Table 3.5} Key Economic Sectors and Services Risks to global aggregated economic growth due to climate change impacts are projected to be lower at 1.5°C than at 2°C by the end of this century ( medium confidence ). {3.5.2, 3.5.3} The largest reductions in economic growth at 2°C compared to 1.5°C of warming are projected for low- and middle-income countries and regions (the African continent, Southeast Asia, India, Brazil and Mexico) ( low to medium confidence ). Countries in the tropics and Southern Hemisphere subtropics are projected to experience the largest impacts on economic growth due to climate change should global warming increase from 1.5°C to 2°C ( medium confidence ). {3.5} Global warming has already affected tourism, with increased risks projected under 1.5°C of warming in specific geographic regions and for seasonal tourism including sun, beach and snow sports destinations ( very high confidence ). Risks will be lower for tourism markets that are less climate sensitive, such as gaming and large hotel-based activities ( high confidence ). Risks for coastal tourism, particularly in subtropical and tropical regions, will increase with temperature-related degradation (e.g., heat extremes, storms) or loss of beach and coral reef assets ( high confidence ). {3.3.6, 3.4.4.12, 3.4.9.1, Box 3.4} Small Islands, and Coastal and Low-lying areas Small islands are projected to experience multiple inter- related risks at 1.5°C of global warming that will increase with warming of 2°C and higher levels ( high confidence ). Climate hazards at 1.5°C are projected to be lower compared to those at 2°C (high confidence ). Long-term risks of coastal flooding and impacts on populations, infrastructures and assets ( high confidence ), freshwater stress ( medium confidence ), and risks across marine ecosystems ( high confidence ) and critical sectors ( medium confidence ) are projected to increase at 1.5°C compared to present-day levels and increase further at 2°C, limiting adaptation opportunities and increasing lo",
    "new_id": 558
  },
  {
    "id": 52608,
    "question": "Which of the following represents a logical consequence based on the interplay between terrestrial ecosystem transformations and ocean ecosystem services, as described in the Global Warming of 1.5°C: An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty?",
    "options": {
      "C": "While constraining warming to 1.5°C reduces terrestrial ecosystem transformations significantly, ocean ecosystem services still face substantial declines due to independent factors like acidification and species relocation.",
      "A": "Limiting warming to 1.5°C would prevent all forms of terrestrial ecosystem transformations, thereby ensuring the complete preservation of ocean ecosystem services.",
      "B": "The projected reduction in ocean ecosystem services at 1.5°C is primarily driven by the irreversible loss of terrestrial ecosystems that occurs even within this temperature range.",
      "D": "Terrestrial ecosystems are less vulnerable to global warming than ocean ecosystems, as evidenced by the absence of significant impacts on land systems at 1.5°C.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "194",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC 1.5.pdf",
    "source_text": "179 3Impacts of 1.5°C of Global Warming on Natural and Human Systems Chapter 3Future risks at 1.5°C of global warming will depend on the mitigation pathway and on the possible occurrence of a transient overshoot ( high confidence ). The impacts on natural and human systems would be greater if mitigation pathways temporarily overshoot 1.5°C and return to 1.5°C later in the century, as compared to pathways that stabilize at 1.5°C without an overshoot (high confidence ). The size and duration of an overshoot would also affect future impacts (e.g., irreversible loss of some ecosystems) ( high confidence ). Changes in land use resulting from mitigation choices could have impacts on food production and ecosystem diversity. {3.6.1, 3.6.2, Cross-Chapter Boxes 7 and 8 in this chapter} Climate Change Risks for Natural and Human systems Terrestrial and Wetland Ecosystems Risks of local species losses and, consequently, risks of extinction are much less in a 1.5°C versus a 2°C warmer world (high confidence ). The number of species projected to lose over half of their climatically determined geographic range at 2°C global warming (18% of insects, 16% of plants, 8% of vertebrates) is projected to be reduced to 6% of insects, 8% of plants and 4% of vertebrates at 1.5°C warming ( medium confidence ). Risks associated with other biodiversity-related factors, such as forest fires, extreme weather events, and the spread of invasive species, pests and diseases, would also be lower at 1.5°C than at 2°C of warming ( high confidence ), supporting a greater persistence of ecosystem services. {3.4.3, 3.5.2} Constraining global warming to 1.5°C, rather than to 2°C and higher, is projected to have many benefits for terrestrial and wetland ecosystems and for the preservation of their services to humans ( high confidence ). Risks for natural and managed ecosystems are higher on drylands compared to humid lands. The global terrestrial land area projected to be affected by ecosystem transformations (13%, interquartile range 8–20%) at 2°C is approximately halved at 1.5°C global warming to 4% (interquartile range 2–7%) ( medium confidence ). Above 1.5°C, an expansion of desert terrain and vegetation would occur in the Mediterranean biome ( medium confidence ), causing changes unparalleled in the last 10,000 years ( medium confidence ). {3.3.2.2, 3.4.3.2, 3.4.3.5, 3.4.6.1, 3.5.5.10, Box 4.2} Many impacts are projected to be larger at higher latitudes, owing to mean and cold-season warming rates above the global average ( medium confidence ). High-latitude tundra and boreal forest are particularly at risk, and woody shrubs are already encroaching into tundra ( high confidence ) and will proceed with further warming. Constraining warming to 1.5°C would prevent the thawing of an estimated permafrost area of 1.5 to 2.5 million km2 over centuries compared to thawing under 2°C ( medium confidence ). {3.3.2, 3.4.3, 3.4.4}Ocean Ecosystems Ocean ecosystems are already experiencing large-scale changes, and critical thresholds are expected to be reached at 1.5°C and higher levels of global warming ( high confidence ). In the transition to 1.5°C of warming, changes to water temperatures are expected to drive some species (e.g., plankton, fish) to relocate to higher latitudes and cause novel ecosystems to assemble ( high confidence ). Other ecosystems (e.g., kelp forests, coral reefs) are relatively less able to move, however, and are projected to experience high rates of mortality and loss ( very high confidence ). For example, multiple lines of evidence indicate that the majority (70–90%) of warm water (tropical) coral reefs that exist today will disappear even if global warming is constrained to 1.5°C ( very high confidence ). {3.4.4, Box 3.4} Current ecosystem services from the ocean are expected to be reduced at 1.5°C of global warming, with losses being even greater at 2°C of global warming ( high confidence ). The risks of declining ocean productivity, shifts of species to higher latitudes, damage to ecosystems (e.g., coral reefs, and mangroves, seagrass and other wetland ecosystems), loss of fisheries productivity (at low latitudes), and changes to ocean chemistry (e.g., acidification, hypoxia and dead zones) are projected to be substantially lower when global warming is limited to 1.5°C ( high confidence ). {3.4.4, Box 3.4} Water Resources The projected frequency and magnitude of floods and droughts in some regions are smaller under 1.5°C than under 2°C ",
    "new_id": 559
  },
  {
    "id": 52950,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects a logical implication or relationship between the disclosed metrics and their calculation methods, as outlined in the Consumer Finance – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The average age of credit products in months excludes inactive accounts, as only active accounts contribute to portfolio performance management strategies.",
      "A": "The average APR of credit products is calculated using all accounts, including those for which no finance charges were assessed, to ensure comprehensive reporting.",
      "B": "The exclusion of checking accounts, share draft accounts, and NOW accounts from pre-paid products implies that these account types are subject to stricter regulatory oversight than pre-paid cards.",
      "C": "The calculation of average fees from add-on products assumes that every customer has purchased at least one add-on product during the reporting period.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "17",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Consumer Finance.pdf",
    "source_text": "1The entity shall discuss its short- and long-term credit and pre-paid product portfolio performance management strategy. 1.1 The discussion shall include the entity ’s strategy for minimising credit deterioration of loans in its portfolio. FN-CF-270a.3. (1) Average fees from add-on products, (2) average APR of credit products, (3) average age of credit products, (4) average number of credit accounts, and (5) average annual fees for pre-paid products 1 The entity shall disclose (1) the average fees from add-on products for all customers. 1.1 Add-on products may include debt protection, identity theft protection, credit score tracking and other products supplementary to the credit provided by the card itself and offered at additional cost to consumers. 1.2 The entity shall calculate the average fees from add-on products as the total amount of revenue generated from add-on products from customers divided by the total number of the entity ’s customers, for the reporting period. 2 The entity shall disclose (2) the average annual percentage rate (APR) of all credit products. 2.1 The entity shall calculate the average APR for all credit products ’ assessed interest during the reporting period as the annualised ratio of total finance charges to the total average daily balances, against which the finance charges were assessed (excluding accounts for which no finance charges were assessed). 2.1.1 Definitions of finance charge and detailed calculation of APR may be defined using applicable jurisdictional laws or regulations. 2.1.2 A finance charge is defined as all charges payable directly or indirectly to the consumer and imposed directly or indirectly by the creditor as an incident to, or a condition of the extension of credit. 3The entity shall disclose (3) the average age of credit products in months for all customers. 3.1 The entity shall calculate the average age of credit products (in months) from the date that each active account was opened until the close of the reporting period. 4The entity shall disclose (4) the average number of credit accounts for all customers. 4.1 The entity shall calculate the average number of credit accounts per customer as the number of credit accounts held by customers divided by the total number of customers. 5 The entity shall disclose (5) the average annual fees for pre-paid products for all customers. 5.1 Pre-paid products include pre-paid accounts and cards, excluding checking accounts, share draft accounts or negotiable order of withdrawal (NOW) accounts, or similar accounts. 5.2 The entity shall calculate the average annual fees for pre-paid products as the total amount of revenue generated from pre-paid products from customers divided by the total number of the entity ’s customers. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |CONSUMER FINANCE |17",
    "new_id": 560
  },
  {
    "id": 52953,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes the relationship between the regulatory environment and the entity's remuneration policies, as implied by the Consumer Finance – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The entity may adopt remuneration policies either in response to regulatory requirements or voluntarily as industry best practice, and must disclose which approach was taken.",
      "B": "The entity’s remuneration policies are exclusively shaped by mandatory regulatory requirements, with no voluntary adoption of industry best practices.",
      "C": "The entity adopts remuneration policies voluntarily as industry best practice only when there are no applicable regulatory requirements.",
      "D": "Regulatory requirements dictate every aspect of the entity’s remuneration structure, leaving no room for discretion in setting performance targets or variable remuneration.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "16",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Consumer Finance.pdf",
    "source_text": "1.3 Covered employees are defined as individuals employed by the entity that are engaged in selling products or services directly to customers or potential customers, and include those categorised by the entity into categories equivalent to (a) sales workers, and (b) first- and mid-level officers and managers – sales managers, in accordance with, and further facilitated by, any applicable jurisdictional laws, regulations, guidance or generally accepted definitions. 2The percentage shall be calculated as the aggregate amount of variable remuneration linked to covered employee products and services sales divided by the aggregate amount of total covered employee remuneration, for the reporting period. Note to FN-CF-270a.1 1The disclosure shall include a discussion regarding how covered employee remuneration relates to the terms and conditions of the products and services, such as interest rates, up-front points or fees. 2The entity shall discuss how it set performance targets and what monetary and non-monetary benefits or penalties were employed for meeting or missing these targets. 3 The discussion shall include: 3.1 the employee remuneration regulatory environment in which the entity operates and whether it must use specific remuneration policies; the entity shall discuss whether its remuneration policies were adopted in response to regulatory requirements or voluntarily as industry best practice; 3.2 the performance objectives for the institution, business areas and staff; 3.3 the methods for the measurement of performance, including performance criteria; and 3.4 the structure of variable remuneration, including (if applicable) the instruments in which parts of the variable remuneration were awarded. FN-CF-270a.2. Approval rate for (1) credit and (2) pre-paid products for applicants 1The entity shall disclose the approval rate for its (1) credit and (2) pre-paid products for all applicants in the reporting period. 1.1 Pre-paid products include pre-paid accounts and cards, excluding checking accounts, share draft accounts or negotiable order of withdrawal (NOW) accounts, or similar accounts. 2The entity shall calculate the approval rate as the number of applications approved from applicants divided by the total number of applications received from applicants. 3The scope of the disclosure includes applications the entity approved or denied during the reporting period, regardless of when the application was received. Note to FN-CF-270a.2 SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |CONSUMER FINANCE |16",
    "new_id": 561
  },
  {
    "id": 52954,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between the entity's approach to managing data security risks and its alignment with external frameworks, as described in the Consumer Finance – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "The entity’s approach to managing data security risks must align with at least one external framework but does not necessarily need to include every standard listed.",
      "A": "The entity is required to adopt all external standards mentioned in the text, such as ISO/IEC 2700, NIST, and others, without exception.",
      "C": "Alignment with external frameworks like ISO/IEC 2700 or NIST is optional unless mandated by specific jurisdictional legal requirements applicable to the entity.",
      "D": "External frameworks are only referenced for voluntary adoption as industry best practices and do not influence regulatory compliance.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "13-14",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Consumer Finance.pdf",
    "source_text": "5The scope also shall include fraudulent transactions that the entity charged back to merchants (or their acquiring banks), including those related to CNP fraudulent activity. FN-CF-230a.3. Description of approach to identifying and addressing data security risks 1The entity shall describe its approach to identifying information system vulnerabilities that may pose a data security risk. 1.1 Vulnerability is defined as a weakness in an information system, implementation, system security procedure or internal control that could be exploited. 1.2 Data security risk is defined as the risk of any circumstance or event with the potential to affect organisational operations (including mission, functions, image or reputation), assets, individuals, other organisations or governments through an information system via unauthorised access, destruction, disclosure, modification of information or denial of service. 2The entity shall describe its approach to managing identified data security risks and vulnerabilities, which may include operational procedures, management processes, structure of products, business partner selection, employee training and use of technology. 3The entity shall discuss observed trends in type, frequency and origination of attacks on its data security and information systems. 4The entity shall describe its policies and procedures for disclosing data breaches to its customers in a timely manner. 5The entity ’s disclosure shall include a discussion of data and system security efforts that relate to new and emerging cyber threats and attack vectors facing the financial services industry. 5.1 Emerging cyber threats may include cyber threats arising from the use of near-field communication payment systems, mobile banking and web-based banking. 5.2 Attack vectors may include ransomware, loan stacking schemes, money mule schemes and remote access attacks. 6The entity shall describe the data security regulatory environment in which it operates. 6.1 The discussion shall include data security policies and procedures the entity adopted for regulatory compliance or voluntarily as an industry best practice. 7The entity shall describe the degree to which its approach aligns with an external standard or framework or applicable jurisdictional legal or regulatory framework for managing data security, such as: 7.1 the ISO/IEC 2700 series; 7.2 the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), Framework for Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity , 2018; SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |CONSUMER FINANCE |13\n\n[Page 14]\n7.3 the New York State Department of Financial Services 23 NYCRR 500, Cybersecurity Requirements for Financial Services Companies ; and 7.4 the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) Bulletin 2013-29, Third-Party Relationships: Risk Management Guidance , 2013. 8All disclosure shall be sufficient such that it is specific to the risks the entity faces, but disclosure itself would not compromise the entity ’s ability to maintain data privacy and security. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |CONSUMER FINANCE |14",
    "new_id": 562
  },
  {
    "id": 53633,
    "question": "Which of the following best represents a scenario where an entity in the iron and steel industry could face significant regulatory risks despite adhering to waste management practices that align with high reclamation rates, as described in the Iron & Steel Producers – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The entity reduces its overall waste generation but fails to address the percentage of hazardous waste, which remains disproportionately high compared to non-hazardous waste.",
      "A": "The entity exclusively recycles non-hazardous by-products while disposing of hazardous wastes in compliance with local regulations.",
      "B": "The entity achieves a 100% recycling rate for all waste types, including hazardous materials, but continues to generate substantial quantities of electric arc furnace dust.",
      "D": "The entity diverts all hazardous waste to off-site facilities legally permitted for disposal, assuming full responsibility for any future remediation costs.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "18-19",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Iron & Steel Producers.pdf",
    "source_text": "4The entity shall analyse all its operations for water risks and identify activities that withdraw and consume water in locations with High (40 –80%) or Extremely High (>80%) Baseline Water Stress as classified by the World Resources Institute ’s (WRI) Water Risk Atlas tool, Aqueduct. 5The entity shall disclose water withdrawn in locations with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress as a percentage of the total water withdrawn. 6The entity shall disclose water consumed in locations with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress as a percentage of the total water consumed. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |IRON & STEEL PRODUCERS |18\n\n[Page 19]\nWaste Management Topic Summary Although waste reclamation rates in steel production are high, the industry generates significant quantities of hazardous wastes. Slag, dusts and sludges constitute the three main industry waste types. These by-products often are recycled internally or sold to other industries. However, process wastes such as electric arc furnace dust, which may be regulated as a hazardous material because of its heavy metal content, can have significant environmental and human health impacts, present a regulatory risk, and result in additional operating costs for entities. Risks related to the long-term impacts of waste disposal may result in significant costs, including those associated with monitoring and managing contaminated off-site disposal properties, for which jurisdictional authorities may hold iron and steel producers responsible for remediation and restoration activities. Entities that reduce waste streams, hazardous waste streams in particular, and recycle or sell non-hazardous by-products, could mitigate regulatory risks and reduce costs while increasing revenues. Metrics EM-IS-150a.1. (1) Amount of waste generated, (2) percentage hazardous, (3) percentage recycled 1The entity shall disclose (1) the weight of waste generated, in metric tonnes. 1.1 Waste is defined as material for which the entity has no further use and that is discarded or released to the environment by the entity. 1.2 The scope includes slags, dusts, sludges, scrap steel, reject coal, used oil and other solid wastes that meet the above definition. 1.3 The scope excludes gaseous wastes. 2The entity shall disclose (2) the percentage of hazardous waste generated, by weight. 2.1 The percentage of hazardous waste shall be calculated as the weight of waste that meets the definition of hazardous waste divided by the total weight of waste material. 2.2 Hazardous wastes are defined in accordance with the applicable jurisdictional legal or regulatory framework where the waste was generated. 2.2.1 The entity may use the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP ) Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal (Basel Convention) for the purposes of defining hazardous waste or recycled hazardous waste for operations located in jurisdictions that lack applicable legal or regulatory definitions. 3 The entity shall disclose (3) the percentage of waste generated, by weight, that has been recycled. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |IRON & STEEL PRODUCERS |19",
    "new_id": 563
  },
  {
    "id": 53643,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why the inclusion of contract employees in incident rate calculations is essential for an accurate representation of workforce health and safety risks, based on their definition and role in the Iron & Steel Producers – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Contract employees are directly supervised by the entity, making them integral to assessing the effectiveness of the entity’s safety policies.",
      "A": "Contract employees perform tasks identical to direct employees, so excluding them would artificially lower reported incident rates.",
      "B": "Contract employees are less likely to report incidents due to fear of job loss, leading to underreported safety risks.",
      "C": "Contract employees work exclusively in high-risk environments, so their exclusion would skew incident rates toward safer conditions.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "21-22",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Iron & Steel Producers.pdf",
    "source_text": "Workforce Health & Safety Topic Summary Iron and steel production processes can present significant risks to employees and contractors working in iron and steel plants. Given the high temperatures and heavy machinery involved, worker injuries and fatalities are a matter of serious concern to iron and steel producers. Given the hazardous work environment, the industry has relatively high fatality rates requiring a strong safety culture and comprehensive health and safety policies. Although accident rates in the industry are in decline, worker injuries and fatalities can result in regulatory penalties, negative publicity, low worker morale and productivity, and increased healthcare and compensation costs. Metrics EM-IS-320a.1. (1) Total recordable incident rate (TRIR), (2) fatality rate, and (3) near miss frequency rate (NMFR) for (a) direct employees and (b) contract employees 1 The entity shall disclose (1) its total recordable incident rate (TRIR) for work-related injuries and illnesses. 1.1 An injury or illness is considered a recordable incident if it results in death, days away from work, restricted work or transfer to another job, medical treatment beyond first aid, or loss of consciousness. Additionally, a significant injury or illness diagnosed by a physician or other licensed health care professional is considered a recordable incident, even if it does not result in death, days away from work, restricted work or job transfer, medical treatment beyond first aid, or loss of consciousness. 1.1.1 First aid is defined as emergency care or treatment for an ill or injured person before regular medical aid can be provided. 1.1.2 The entity may use applicable jurisdictional criteria for definitions of a recordable incident and a non-recordable incident such as first aid. The entity shall disclose the legal, regulatory or industry framework used as the source for these criteria and definitions. 2The entity shall disclose (2) its fatality rate for work-related fatalities. 3The entity shall disclose (3) its near miss frequency rate (NMFR) for work-related near misses. 3.1 A near miss is defined as an unplanned or uncontrolled event or chain of events that has not resulted in a recordable injury, illness, physical damage, or environmental damage, but had the potential to do so in other circumstances. 3.2 The entity may disclose its process for classifying, identifying and reporting near misses. 4All disclosed rates shall be calculated as: (statistic count × 200,000) / total number of hours worked by all employees in the year reported. 4.1 The ‘200,000’ in the rate calculation represents the total number of hours 100 full-time workers working 40 hours per week for 50 weeks per year can provide annually. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |IRON & STEEL PRODUCERS |21\n\n[Page 22]\n5 The scope of the disclosure includes work-related incidents only. 5.1 Work-related incidents are injuries and illnesses resulting from events or exposures in the work environment. 5.2 The work environment is the establishment and other locations where one or more employees are working or are present as a condition of their employment. 5.3 The work environment includes not only physical locations, but also the equipment or materials used by the employee during the course of work. 5.4 Incidents that occur while an employee is travelling are work-related if, at the time of the injury or illness, the employee was engaged in work activities in the interest of the employer. 5.5 A work-related incident must be a new case, not a previously recorded injury or illness being updated. 6 The entity shall disclose the rates for each of these employee categories: 6.1 Direct employees, defined as individuals on the entity ’s payroll, whether they are full-time, short service, part-time, executive, labour, salary, seasonal, migrant or hourly employees. 6.2 Contract employees, defined as individuals who are not on the entity ’s payroll, but whom the entity supervises or manages, including independent contractors and those employed by third parties (for example, temp agencies and labour brokers). 7The scope of the disclosure includes all employees regardless of employee location or type of employment. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |IRON & STEEL PRODUCERS |22",
    "new_id": 564
  },
  {
    "id": 53644,
    "question": "Which of the following statements accurately reflects a nuanced implication regarding the entity's responsibility for disclosing air emissions under the Iron & Steel Producers – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "An entity can define VOCs according to jurisdictional regulations even if they conflict with the provided definition, but must explicitly acknowledge the deviation.",
      "B": "The entity is only required to report on pollutants emitted directly from stationary sources, excluding mobile sources like transportation fleets.",
      "C": "PAH emissions are considered negligible unless specifically listed in World Health Organization reports as having significant photochemical reactivity.",
      "D": "The disclosure of NOx excludes N2O because it is deemed to have negligible atmospheric impact compared to other nitrogen oxides.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "12-13",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Iron & Steel Producers.pdf",
    "source_text": "Air Quality Topic Summary Iron and steel production typically generates criteria air pollutants, volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and hazardous air pollutants, which can have significant localised public health impacts. Of particular concern are sulphur oxides, nitrogen dioxide, lead, carbon monoxide and manganese, as well as particles such as soot and dust, released during production. Technological innovation and continuous improvements in steel-making processes have reduced air pollutants significantly from the Iron & Steel Producers industry. However, air pollutants remain a concern because of increased regulatory and public concern about air pollution, as well as expansion of steel production in emerging markets. In emerging markets, regulatory efforts to curb air pollution may constrain iron and steel production. Active management of facility emissions through industry best practices implementation across global operations can facilitate the transition to sustainable steel production, reducing costs and potentially enhancing operational efficiency. Metrics EM-IS-120a.1. Air emissions of the following pollutants: (1) CO, (2) NO x (excluding N2O), (3) SO x, (4) particulate matter (PM 10), (5) manganese (MnO), (6) lead (Pb), (7) volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and (8) polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) 1The entity shall disclose its emissions of air pollutants, in metric tonnes per pollutant, released into the atmosphere. 1.1 The scope of the disclosure includes air pollutants associated with the entity ’s direct air emissions resulting from all the entity ’s activities and sources of emissions, which may include stationary and mobile sources, production facilities, office buildings and transportation fleets. 2The entity shall disclose its emissions of (1) carbon monoxide, reported as CO. 3 The entity shall disclose its emissions of (2) oxides of nitrogen (NO X), reported as NO X. 3.1 The scope of NO X includes NO and NO 2 but excludes N 2O. 4 The entity shall disclose its emissions of (3) oxides of sulphur (SO X), reported as SO X. 4.1 The scope of SO X includes SO 2 and SO 3 5The entity shall disclose its emissions of (4) particulate matter 10 micrometres or less in diameter (PM 10), reported as PM 10. 5.1 PM10 is defined as any airborne finely divided solid or liquid material with an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to a nominal 10 micrometres. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |IRON & STEEL PRODUCERS |12\n\n[Page 13]\n6 The entity shall disclose its emissions of (5) oxides of manganese, reported as MnO. 7 The entity shall disclose its emissions of (6) lead and lead compounds, reported as Pb. 8 The entity shall disclose its emissions of (7) non-methane volatile organic compounds (VOCs). 8.1 VOCs are defined as any compound of carbon, excluding carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, carbonic acid, metallic carbides or carbonates, ammonium carbonate and methane, that participates in atmospheric photochemical reactions, except those designated under applicable jurisdictional law or regulation as having negligible photochemical reactivity. 8.2 If applicable regulatory definitions of VOCs conflict with this definition, the entity may define VOCs in accordance with the applicable jurisdictional legal or regulatory definition. In this case, the entity shall identify the source of the definition. 9 The entity shall disclose its emissions of (8) polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). 9.1 PAHs are a large group of organic compounds containing two or more fused aromatic (benzene) rings. A main source of emission is the incomplete combustion or pyrolysis of organic material. 9.2 PAHs include those listed in World Health Organization, Human Health Effects of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons as Ambient Air Pollutants: Report of the Working Group on Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons of the Joint Task Force on the Health Aspects of Air Pollution , 2021. 10The entity may discuss the calculation method for its emissions disclosure, such as whether data is from continuous emissions monitoring systems (CEMS), engineering calculations or mass balance calculations. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |IRON & STEEL PRODUCERS |13",
    "new_id": 565
  },
  {
    "id": 53645,
    "question": "Which scenario would most likely cause an entity in the steel production industry to face increased operational risks, based on their water management practices in the Iron & Steel Producers – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "An entity that achieves compliance with jurisdictional drinking water regulations but operates primarily in areas with Extremely High Baseline Water Stress.",
      "A": "An entity that reduces its total water consumption but does not assess baseline water stress levels in its operational regions.",
      "C": "An entity operating exclusively in regions classified as having Low Baseline Water Stress, despite high water withdrawal volumes.",
      "D": "An entity that shifts a significant portion of its water sourcing to non-freshwater sources while maintaining stable total water consumption.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "17-18",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Iron & Steel Producers.pdf",
    "source_text": "Water Management Topic Summary Steel production requires substantial volumes of water. Entities face increasing operational, regulatory and reputational risks associated with water scarcity, costs of water acquisition, regulations on effluents or amount of water used, and competition with local communities and other industries for limited water resources. These risks are particularly likely to affect regions where water is scarce, resulting in water availability constraints and price volatility. Entities unable to secure a stable water supply could face production disruptions, while rising water prices could directly increase production costs. Consequently, entities adopting technologies and processes to decrease reduce water consumption may reduce operating risks and costs by mitigating the operational impacts of regulatory changes, water supply shortages and community-related disruptions. Metrics EM-IS-140a.1. (1) Total water withdrawn, (2) total water consumed; percentage of each in regions with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress 1The entity shall disclose the amount of water, in thousands of cubic metres, withdrawn from all sources. 1.1 Water sources include surface water (including water from wetlands, rivers, lakes and oceans), groundwater, rainwater collected directly and stored by the entity, and water and wastewater obtained from municipal water supplies, water utilities or other entities. 2The entity may disclose portions of its supply by source if, for example, significant portions of withdrawals are from non-freshwater sources. 2.1 Fresh water may be defined according to the local laws and regulations where the entity operates. If no legal definition exists, fresh water shall be considered to be water that has less than 1,000 parts per million of dissolved solids. 2.2 Water obtained from a water utility in compliance with jurisdictional drinking water regulations can be assumed to meet the definition of fresh water. 3The entity shall disclose the amount of water, in thousands of cubic metres, consumed in its operations. 3.1 Water consumption is defined as: 3.1.1 Water that evaporates during withdrawal, use and discharge 3.1.2 Water that is directly or indirectly incorporated into the entity ’s product or service 3.1.3 Water that does not otherwise return to the same catchment area from which it was withdrawn, such as water returned to another catchment area or the sea SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |IRON & STEEL PRODUCERS |17\n\n[Page 18]\n4The entity shall analyse all its operations for water risks and identify activities that withdraw and consume water in locations with High (40 –80%) or Extremely High (>80%) Baseline Water Stress as classified by the World Resources Institute ’s (WRI) Water Risk Atlas tool, Aqueduct. 5The entity shall disclose water withdrawn in locations with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress as a percentage of the total water withdrawn. 6The entity shall disclose water consumed in locations with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress as a percentage of the total water consumed. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |IRON & STEEL PRODUCERS |18",
    "new_id": 566
  },
  {
    "id": 53661,
    "question": "Which of the following most accurately reflects the relationship between product safety disclosures and an entity's responsibility for materiality judgments, as described in the Appliance Manufacturing – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "While entities must disclose notable recalls, they retain the authority to judge which recalls are significant enough to affect cash flows or capital costs.",
      "A": "Entities are required to report all product recalls, regardless of their significance, to comply with SASB Standards.",
      "B": "The responsibility for determining which safety-related metrics are material lies solely with investors assessing the company’s disclosures.",
      "D": "Product safety disclosures exclude qualitative information, focusing exclusively on quantitative measures such as monetary losses.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "5-6",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Appliance Manufacturing.pdf",
    "source_text": "Use of the Standards SASB Standards are intended to aid entities in disclosing information about sustainability-related risks and opportunities that could reasonably be expected to affect the entity ’s cash flows, its access to finance or cost of capital over the short, medium or long term. An entity determines which Industry Standard(s) and which disclosure topics are relevant to its business, and which associated metrics to report. In general, an entity should use the SASB Standard specific to its primary industry as identified in SICS® . However, companies with substantial business in multiple SICS® industries should refer to and consider the applicability of the disclosure topics and associated metrics in additional SASB Standards. The disclosure topics and associated metrics contained in this Standard have been identified as those that are likely to be useful to investors. However, the responsibility for making materiality judgements and determinations rests with the reporting entity. Industry Description Appliance Manufacturing industry entities design and manufacture household appliances and hand tools. Entities in this industry sell and manufacture products all over the world, primarily selling products to consumers through retailers. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |APPLIANCE MANUFACTURING |5\n\n[Page 6]\nSUSTAINABILITY DISCLOSURE TOPICS & METRICS Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORYUNIT OF MEASURECODE Product Safety(1) Number of recalls issued and (2) total units recalled 1 Quantitative Number CG-AM-250a.1 Discussion of process to identify and manage safety risks associated with the use of its productsDiscussion and Analysisn/a CG-AM-250a.2 Total amount of monetary losses because of legal proceedings associated with product safety 2QuantitativePresentation currencyCG-AM-250a.3 Product Lifecycle Environmental ImpactsPercentage of eligible products by revenue certified to an energy efficiency certificationQuantitativePercentage (%) by revenueCG-AM-410a.1 Percentage of eligible products by revenue certified to an environmental product lifecycle standardQuantitativePercentage (%) by revenueCG-AM-410a.2 Description of efforts to manage products ’ end-of-life impactsDiscussion and Analysisn/a CG-AM-410a.3 Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORYUNIT OF MEASURECODE Annual production3QuantitativeNumber of unitsCG-AM-000.A 1Note to CG-AM-250a.1 – The entity shall discuss notable recalls such as those that affected a significant number of units of one product or those related to serious injury or fatality. 2Note to CG-AM-250a.3 – The entity shall briefly describe the nature, context, and any corrective actions taken because of monetary losses. 3Note to CG-AM-000.A – Production shall be disclosed as the number of units produced by product category, where relevant product categories may include small appliances and major appliances. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |APPLIANCE MANUFACTURING |6",
    "new_id": 567
  },
  {
    "id": 53848,
    "question": "Which statement best captures the implicit relationship between pricing pressures and materiality judgements in sustainability disclosures for companies in the Medical Equipment & Supplies industry, as outlined in the Medical Equipment & Supplies – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Downward pricing pressure may influence which sustainability-related risks and opportunities are deemed material, thereby shaping the entity’s disclosure decisions.",
      "A": "Pricing pressures from regulatory emphasis on cost reduction directly eliminate the need for materiality judgements in sustainability disclosures.",
      "B": "Companies facing downward pricing pressure are exempt from reporting on affordability and pricing metrics if they operate in multiple SICS® industries.",
      "C": "The responsibility for materiality judgements lies solely with investors, who assess pricing pressures independently of the disclosed sustainability metrics.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "5-6",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Medical Equipment & Supplies.pdf",
    "source_text": "Use of the Standards SASB Standards are intended to aid entities in disclosing information about sustainability-related risks and opportunities that could reasonably be expected to affect the entity ’s cash flows, its access to finance or cost of capital over the short, medium or long term. An entity determines which Industry Standard(s) and which disclosure topics are relevant to its business, and which associated metrics to report. In general, an entity should use the SASB Standard specific to its primary industry as identified in SICS® . However, companies with substantial business in multiple SICS® industries should refer to and consider the applicability of the disclosure topics and associated metrics in additional SASB Standards. The disclosure topics and associated metrics contained in this Standard have been identified as those that are likely to be useful to investors. However, the responsibility for making materiality judgements and determinations rests with the reporting entity. Industry Description The Medical Equipment & Supplies industry researches, develops and produces medical, surgical, dental, ophthalmic and veterinary instruments and devices. Hospitals, clinics and laboratories use these products, which range from disposable items to highly specialised equipment. The increased prevalence of diseases associated with unhealthy lifestyles and an ageing population are important factors that may encourage growth in this industry. Emerging markets and the expansion of health insurance may contribute to further growth. However, the extension of government insurance programmes, provider and payer consolidation, and regulatory emphasis on reduced costs in all markets may result in downward pricing pressure. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |MEDICAL EQUIPMENT & SUPPLIES |5\n\n[Page 6]\nSUSTAINABILITY DISCLOSURE TOPICS & METRICS Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORYUNIT OF MEASURECODE Affordability & PricingDescription of how price information for each product is disclosed to customers or to their agentsDiscussion and Analysisn/a HC-MS-240a.2 Percentage change in: (1) weighted average list price and (2) weighted average net price across product portfolio compared to previous reporting periodQuantitativePercentage (%)HC-MS-240a.3 Product Safety(1) Number of recalls issued, (2) total units recalledQuantitative Number HC-MS-250a.1 Products listed in any public medical product safety or adverse event alert databaseDiscussion and Analysisn/a HC-MS-250a.2 Number of fatalities associated with productsQuantitative Number HC-MS-250a.3 Number of enforcement actions taken in response to violations of good manufacturing practices (GMP) or equivalent standards, by type 1Quantitative Number HC-MS-250a.4 Ethical MarketingTotal amount of monetary losses as a result of legal proceedings associated with false marketing claims 2QuantitativePresentation currencyHC-MS-270a.1 Description of code of ethics governing promotion of off-label use of productsDiscussion and Analysisn/a HC-MS-270a.2 Product Design & Lifecycle ManagementDiscussion of process to assess and manage environmental and human health considerations associated with chemicals in products, and meet demand for sustainable productsDiscussion and Analysisn/a HC-MS-410a.1 Total amount of products accepted for take-back and reused, recycled or donated, broken down by: (1) devices and equipment and (2) suppliesQuantitativeMetric tonnes (t)HC-MS-410a.2 continued... 1Note to HC-MS-250a.4 – The entity shall briefly describe the nature, context and any corrective actions taken because of enforcement actions. 2Note to HC-MS-270a.1 – The entity shall briefly describe the nature, context and any corrective actions taken because of monetary losses. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |MEDICAL EQUIPMENT & SUPPLIES |6",
    "new_id": 568
  },
  {
    "id": 53850,
    "question": "Which statement accurately captures the relationship between the calculation of net price and the reporting requirements for product recalls, as described in the Medical Equipment & Supplies – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "While net price excludes rebates, discounts, and returns, recall disclosures may include revenues from up to 12 months prior to assess financial impacts, with no overlap in these calculations.",
      "B": "The revenue-weighted average WAC is adjusted for inflation before calculating the net price, and recall disclosures must include indexed consumer price changes.",
      "C": "Net price calculations exclude rebates and discounts but require the inclusion of revenues from recalled products to ensure accurate annualized percentage change reporting.",
      "D": "Both net price and recall-related revenue disclosures are directly tied to inflation data, requiring entities to report broad consumer price index changes for both metrics.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "9-10",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Medical Equipment & Supplies.pdf",
    "source_text": "1.2 The list price shall be calculated as the revenue-weighted average wholesale acquisition cost (WAC) for the reporting period being calculated. 2The entity shall disclose (2) the annualised percentage change in revenue-weighted average net price across all the entity ’s products sold globally during the reporting period. 2.1 The average net price increase shall be calculated as the annualised percentage change in net price compared to the prior reporting period for each product across the entity ’s global medical equipment and supplies product portfolio. 2.2 The net price shall be calculated as the revenue-weighted average WAC minus rebates, discounts and returns for the reporting period being calculated. 3 The entity may disaggregate the disclosures by product type, region, or another relevant categorisation. 4The entity may discuss additional context regarding price changes by the categories chosen, including its strategy for determining product pricing by category. 5The entity may disclose comparative presentation currency inflation data by providing the change in the broadest relevant measure of indexed consumer prices concurrent with the reporting period. If making this disclosure, the entity shall identify the trusted source of that inflation data. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |MEDICAL EQUIPMENT & SUPPLIES |9\n\n[Page 10]\nProduct Safety Topic Summary Information on product safety and side effects may be discovered after controlled clinical trials and approval. In such cases, entities are exposed to the financial implications of recalls and other adverse events, such as unfavourable media coverage, fines or investigations. Issues related to product safety, such as equipment failures, manufacturing defects, design flaws or inadequate disclosure of product-related risks, may result in significant product liability claims. Entities that limit the incidence of recalls, safety concerns and enforcement actions for manufacturing concerns may better protect shareholder value. Metrics HC-MS-250a.1. (1) Number of recalls issued, (2) total units recalled 1The entity shall disclose (1) the total number of product-safety recalls for medical devices and supplies that it manufactures issued during the reporting period. 1.1 Product-safety recalls are defined as actions taken by an entity to remove a product from the market related to potential or actual adverse health consequences resulting from prescribed use. This includes recalls conducted by the entity voluntarily, as well as those requested or mandated by a regulatory authority. 1.2 The scope of the disclosure shall include recalls associated with all devices manufactured by the entity or by its subsidiaries. 2The entity shall disclose recalls initiated voluntarily that have not been requested or mandated by applicable jurisdictional legal or regulatory authorities or are not listed in a jurisdictional regulatory recall report. 3The entity shall disclose (2) the total number of device units subject to product-safety recalls. 4The entity may disclose revenues for each recalled product from 12 months prior to the date of recall. This 12- month period may extend beyond the reporting period for which the entity is disclosing; the figure is intended to disclose the annual revenues associated with the product such that the recall ’s financial effects of the recall can be accurately measured. 5If a recall relates to only a subset of a product (for example, specific lots), then the entity should explain the scope of the recall. If the entity is disclosing revenue associated with the recall, the disclosure should be limited to the portion of the product affected by the recall. 6The entity shall discuss notable recalls, such as those that affected a significant number of units of a given product or those related to serious injuries or fatalities. For such recalls, the entity may provide: 6.1 a description and cause of the recall issue; 6.2 the total number of units recalled; SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |MEDICAL EQUIPMENT & SUPPLIES |10",
    "new_id": 569
  },
  {
    "id": 54091,
    "question": "Which inference is most strongly supported regarding Lebanon's performance on environmental sustainability goals, considering both local and global impacts as outlined in SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT REPORT 2024 The SDGs and the UN Summit of the Future Includes the SDG Index and Dashboards?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Lebanon’s imported deforestation significantly exceeds its local permanent deforestation, implying a reliance on foreign resources for wood and agricultural products.",
      "A": "Lebanon's high nitrogen emissions associated with imports suggest it outsources environmentally harmful activities to meet domestic consumption demands.",
      "C": "The absence of CO2 emissions from fossil fuel exports indicates Lebanon is a net importer of fossil fuels, contributing to its low air pollution levels.",
      "D": "Air pollution embodied in imports outweighs production-based air pollution, indicating that Lebanon primarily mitigates environmental harm through stricter local regulations.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "287",
    "ref_doc": "SUS Report.pdf",
    "source_text": "Performance by Indicator5. Country ProfilesSustainable Development Report 2024 The SDGs and the UN Summit of the Future 275 * Imputed data point, ** Not applicable NA = Data not availableYear Rating Trend Value Year Rating Trend ValueLEBANON SDG9 – Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure Rural population with access to all-season roads (%) 100.0 2024•• Population using the internet (%) 90.1 2022•A Mobile broadband subscriptions (per 100 population) 77.8 2021•A Logistics Performance Index: Infrastructure score (worst 1–5 best) 2.6 2018•• The Times Higher Education Universities Ranking: Average score of top 3 universities (worst 0–100 best) 43.6 2024•A Articles published in academic journals (per 1,000 population) 0.8 2022•A Expenditure on research and development (% of GDP) NA NA•• SDG10 – Reduced Inequalities Gini coefficient 31.8 2011•• Palma ratio 1.2 2011•• SDG11 – Sustainable Cities and Communities Proportion of urban population living in slums (%) 4.5 2016•• Annual mean concentration of PM2.5 (μg/m³) 31.3 2022•G Access to improved water source, piped (% of urban population) NA NA•• Population with convenient access to public transport in cities (%) 22.3 2020•• SDG12 – Responsible Consumption and Production Municipal solid waste (kg/capita/day) 0.9 2014•• Electronic waste (kg/capita) 8.2 2019•• Production-based air pollution (DALYs per 1,000 population) 10.3 2024•G Air pollution associated with imports (DALYs per 1,000 population) 6.4 2024•G Production-based nitrogen emissions (kg/capita) 32.7 2024•G Nitrogen emissions associated with imports (kg/capita) 27.2 2024•G Exports of plastic waste (kg/capita) 1.8 2022•G SDG13 – Climate Action CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and cement production (tCO 2/capita) 4.3 2022•D GHG emissions embodied in imports (tCO 2/capita) 4.6 2021•G CO2 emissions embodied in fossil fuel exports (kg/capita) 0.0 2022•• SDG14 – Life Below Water Mean area that is protected in marine sites important to biodiversity (%) 10.8 2023•D Ocean Health Index: Clean Waters score (worst 0–100 best) 53.9 2023•S Fish caught from overexploited or collapsed stocks (% of total catch) NA NA•• Fish caught by trawling or dredging (%) 9.0 2008•• Fish caught that are then discarded (%) 0.3 2019•A Marine biodiversity threats embodied in imports (per million population) 0.2 2018•• SDG15 – Life on Land Mean area that is protected in terrestrial sites important to biodiversity (%) 4.7 2023•D Mean area that is protected in freshwater sites important to biodiversity (%) 9.0 2023•D Red List Index of species survival (worst 0–1 best) 0.96 2024•A Permanent deforestation (% of forest area, 3-year average) 0.0 2022•A Imported deforestation (m²/capita) 27.1 2022•G SDG16 – Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions Homicides (per 100,000 population) 2.3 2020•A Crime is effectively controlled (worst 0–1 best) 0.70 2022•D Unsentenced detainees (% of prison population) 55.9 2021•G Birth registrations with civil authority (% of children under age 5) 98.9 2016•• Corruption Perceptions Index (worst 0–1 best) 24.0 2023•G Children involved in child labor (%) NA NA•• Exports of major conventional weapons (TIV constant million USD per 100,000 population) 1.1 2002•• Press Freedom Index (worst 0–1 best) 41.9 2024•G Access to and affordability of justice (worst 0–1 best) 0.55 2022•D Timeliness of administrative proceedings (worst 0–1 best) 0.38 2022•G Expropriations are lawful and adequately compensated (worst 0–1 best) 0.44 2022•D SDG17 – Partnerships for the Goals Government spending on health and education (% of GDP) 4.6 2021•G For high-income and all OECD DAC countries: International concessional public finance, including official development assistance (% of GNI) NA NA•• Other countries: Government revenue excluding grants (% of GDP) 6.9 2021•G Corporate Tax Haven score (best 0–100 worst) 752021•• Statistical Performance Index (worst 0–100 best) 58.5 2022•A Index of countries’ support to UN-based multilateralism (worst 0–100 best) 60.9 2023••SDG1 – No Poverty Poverty headcount ratio at $2.15/day (2017 PPP , %) 0.6 2024•D Poverty headcount ratio at $3.65/day (2017 PPP , %) 0.9 2024•D SDG2 – Zero Hunger Prevalence of undernourishment (%) NA NA•• Prevalence of stunting in children under 5 years of age (%) 7.0 2021•• Prevalence of wasting in children under 5 years of age (%) 1.4 2021•• Prevalence of obesity, BMI ≥ 30 (% of adult population) 29.8 2022•G Human Trophic Level (best 2–3 worst) 2.2 2021•D Cereal yield (tonnes per hectare o",
    "new_id": 570
  },
  {
    "id": 54130,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why Equatorial Guinea's performance on SDG14 – Life Below Water might appear stronger than its actual sustainability efforts suggest as outlined in SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT REPORT 2024 The SDGs and the UN Summit of the Future Includes the SDG Index and Dashboards?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The nation has achieved a perfect score in protecting marine biodiversity, but this does not account for imported threats to marine ecosystems.",
      "A": "Equatorial Guinea’s high Ocean Health Index score overshadows its reliance on overexploited fish stocks, which are minimal compared to global averages.",
      "B": "The country protects 100% of critical marine sites, yet it simultaneously ranks poorly on trawling practices and discards a significant percentage of its catch.",
      "D": "While the Red List Index indicates strong species survival rates, the nation imports deforestation at levels that indirectly harm marine habitats.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "203",
    "ref_doc": "SUS Report.pdf",
    "source_text": "Performance by Indicator5. Country ProfilesSustainable Development Report 2024 The SDGs and the UN Summit of the Future 191 * Imputed data point, ** Not applicable NA = Data not availableYear Rating Trend Value Year Rating Trend ValueEQUATORIAL GUINEA SDG9 – Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure Rural population with access to all-season roads (%) 84.8 2024•• Population using the internet (%) 66.8 2022•A Mobile broadband subscriptions (per 100 population) 0.9 2022•D Logistics Performance Index: Infrastructure score (worst 1–5 best) 1.9 2018•• The Times Higher Education Universities Ranking: Average score of top 3 universities (worst 0–100 best)* 0.0 2024•• Articles published in academic journals (per 1,000 population) 0.0 2022•G Expenditure on research and development (% of GDP) NA NA•• SDG10 – Reduced Inequalities Gini coefficient NA NA•• Palma ratio NA NA•• SDG11 – Sustainable Cities and Communities Proportion of urban population living in slums (%) NA NA•• Annual mean concentration of PM2.5 (μg/m³) 40.9 2022•G Access to improved water source, piped (% of urban population) 48.1 2017•• Population with convenient access to public transport in cities (%) NA NA•• SDG12 – Responsible Consumption and Production Municipal solid waste (kg/capita/day) 0.4 2016•• Electronic waste (kg/capita) NA NA•• Production-based air pollution (DALYs per 1,000 population) 0.3 2024•A Air pollution associated with imports (DALYs per 1,000 population) 1.6 2024•A Production-based nitrogen emissions (kg/capita) 4.9 2024•A Nitrogen emissions associated with imports (kg/capita) 5.9 2024•A Exports of plastic waste (kg/capita) NA NA•• SDG13 – Climate Action CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and cement production (tCO 2/capita) 3.1 2022•A GHG emissions embodied in imports (tCO 2/capita) 2.0 2021•A CO2 emissions embodied in fossil fuel exports (kg/capita) NA NA•• SDG14 – Life Below Water Mean area that is protected in marine sites important to biodiversity (%) 100.0 2023•A Ocean Health Index: Clean Waters score (worst 0–100 best) 64.1 2023•D Fish caught from overexploited or collapsed stocks (% of total catch) 18.9 2018•A Fish caught by trawling or dredging (%) 26.8 2019•G Fish caught that are then discarded (%) 0.2 2019•D Marine biodiversity threats embodied in imports (per million population) NA NA•• SDG15 – Life on Land Mean area that is protected in terrestrial sites important to biodiversity (%) 100.0 2023•A Mean area that is protected in freshwater sites important to biodiversity (%) NA NA•• Red List Index of species survival (worst 0–1 best) 0.82 2024•D Permanent deforestation (% of forest area, 3-year average) 0.1 2022•A Imported deforestation (m²/capita) 7.7 2022•A SDG16 – Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions Homicides (per 100,000 population) NA NA•• Crime is effectively controlled (worst 0–1 best) NA NA•• Unsentenced detainees (% of prison population) NA NA•• Birth registrations with civil authority (% of children under age 5) 53.5 2011•• Corruption Perceptions Index (worst 0–1 best) 17.0 2023•• Children involved in child labor (%) NA NA•• Exports of major conventional weapons (TIV constant million USD per 100,000 population)* 0.0 2023•• Press Freedom Index (worst 0–1 best) 46.5 2024•S Access to and affordability of justice (worst 0–1 best) NA NA•• Timeliness of administrative proceedings (worst 0–1 best) NA NA•• Expropriations are lawful and adequately compensated (worst 0–1 best) NA NA•• SDG17 – Partnerships for the Goals Government spending on health and education (% of GDP) 2.9 2021•D For high-income and all OECD DAC countries: International concessional public finance, including official development assistance (% of GNI) NA NA•• Other countries: Government revenue excluding grants (% of GDP) 15.5 2021•G Corporate Tax Haven score (best 0–100 worst) * 02021•• Statistical Performance Index (worst 0–100 best) 39.3 2022•• Index of countries’ support to UN-based multilateralism (worst 0–100 best) 50.0 2023••SDG1 – No Poverty Poverty headcount ratio at $2.15/day (2017 PPP , %) * NA NA•• Poverty headcount ratio at $3.65/day (2017 PPP , %) * NA NA•• SDG2 – Zero Hunger Prevalence of undernourishment (%) NA NA•• Prevalence of stunting in children under 5 years of age (%) 26.2 2011•• Prevalence of wasting in children under 5 years of age (%) 3.1 2011•• Prevalence of obesity, BMI ≥ 30 (% of adult population) 17.7 2022•G Human Trophic Level (best 2–3 worst) NA NA•• Cereal yield (tonnes per hectare of harvested land) NA NA•• Sustainable",
    "new_id": 571
  },
  {
    "id": 54183,
    "question": "Which of the following statements accurately reflects a necessary condition for achieving an optimal level in at least two indicators related to energy and infrastructure, while considering their interdependencies, as outlined in SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT REPORT 2024 The SDGs and the UN Summit of the Future Includes the SDG Index and Dashboards?",
    "options": {
      "D": "A country must ensure that its CO2 emissions from fuel combustion per total electricity output are below 0 MtCO2/TWh and simultaneously achieve a renewable energy share exceeding 55% in total final energy consumption.",
      "A": "A nation needs to reach an access rate of clean fuels and technology for cooking above 85% and maintain a Logistics Performance Index infrastructure score higher than 3.",
      "B": "To meet the criteria, countries should prioritize reducing CO₂ emissions from fuel combustion to zero while also ensuring that mobile broadband subscriptions exceed 75 per 100 population.",
      "C": "Achieving full population access to clean fuels and technologies for cooking is sufficient alongside a Times Higher Education Universities Ranking average score above 50 among the top three universities.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "91",
    "ref_doc": "SUS Report.pdf",
    "source_text": "79 Sustainable Development Report 2024 The SDGs and the UN Summit of the Future Part 4. Transforming systemsA.3 Methodology (overview) Table A.5 (continued) SDG Notes Trend Indicator OptimumGreen thresholdRed thresholdLower boundReference Year Source 7 ✓Population with access to clean fuels and technology for cooking (%)100 85 50 2 2021 WHO 7 ✓CO₂ emissions from fuel combustion per total electricity output (MtCO₂/TWh)0 1 1.5 5.9 2022Global Carbon Project & IEA 7 ✓Renewable energy share in total final energy consumption (%)55 32 10 3 2021IEA, IRENA, UNSD, WB, WHO 8 Adjusted GDP growth (%) 5 0 -3 -14.7 2022 World Bank 8 Victims of modern slavery (per 1,000 population)0 4 10 22 2022Walk Free Foundation (2018) 8 ✓Adults with an account at a bank or other financial institution or with a mobile-money-service provider (% of population aged 15 or over)100 80 50 8 2021Global Findex Database 8 [b] ✓Unemployment rate (% of total labor force, ages 15+)0.5 5 10 25.9 2024 ILO 8 ✓Fundamental labor rights are effectively guaranteed (worst 0–1 best)0.85 0.7 0.5 0.3 2022 World Justice Project 8 ✓Fatal work-related accidents embodied in imports (per million population)0 1 4 10 2018Alsamawi et al. (2017) 8 Victims of modern slavery embodied in imports (per 100,000 population)0 20 250 300 2018 Malik et al (2022) 8 [a] ✓ Employment-to-population ratio (%) 77.8 60 50 50 2023 OECD 8 [a] ✓Youth not in employment, education or training (NEET) (% of population aged 15 to 24)8.1 10 15 28.2 2021 OECD 9 Rural population with access to all-season roads (%)99.5 90 60 35 2024SDSN (2023), based on Workman, R. & McPherson, K., TRL (2019) 9 ✓ Population using the internet (%) 100 80 50 2.2 2022 ITU 9 ✓Mobile broadband subscriptions (per 100 population)100 75 40 1.4 2022 ITU 9 ✓Logistics Performance Index: Infrastructure Score (worst 1–5 best)3.8 3 2 1.6 2023 World Bank 9 ✓The Times Higher Education Universities Ranking: Average score of top 3 universities (worst 0–100 best)50 30 0 0 2024Times Higher Education 9 ✓Articles published in academic journals (per 1,000 population)1.2 0.7 0.05 0 2022Scimago Jounal Rank 9 ✓Expenditure on research and development (% of GDP)3.7 1.5 1 0 2022 UNESCO 9 [a] ✓ Researchers (per 1,000 employed population) 15.6 8 7 0.8 2022 OECD 9 ✓Triadic patent families filed (per million population)115.7 20 10 0.1 2020 OECD 9 [a] ✓Gap in internet access by income (percentage points)0 7 45 63.6 2020 OECD 9 [a] ✓Female share of graduates from STEM fields at the tertiary level (%)50 30 20 15 2018 World Bank 10 ✓ Gini coefficient 27.5 30 40 63 2021 World Bank 10 ✓ Palma ratio 0.9 1 1.3 2.5 2022 OECD & UNDP",
    "new_id": 572
  },
  {
    "id": 54215,
    "question": "Which of the following statements most accurately reflects a logical inconsistency or limitation in the reported metrics for Colombia's progress toward Sustainable Development Goals as outlined ined SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT REPORT 2024 The SDGs and the UN Summit of the Future Includes the SDG Index and Dashboards?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The absence of data on non-recycled municipal solid waste undermines the reliability of SDG12 indicators related to responsible consumption and production.",
      "B": "The high homicide rate of 25.4 per 100,000 population directly implies ineffective crime control mechanisms despite the score of 0.47 on the 'crime is effectively controlled' metric.",
      "C": "The proportion of urban population living in slums at 9.7% suggests significant inequality, yet the Gini coefficient of 51.5 contradicts this by indicating moderate income equality.",
      "D": "The Palma ratio of 4.2 indicates reduced inequalities, aligning with improvements shown in other socioeconomic metrics such as elderly poverty rates.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "169",
    "ref_doc": "SUS Report.pdf",
    "source_text": "Performance by Indicator * Imputed data point, ** Not applicable NA = Data not availableSustainable Development Report 2024 The SDGs and the UN Summit of the Future 157 Year Rating Trend Value Year Rating Trend Value5. COUNTRY PROFILESCOLOMBIA SDG9 – Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure Rural population with access to all-season roads (%) 84.7 2024•• Population using the internet (%) 72.8 2022•A Mobile broadband subscriptions (per 100 population) 76.2 2022•A Logistics Performance Index: Infrastructure score (worst 1–5 best) 2.9 2023•A The Times Higher Education Universities Ranking: Average score of top 3 universities (worst 0–100 best) 33.4 2024•A Articles published in academic journals (per 1,000 population) 0.3 2022•S Expenditure on research and development (% of GDP) 0.3 2020•G Researchers (per 1,000 employed population) NA NA•• Triadic patent families filed (per million population) 0.2 2020•D Gap in internet access by income (percentage points) 56.4 2022•D Female share of graduates from STEM fields at the tertiary level (%) 33.4 2018•A SDG10 – Reduced Inequalities Gini coefficient 51.5 2021•G Palma ratio 4.2 2022•G Elderly poverty rate (% of population aged 66 or over) NA NA•• SDG11 – Sustainable Cities and Communities Proportion of urban population living in slums (%) 9.7 2020•D Annual mean concentration of PM2.5 (μg/m3) 18.8 2022•D Access to improved water source, piped (% of urban population) 94.9 2022•G Population with rent overburden (%) 44.3 2020•G Urban population with access to points of interest within a 15min walk (%) 88.1 2024•• Population with convenient access to public transport in cities (%) 67.6 2020•• SDG12 – Responsible Consumption and Production Electronic waste (kg/capita) 6.3 2019•• Production-based air pollution (DALYs per 1,000 population) 0.6 2024•A Air pollution associated with imports (DALYs per 1,000 population) 2.0 2024•G Production-based nitrogen emissions (kg/capita) 28.7 2024•D Nitrogen emissions associated with imports (kg/capita) 6.2 2024•A Exports of plastic waste (kg/capita) 0.1 2022•D Non-recycled municipal solid waste (kg/capita/day) NA NA•• SDG13 – Climate Action CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and cement production (tCO 2/capita) 1.9 2022•A GHG emissions embodied in imports (tCO 2/capita) 1.1 2021•A CO2 emissions embodied in fossil fuel exports (kg/capita) 4,658.0 2022•• Carbon Pricing score at EUR60/tCO 2 (%, worst 0–100 best) 21.2 2021•• SDG14 – Life Below Water Mean area that is protected in marine sites important to biodiversity (%) 56.1 2023•D Ocean Health Index: Clean Waters score (worst 0–100 best) 67.9 2023•D Fish caught from overexploited or collapsed stocks (% of total catch) 51.1 2018•G Fish caught by trawling or dredging (%) 26.4 2019•G Fish caught that are then discarded (%) 15.9 2019•G Marine biodiversity threats embodied in imports (per million population) 0.1 2018•• SDG15 – Life on Land Mean area that is protected in terrestrial sites important to biodiversity (%) 58.1 2023•D Mean area that is protected in freshwater sites important to biodiversity (%) 55.0 2023•D Red List Index of species survival (worst 0–1 best) 0.74 2024•G Permanent deforestation (% of forest area, 3-year average) 0.2 2022•G Imported deforestation (m2/capita) 3.6 2022•A SDG16 – Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions Homicides (per 100,000 population) 25.4 2022•D Crime is effectively controlled (worst 0–1 best) 0.47 2022•D Unsentenced detainees (% of prison population) 24.0 2022•A Birth registrations with civil authority (% of children under age 5) 96.8 2015•• Corruption Perceptions Index (worst 0–100 best) 40.0 2023•D Children involved in child labor (%) 7.0 2020•• Exports of major conventional weapons (TIV constant million USD per 100,000 population) 0.0 2020•• Press Freedom Index (worst 0–100 best) 49.6 2024•G Access to and affordability of justice (worst 0–1 best) 0.56 2022•G Timeliness of administrative proceedings (worst 0–1 best) 0.35 2022•G Expropriations are lawful and adequately compensated (worst 0–1 best) 0.62 2022•G Persons held in prison (per 100,000 population) 188.1 2021•A SDG17 – Partnerships for the Goals Government spending on health and education (% of GDP) 11.8 2021•A For high-income and all OECD DAC countries: International concessional public finance, including official development assistance (% of GNI) NA NA•• Other countries: Government revenue excluding grants (% of GDP) 24.9 2022•D Corporate Tax Haven score (best 0–100 worst) * 02021•• Financial Sec",
    "new_id": 573
  },
  {
    "id": 54220,
    "question": "Which inference about Afghanistan's SDG performance can be drawn by analyzing the interplay between its regional context and the provided dashboard metrics, as mentioned in SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT REPORT 2024 The SDGs and the UN Summit of the Future Includes the SDG Index and Dashboards?",
    "options": {
      "B": "The dashboard implies that Afghanistan shows limited progress in some SDGs but does not indicate uniform stagnation across all goals.",
      "A": "Afghanistan's ranking of 162/167 indicates it outperforms most countries in Eastern Europe and Central Asia on SDG targets.",
      "C": "The data suggests that Afghanistan faces 'Major challenges' across all SDGs, as no SDG is marked as fully achieved or on track.",
      "D": "Afghanistan's score of 48.2 reflects a higher achievement level than the regional average for Eastern Europe and Central Asia.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "96",
    "ref_doc": "SUS Report.pdf",
    "source_text": "STATISTICAL PERFORMANCE INDEX MISSING DATA IN SDG INDEXNote: The full title of each SDG is available here: https://sdgs.un.orgp Decreasing 5 Stagnating D Moderately improving L On track or maintaining SDG achievement • Information unavailable Major challenges Significant challenges Challenges remain SDG achieved Information unavailable INTERNATIONAL SPILLOVER INDEXAVERAGE PERFORMANCE BY SDG OVERALL PERFORMANCE SDG DASHBOARDS AND TRENDS 84 Sustainable Development Report 2024 The SDGs and the UN Summit of the FutureSTATISTICAL PERFORMANCE INDEX MISSING DATA IN SDG INDEXINTERNATIONAL SPILLOVER INDEXAVERAGE PERFORMANCE BY SDG OVERALL PERFORMANCE SDG DASHBOARDS AND TRENDSAFGHANISTAN Eastern Europe and Central Asia 100 75 50 25SDG 1SDG 17 SDG 16 SDG 15 SDG 14 SDG 13 SDG 12 SDG 11 SDG 10SDG 9SDG 8SDG 7SDG 6SDG 5SDG 4SDG 3SDG 2 Afghanistan G D D D D S D G D •G S S •S D S 0 1000 (worst) to 100 (best) OECD members Easter n Eur ope and Central Asia Middle East and North Africa World Afghanistan East and South Asia Latin America and the Caribbean Sub-Saharan Africa 69.9 88.4 89.6 90.2 92.0 94.3 94.4 95.5STATUS OF SDG T ARGETS (%)100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0Worsening Limited progress Achieved or on track 58.4 42.00 (worst) to 100 (best) 001 0 5% ACOU NTRY SCO RE REGION AL AVERAGE:48.2 51.77COUNTRY RANKING162 /167 70.6",
    "new_id": 574
  },
  {
    "id": 54223,
    "question": "Which inference can be drawn about Nigeria's SDG performance relative to regional and global contexts, based on the nuanced relationships between data points provided in SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT REPORT 2024 The SDGs and the UN Summit of the Future Includes the SDG Index and Dashboards?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Nigeria's low ranking (146/167) reflects significant challenges across most SDGs, yet its scores exceed those of the worst-performing regions globally.",
      "A": "Nigeria ranks above the regional average for Sub-Saharan Africa in all SDGs, suggesting consistent outperformance.",
      "B": "While Nigeria underperforms compared to OECD members globally, its progress aligns closely with Eastern Europe and Central Asia averages.",
      "D": "Nigeria demonstrates stagnation or worsening trends in all SDGs, as no indicator shows achievement or improvement.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "350",
    "ref_doc": "SUS Report.pdf",
    "source_text": "STATISTICAL PERFORMANCE INDEX MISSING DATA IN SDG INDEXNote: The full title of each SDG is available here: https://sdgs.un.orgp Decreasing 5 Stagnating D Moderately improving L On track or maintaining SDG achievement • Information unavailable Major challenges Significant challenges Challenges remain SDG achieved Information unavailable INTERNATIONAL SPILLOVER INDEXAVERAGE PERFORMANCE BY SDG OVERALL PERFORMANCE SDG DASHBOARDS AND TRENDS 338 Sustainable Development Report 2024 The SDGs and the UN Summit of the Future100 75 50 25SDG 1SDG 17 SDG 16 SDG 15 SDG 14 SDG 13 SDG 12 SDG 11 SDG 10SDG 9SDG 8SDG 7SDG 6SDG 5SDG 4SDG 3SDG 2 NigeriaNIGERIA Sub-Saharan Africa 4% 58.6 41.00 (worst) to 100 (best) 001 0 S 0 1000 (worst) to 100 (best) OECD members Easter n Eur ope and Central Asia Middle East and North Africa World East and South Asia Latin America and the Caribbean Sub-Saharan Africa Nigeria 69.9 88.4 89.6 90.2 94.3 94.4 95.5 96.5STATUS OF SDG T ARGETS (%)100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0Worsening Limited progress Achieved or on trackCOU NTRY SCO RE REGION AL AVERAGE:54.6 45.4353.7COUNTRY RANKING146 /167 G D D •D S D D S •D S A S D G S",
    "new_id": 575
  },
  {
    "id": 54229,
    "question": "Which inference about the FABLE Scenathon 2023's approach to modeling global food and land systems is most strongly supported by SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT REPORT 2024 The SDGs and the UN Summit of the Future Includes the SDG Index and Dashboards?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The integration of 'rest of' world regions was necessary to achieve equilibrium between national exports and imports within the modeled scenarios.",
      "A": "The FABLE Calculator exclusively uses MAgPIE and GLOBIOM models for all participating countries, ensuring consistency in results.",
      "B": "Standardized reporting tables were optional but recommended to allow aggregation of national results to a global scale.",
      "C": "The 16 targets agreed upon by participants focus solely on SDG 2, leaving other SDGs unaddressed in the Scenathon 2023.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "64",
    "ref_doc": "SUS Report.pdf",
    "source_text": "52 Sustainable Development Report 2024 The SDGs and the UN Summit of the Future PART 4 – TRANSFORMING FOOD AND LAND SYSTEMS TO ACHIEVE THE SDGS4.1 The FABLE Scenathon 2023 approach We use the FABLE Calculator ,16 an Excel-based tool that computes land use, land cover , animal stocks, and agricultural input use for each 5 year-time period until 2050. * Countries represented individually in the Scenathon 2023 were Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Colombia, Denmark, Ethiopia, Finland, Germany, Greece, India, Indonesia, Mexico, Norway, Nepal, Russia, Rwanda, Sweden, Türkiye, the UK, and the United States. These 22 countries account for 60% of global terrestrial land and are home to 4.5 billion people. To ensure global coverage, all remaining countries were grouped into six ‘rest of’ world regions (Figure 4.1). Country models were uploaded to the * Other models, such as the global partial equilibrium models MAgPIE17 and GLOBIOM,18 have provided complementary results for some countries, allowing useful benchmarking of results across pathways.Scenathon web platform, with their exports adjusted to achieve equilibrium between global exports and global imports. Standardised reporting tables allowed aggrega - tion of national and regional results to the global level.19 In the Scenathon 2023, participants agreed on a set of targets to be achieved collectively and simultaneously. Those 16 targets encompass four domains (Figure 4.2), related to the following SDGs: SDG 2 – Target 2.1 is to end hunger by 2030, while target 2.2 aims to eliminate all forms of malnutrition, including both insufficient and excessive kilocalorie intake in comparison to what is needed for a healthy life. For target 2.1, we compute the prevalence of under - nourishment by country and region.20 For target 2.2, we compare the average per capita kilocalorie intake of each country and region with the minimum dietary energy requirement (MDER), setting a range of 10% to 50% above the MDER as our food security objective. FABLE Country Rest of EU Rest of Asia Pacific Rest of Central and South America Rest of Middle East Central Asia Rest of Non−EU Rest of Sub−Saharan Africa No data available Source: Authors Disclaimer: The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of the SDSN and co-authors of this chapter concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. Figure 4.1 Countries and regions included in the Scenathon 2023",
    "new_id": 576
  },
  {
    "id": 54230,
    "question": "Which conclusion can be drawn regarding the focus of the reports and studies referenced in SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT REPORT 2024 The SDGs and the UN Summit of the Future Includes the SDG Index and Dashboards?",
    "options": {
      "A": "They analyze international spillover effects as a central concern, alongside country-level SDG performance.",
      "B": "They primarily emphasize country-specific progress on the SDGs without addressing cross-border impacts.",
      "C": "Their main objective is to critique the United Nations’ role in advancing the SDGs.",
      "D": "They exclusively concentrate on happiness metrics as indicators of sustainable development.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "43-44",
    "ref_doc": "SUS Report.pdf",
    "source_text": "31 Sustainable Development Report 2024 The SDGs and the UN Summit of the Future 2. SDG Index & DashboardsAnnex: Regional dashboards References Fuller , Grayson, and Leslie Bermont-Diaz. 2024. International Spillover Effect and Germany: An Analysis of Germany’s Performance on Spillovers and the Policy Options to Manage Them . SDSN and GIZ. http://dx.doi.org/10.13140/ RG.2.2.17990.89922 Helliwell, J. F., Layard, R., Sachs, J. D., De Neve, J.-E., Aknin, L. B., & Wang, S. (Eds.). 2024. World Happiness Report 2024. University of Oxford: Wellbeing Research Centre. Ishii, Naoko, Guillaume Lafortune, Daniel C. Esty, Etienne Berthet, Grayson Fuller , Akiyuki Kawasaki, Leslie Bermont- Diaz, and Sara Allali. 2024. Global Commons Stewardship Index 2024 . SDSN, Yale Center for Environmental Law & Policy, and the Center for Global Commons at the University of Tokyo. Paris; New Haven, CT; and Tokyo. Lafortune, Guillaume, Grayson Fuller , Jorge Moreno, Guido Schmidt-Traub, and Christian Kroll. 2018. SDG Index and Dashboards. Detailed Methodological Paper . Paris: Bertelsmann Stiftung and Sustainable Development Solutions Network. https://raw. githubusercontent.com/sdsna/2018GlobalIndex/ master/2018GlobalIndexMethodology.pdf . Malik, Arunima, Guillaume Lafortune, Sarah Carter , Mengyu Li, Manfred Lenzen, and Christian Kroll. 2021. International Spillover Effects in the EU’s Textile Supply Chains: A Global SDG Assessment. Journal of Environmental Management 295 (October):113037. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.113037 . Malik, Arunima, Guillaume Lafortune, Camille J Mora, Sarah Carter , and Manfred Lenzen. 2022. International Spillovers Embodied in the Eu’s Supply Chains: Tracking forced labour , accidents at work and climate impacts in the EU’s consumption of fossil and mineral raw materials . Case Study. GIZ, SDSN and University of Sydney.Massa, Isabella, Simona Marinescu, Grayson Fuller , Leslie Bermont-Diaz, and Guillaume Lafortune. 2023. Sustainable Development Report for SIDS 2023: Addressing Structural Vulnerability and Financing the SDGs in Small Island Developing States. UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network. https://sdgtransformationcenter .org/ reports/sustainable-development-report-for-small-island- developing-states-2023 . Papadimitriou, Eleni, Ana Fragoso Neves, and William Becker . 2019. JRC Statistical Audit of the Sustainable Development Goals Index and Dashboards . European Commission, Joint Research Centre. doi:10.2760/723763, JRC116857. Remaking trade for a Sustainable Future. 2023. Villars framework for a sustainable global trade system. Remaking Trade Project. Schmidt-Traub, Guido, Holger Hoff, and Maren Bernlöhr . 2019. International Spillovers and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): International Spillovers and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): Measuring How a Country’s Progress Towards the SDGs is Affected by Actions in other Countries . SDSN Policy Brief. Paris: Sustainable Development Solutions Network. Schmidt-Traub, Guido, Christian Kroll, Katerina Teksoz, David Durand-Delacre, and Jeffrey D. Sachs. 2017. National baselines for the Sustainable Development Goals assessed in the SDG Index and Dashboards. Nature Geoscience 10 (8): 547-55. https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo2985 . University of Tokyo, Systemiq, and SDSN. 2023. Tackling International Spillovers – An Overview of Policy Options . Discussion Paper . Center for Global Commons.\n\n[Page 44]\nGovernment Support to UN-Based Multilateralism and the SDGsPart 3",
    "new_id": 577
  },
  {
    "id": 54232,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why a high Logistics Performance Index: Infrastructure score and a low Red List Index of species survival might coexist in the same country profile based on the provided indicators, as outlined in SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT REPORT 2024 The SDGs and the UN Summit of the Future Includes the SDG Index and Dashboards?",
    "options": {
      "B": "High logistics performance correlates with improved urban access to points of interest, but this does not necessarily address threats to marine or terrestrial biodiversity.",
      "A": "The country prioritizes industrial infrastructure over biodiversity conservation, as evidenced by high nitrogen emissions and low protection of terrestrial sites.",
      "C": "Strong institutions and governance have mitigated environmental degradation despite heavy infrastructure development, as indicated by low deforestation rates and high Corruption Perceptions Index scores.",
      "D": "The data suggests an inherent trade-off between infrastructure quality and species survival, given that air pollution associated with imports is high while fish stocks remain underexploited.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "257",
    "ref_doc": "SUS Report.pdf",
    "source_text": "5. Country ProfilesPerformance by Indicator * Imputed data point, ** Not applicable NA = Data not availableSustainable Development Report 2024 The SDGs and the UN Summit of the Future 245 Year Rating Trend Value Year Rating Trend ValueIRELAND SDG9 – Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure Rural population with access to all-season roads (%) 99.9 2024•• Population using the internet (%) 95.6 2022•A Mobile broadband subscriptions (per 100 population) 118.6 2022•A Logistics Performance Index: Infrastructure score (worst 1–5 best) 3.5 2023•D The Times Higher Education Universities Ranking: Average score of top 3 universities (worst 0–100 best) 58.3 2024•A Articles published in academic journals (per 1,000 population) 3.7 2022•A Expenditure on research and development (% of GDP) 1.1 2021•G Researchers (per 1,000 employed population) 10.9 2022•D Triadic patent families filed (per million population) 25.3 2020•A Gap in internet access by income (percentage points) 18.1 2020•• Female share of graduates from STEM fields at the tertiary level (%) 29.0 2016•• SDG10 – Reduced Inequalities Gini coefficient 29.2 2020•A Palma ratio 1.1 2021•S Elderly poverty rate (% of population aged 66 or over) 18.2 2021•G SDG11 – Sustainable Cities and Communities Proportion of urban population living in slums (%) 0.0 2020•A Annual mean concentration of PM2.5 (μg/m3) 8.1 2022•D Access to improved water source, piped (% of urban population) 95.4 2022•G Population with rent overburden (%) 10.8 2020•S Urban population with access to points of interest within a 15min walk (%) 98.5 2024•• Population with convenient access to public transport in cities (%) 92.0 2020•• SDG12 – Responsible Consumption and Production Electronic waste (kg/capita) 18.7 2019•• Production-based air pollution (DALYs per 1,000 population) 18.9 2024•D Air pollution associated with imports (DALYs per 1,000 population) 15.9 2024•G Production-based nitrogen emissions (kg/capita) 115.9 2024•D Nitrogen emissions associated with imports (kg/capita) 44.3 2024•G Exports of plastic waste (kg/capita) NA NA•• Non-recycled municipal solid waste (kg/capita/day) 1.0 2020•G SDG13 – Climate Action CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and cement production (tCO 2/capita) 7.7 2022•D GHG emissions embodied in imports (tCO 2/capita) 14.1 2021•G CO2 emissions embodied in fossil fuel exports (kg/capita) 21.8 2022•• Carbon Pricing score at EUR60/tCO 2 (%, worst 0–100 best) 73.1 2021•A SDG14 – Life Below Water Mean area that is protected in marine sites important to biodiversity (%) 83.2 2023•A Ocean Health Index: Clean Waters score (worst 0–100 best) 65.3 2023•D Fish caught from overexploited or collapsed stocks (% of total catch) 25.2 2018•A Fish caught by trawling or dredging (%) 17.0 2019•G Fish caught that are then discarded (%) 9.9 2019•S Marine biodiversity threats embodied in imports (per million population) 0.1 2018•• SDG15 – Life on Land Mean area that is protected in terrestrial sites important to biodiversity (%) 83.4 2023•A Mean area that is protected in freshwater sites important to biodiversity (%) 98.7 2023•A Red List Index of species survival (worst 0–1 best) 0.88 2024•D Permanent deforestation (% of forest area, 3-year average) 0.0 2022•A Imported deforestation (m2/capita) 56.6 2022•G SDG16 – Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions Homicides (per 100,000 population) 0.9 2022•D Crime is effectively controlled (worst 0–1 best) 0.92 2022•• Unsentenced detainees (% of prison population) 20.0 2022•D Birth registrations with civil authority (% of children under age 5) 100.0 2023•• Corruption Perceptions Index (worst 0–100 best) 77.0 2023•A Children involved in child labor (%) * 0.0 2020•• Exports of major conventional weapons (TIV constant million USD per 100,000 population) 0.6 2022•• Press Freedom Index (worst 0–100 best) 85.6 2024•D Access to and affordability of justice (worst 0–1 best) 0.61 2022•• Timeliness of administrative proceedings (worst 0–1 best) 0.63 2022•• Expropriations are lawful and adequately compensated (worst 0–1 best) 0.92 2022•• Persons held in prison (per 100,000 population) 76.3 2021•A SDG17 – Partnerships for the Goals Government spending on health and education (% of GDP) 8.2 2021•G For high-income and all OECD DAC countries: International concessional public finance, including official development assistance (% of GNI) 0.7 2023•A Other countries: Government revenue excluding grants (% of GDP) ** ** ** ** Corporate Tax Haven score (best 0–100 worst) 772021•• ",
    "new_id": 578
  },
  {
    "id": 54245,
    "question": "Which inference about Sub-Saharan Africa's progress toward sustainable development goals can be drawn from the interplay between SDG9 (Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure) and SDG11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities) as mentioned in SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT REPORT 2024 The SDGs and the UN Summit of the Future Includes the SDG Index and Dashboards?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Low logistics performance index scores imply challenges in physical infrastructure that may hinder urban sustainability efforts.",
      "A": "The region's infrastructure scores suggest that improvements in road access directly correlate with reduced urban slum populations.",
      "B": "High mobile broadband subscription rates indicate sufficient technological infrastructure to support urban public transport systems.",
      "D": "Increased internet usage has led to measurable advancements in reducing air pollution levels within cities.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "501",
    "ref_doc": "SUS Report.pdf",
    "source_text": "5. Country ProfilesRegional Performance by Indicator Year Rating Trend Value Year Rating Trend ValueSustainable Development Report 2024 The SDGs and the UN Summit of the Future 489 * Imputed data point, ** Not applicable NA = Data not availableSUB-SAHARAN AFRICA SDG9 – Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure Rural population with access to all-season roads (%) 74.7 2024•• Population using the internet (%) 33.1 2022•S Mobile broadband subscriptions (per 100 population) 44.9 2022•S Logistics Performance Index: Infrastructure score (worst 1–5 best) 2.4 2023•G The Times Higher Education Universities Ranking: Average score of top 3 universities (worst 0–100 best) 18.1 2024•• Articles published in academic journals (per 1,000 population) 0.1 2022•D Expenditure on research and development (% of GDP) 0.3 2022•• SDG10 – Reduced Inequalities Gini coefficient 40.9 2021•• Palma ratio 2.1 2022•• SDG11 – Sustainable Cities and Communities Proportion of urban population living in slums (%) 53.0 2020•D Annual mean concentration of PM2.5 (μg/m³) 36.7 2022•D Access to improved water source, piped (% of urban population) 61.1 2022•G Population with convenient access to public transport in cities (%) 34.8 2020•• SDG12 – Responsible Consumption and Production Municipal solid waste (kg/capita/day) 0.5 2019•• Electronic waste (kg/capita) 1.7 2019•• Production-based air pollution (DALYs per 1,000 population) 0.5 2024•A Air pollution associated with imports (DALYs per 1,000 population) 0.6 2024•A Production-based nitrogen emissions (kg/capita) 13.0 2024•A Nitrogen emissions associated with imports (kg/capita) 2.2 2024•A Exports of plastic waste (kg/capita) 0.1 2023•• SDG13 – Climate Action CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and cement production (tCO 2/capita) 0.7 2022•A GHG emissions embodied in imports (tCO 2/capita) 0.4 2021•A CO2 emissions embodied in fossil fuel exports (kg/capita) 542.7 2023•• SDG14 – Life Below Water Mean area that is protected in marine sites important to biodiversity (%) 32.4 2023•D Ocean Health Index: Clean Waters score (worst 0–100 best) 40.9 2023•G Fish caught from overexploited or collapsed stocks (% of total catch) 17.0 2018•A Fish caught by trawling or dredging (%) 11.5 2019•• Fish caught that are then discarded (%) 3.9 2019•A Marine biodiversity threats embodied in imports (per million population) 0.0 2018•• SDG15 – Life on Land Mean area that is protected in terrestrial sites important to biodiversity (%) 52.6 2023•D Mean area that is protected in freshwater sites important to biodiversity (%) 50.5 2023•D Red List Index of species survival (worst 0–1 best) 0.85 2024•G Permanent deforestation (% of forest area, 3-year average) 0.4 2022•D Imported deforestation (m²/capita) 1.8 2022•A SDG16 – Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions Homicides (per 100,000 population) 11.8 2022•• Crime is effectively controlled (worst 0–1 best) 0.59 2022•• Unsentenced detainees (% of prison population) 50.0 2022•• Birth registrations with civil authority (% of children under age 5) 50.9 2023•• Corruption Perceptions Index (worst 0–1 best) 30.2 2023•D Children involved in child labor (%) 26.4 2020•• Exports of major conventional weapons (TIV constant million USD per 100,000 population) 0.0 2023•• Press Freedom Index (worst 0–1 best) 52.3 2024•G Access to and affordability of justice (worst 0–1 best) 0.47 2022•• Timeliness of administrative proceedings (worst 0–1 best) 0.38 2022•• Expropriations are lawful and adequately compensated (worst 0–1 best) 0.46 2022•• SDG17 – Partnerships for the Goals Government spending on health and education (% of GDP) 5.2 2022•G For high-income and all OECD DAC countries: International concessional public finance, including official development assistance (% of GNI) NA NA•• Other countries: Government revenue excluding grants (% of GDP) 15.2 2022•• Corporate Tax Haven score (best 0–100 worst) 4.3 2021•• Statistical Performance Index (worst 0–100 best) 60.5 2022•S Index of countries’ support to UN-based multilateralism (worst 0–100 best) 67.6 2023••SDG1 – No Poverty Poverty headcount ratio at $2.15/day (2017 PPP , %) 33.5 2024•D Poverty headcount ratio at $3.65/day (2017 PPP , %) 54.1 2024•D SDG2 – Zero Hunger Prevalence of undernourishment (%) 21.6 2021•G Prevalence of stunting in children under 5 years of age (%) 31.4 2021•• Prevalence of wasting in children under 5 years of age (%) 6.7 2021•• Prevalence of obesity, BMI ≥ 30 (% of adult population) 11.0 2022•G Human Trophic Level (best 2–3 wor",
    "new_id": 579
  },
  {
    "id": 54248,
    "question": "Which of the following conclusions about Fiji's progress toward sustainable development can be most reasonably inferred from the data trends and gaps presented in SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT REPORT 2024 The SDGs and the UN Summit of the Future Includes the SDG Index and Dashboards?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Fiji demonstrates strong performance in internet accessibility but shows untracked research and development expenditure.",
      "A": "Fiji has achieved near-universal access to clean water but faces significant challenges in reducing urban slum populations.",
      "B": "Fiji’s environmental sustainability efforts are hindered primarily by high deforestation rates and low biodiversity protection.",
      "C": "Fiji excels in reducing income inequality, as evidenced by a low Gini coefficient and minimal reliance on imports for nitrogen emissions.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "213",
    "ref_doc": "SUS Report.pdf",
    "source_text": "Performance by Indicator5. Country ProfilesSustainable Development Report 2024 The SDGs and the UN Summit of the Future 201 * Imputed data point, ** Not applicable NA = Data not availableYear Rating Trend Value Year Rating Trend ValueFIJI SDG9 – Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure Rural population with access to all-season roads (%) 96.7 2024•• Population using the internet (%) 85.2 2022•A Mobile broadband subscriptions (per 100 population) 76.1 2021•A Logistics Performance Index: Infrastructure score (worst 1–5 best) 2.2 2023•G The Times Higher Education Universities Ranking: Average score of top 3 universities (worst 0–100 best) 30.5 2024•• Articles published in academic journals (per 1,000 population) 0.6 2022•A Expenditure on research and development (% of GDP) NA NA•• SDG10 – Reduced Inequalities Gini coefficient 30.7 2019•• Palma ratio 1.1 2019•• SDG11 – Sustainable Cities and Communities Proportion of urban population living in slums (%) 9.4 2020•D Annual mean concentration of PM2.5 (μg/m³) 7.4 2022•D Access to improved water source, piped (% of urban population) 98.4 2022•A Population with convenient access to public transport in cities (%) 19.2 2020•• SDG12 – Responsible Consumption and Production Municipal solid waste (kg/capita/day) 0.6 2011•• Electronic waste (kg/capita) 6.1 2019•• Production-based air pollution (DALYs per 1,000 population) NA NA•• Air pollution associated with imports (DALYs per 1,000 population) NA NA•• Production-based nitrogen emissions (kg/capita) NA NA•• Nitrogen emissions associated with imports (kg/capita) NA NA•• Exports of plastic waste (kg/capita) 0.6 2022•A SDG13 – Climate Action CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and cement production (tCO 2/capita) 1.2 2022•A GHG emissions embodied in imports (tCO 2/capita) NA NA•• CO2 emissions embodied in fossil fuel exports (kg/capita) 0.0 2022•• SDG14 – Life Below Water Mean area that is protected in marine sites important to biodiversity (%) 16.5 2023•D Ocean Health Index: Clean Waters score (worst 0–100 best) 74.1 2023•D Fish caught from overexploited or collapsed stocks (% of total catch) 9.0 2018•A Fish caught by trawling or dredging (%) 0.0 2019•• Fish caught that are then discarded (%) 7.3 2019•D Marine biodiversity threats embodied in imports (per million population) 0.3 2018•• SDG15 – Life on Land Mean area that is protected in terrestrial sites important to biodiversity (%) 11.2 2023•D Mean area that is protected in freshwater sites important to biodiversity (%) 0.1 2023•D Red List Index of species survival (worst 0–1 best) 0.69 2024•G Permanent deforestation (% of forest area, 3-year average) 0.1 2022•A Imported deforestation (m²/capita) NA NA•• SDG16 – Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions Homicides (per 100,000 population) 2.2 2020•D Crime is effectively controlled (worst 0–1 best) NA NA•• Unsentenced detainees (% of prison population) 19.9 2021•A Birth registrations with civil authority (% of children under age 5) 86.6 2021•• Corruption Perceptions Index (worst 0–1 best) 52.0 2023•• Children involved in child labor (%) 16.7 2021•• Exports of major conventional weapons (TIV constant million USD per 100,000 population)* 0.0 2023•• Press Freedom Index (worst 0–1 best) 71.2 2024•A Access to and affordability of justice (worst 0–1 best) NA NA•• Timeliness of administrative proceedings (worst 0–1 best) NA NA•• Expropriations are lawful and adequately compensated (worst 0–1 best) NA NA•• SDG17 – Partnerships for the Goals Government spending on health and education (% of GDP) 9.3 2021•A For high-income and all OECD DAC countries: International concessional public finance, including official development assistance (% of GNI) NA NA•• Other countries: Government revenue excluding grants (% of GDP) 19.0 2021•G Corporate Tax Haven score (best 0–100 worst) * 02021•• Statistical Performance Index (worst 0–100 best) 63.2 2022•S Index of countries’ support to UN-based multilateralism (worst 0–100 best) 88.3 2023••SDG1 – No Poverty Poverty headcount ratio at $2.15/day (2017 PPP , %) 1.6 2024•D Poverty headcount ratio at $3.65/day (2017 PPP , %) 7.3 2024•D SDG2 – Zero Hunger Prevalence of undernourishment (%) 6.6 2021•A Prevalence of stunting in children under 5 years of age (%) 7.2 2021•• Prevalence of wasting in children under 5 years of age (%) 4.6 2021•• Prevalence of obesity, BMI ≥ 30 (% of adult population) 33.8 2022•G Human Trophic Level (best 2–3 worst) 2.2 2021•D Cereal yield (tonnes per hectare of harvested land) 4.1 202",
    "new_id": 580
  },
  {
    "id": 54249,
    "question": "Which inference about Malta's sustainability efforts can be drawn based on the interplay between SDG11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities) and SDG13 (Climate Action) as described in SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT REPORT 2024 The SDGs and the UN Summit of the Future Includes the SDG Index and Dashboards?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Despite near-universal access to public transport, Malta still exhibits relatively high GHG emissions embodied in imports compared to local emissions.",
      "B": "Malta’s urban population has no exposure to air pollution, as indicated by zero PM2.5 concentrations.",
      "C": "The high access to public transport in cities directly correlates with lower CO2 emissions from fossil fuels per capita.",
      "D": "Malta’s imported deforestation offsets any gains achieved through its sustainable urban infrastructure initiatives.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "311",
    "ref_doc": "SUS Report.pdf",
    "source_text": "Performance by Indicator5. Country ProfilesSustainable Development Report 2024 The SDGs and the UN Summit of the Future 299 * Imputed data point, ** Not applicable NA = Data not availableYear Rating Trend Value Year Rating Trend ValueMALTA SDG9 – Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure Rural population with access to all-season roads (%) 100.0 2024•• Population using the internet (%) 91.5 2022•A Mobile broadband subscriptions (per 100 population) 123.7 2022•A Logistics Performance Index: Infrastructure score (worst 1–5 best) 3.7 2023•A The Times Higher Education Universities Ranking: Average score of top 3 universities (worst 0–100 best) 34.8 2024•• Articles published in academic journals (per 1,000 population) 2.3 2022•A Expenditure on research and development (% of GDP) 0.7 2021•G SDG10 – Reduced Inequalities Gini coefficient 31.4 2020•G Palma ratio 1.2 2020•D SDG11 – Sustainable Cities and Communities Proportion of urban population living in slums (%) * 0.0 2020•A Annual mean concentration of PM2.5 (μg/m³) 11.8 2022•S Access to improved water source, piped (% of urban population) 100.0 2022•A Population with convenient access to public transport in cities (%) 97.3 2020•• SDG12 – Responsible Consumption and Production Municipal solid waste (kg/capita/day) 2.2 2019•• Electronic waste (kg/capita) 14.5 2019•• Production-based air pollution (DALYs per 1,000 population) 4.0 2024•A Air pollution associated with imports (DALYs per 1,000 population) 15.5 2024•G Production-based nitrogen emissions (kg/capita) 10.8 2024•A Nitrogen emissions associated with imports (kg/capita) 38.8 2024•G Exports of plastic waste (kg/capita) 3.4 2022•A SDG13 – Climate Action CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and cement production (tCO 2/capita) 3.1 2022•S GHG emissions embodied in imports (tCO 2/capita) 15.9 2021•G CO2 emissions embodied in fossil fuel exports (kg/capita) 0.0 2021•• SDG14 – Life Below Water Mean area that is protected in marine sites important to biodiversity (%) 98.9 2023•A Ocean Health Index: Clean Waters score (worst 0–100 best) 57.0 2023•S Fish caught from overexploited or collapsed stocks (% of total catch) 18.9 2018•D Fish caught by trawling or dredging (%) 8.7 2019•G Fish caught that are then discarded (%) 15.8 2019•G Marine biodiversity threats embodied in imports (per million population) 0.1 2018•• SDG15 – Life on Land Mean area that is protected in terrestrial sites important to biodiversity (%) 90.9 2023•A Mean area that is protected in freshwater sites important to biodiversity (%) NA NA•• Red List Index of species survival (worst 0–1 best) 0.92 2024•A Permanent deforestation (% of forest area, 3-year average) NA NA•• Imported deforestation (m²/capita) 11.0 2022•A SDG16 – Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions Homicides (per 100,000 population) 0.4 2021•A Crime is effectively controlled (worst 0–1 best) 0.86 2022•• Unsentenced detainees (% of prison population) 31.6 2021•G Birth registrations with civil authority (% of children under age 5) 100.0 2023•• Corruption Perceptions Index (worst 0–1 best) 51.0 2023•G Children involved in child labor (%) NA NA•• Exports of major conventional weapons (TIV constant million USD per 100,000 population) 1.1 2015•• Press Freedom Index (worst 0–1 best) 61.0 2024•G Access to and affordability of justice (worst 0–1 best) 0.69 2022•• Timeliness of administrative proceedings (worst 0–1 best) 0.46 2022•• Expropriations are lawful and adequately compensated (worst 0–1 best) 0.55 2022•• SDG17 – Partnerships for the Goals Government spending on health and education (% of GDP) 12.8 2021•A For high-income and all OECD DAC countries: International concessional public finance, including official development assistance (% of GNI) 0.3 2023•G Other countries: Government revenue excluding grants (% of GDP) ** ** ** ** Corporate Tax Haven score (best 0–100 worst) 792021•• Statistical Performance Index (worst 0–100 best) 80.6 2022•A Index of countries’ support to UN-based multilateralism (worst 0–100 best) 78.4 2023••SDG1 – No Poverty Poverty headcount ratio at $2.15/day (2017 PPP , %) 0.2 2024•D Poverty headcount ratio at $3.65/day (2017 PPP , %) 0.2 2024•D SDG2 – Zero Hunger Prevalence of undernourishment (%) 4.6 2021•D Prevalence of stunting in children under 5 years of age (%) * 2.6 2021•• Prevalence of wasting in children under 5 years of age (%) * 0.7 2021•• Prevalence of obesity, BMI ≥ 30 (% of adult population) 32.3 2022•G Human Trophic Level (best 2–3 worst) 2.3 2021•D Cereal yie",
    "new_id": 581
  },
  {
    "id": 54287,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the Task Force's position on materiality and disclosure of climate-related information, as outlined in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Scope 1 and Scope 2 GHG emissions must be disclosed regardless of whether they are considered material or not.",
      "A": "Companies are advised to exclude climate-related risks deemed immaterial based on their long-term nature from all reports.",
      "C": "Strategy and Metrics and Targets information should only be included in financial filings for companies with annual revenues below 1 billion USD.",
      "D": "Materiality determinations for climate-related issues can follow different criteria than those used for other financial disclosures.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "30-31",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD WS 1.pdf",
    "source_text": "301 234 5 6 7Represent relevant information Be specific and completeBe clear, balanced, and understandable Be consistent over time Be comparable among companies within a sector industry or portfolio Be reliable, verifiable, and objective Be provided on a timely basisPrinciples for Effective Disclosure To help achieve high- quality disclosures, the Task Force recommends that companies consider seven principles for effective disclosure Disclosures Should: Source: TCFD, Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate -related Financial Disclosures , 2017, Appendix 3, pp. 51 -53 The 2017 report also provides more information on these principles.\n\n[Page 31]\n31Location of Disclosure The Task Force recommends that information on climate -related issues be disclosed in a company’s annual financial filings or other official company reports Location of Disclosure for Task Force Recommendations Financial FilingOther Annual Report* Information is deemed Material Information is deemed not Material Large non -financial companies in high -emitting industries1Governance Strategy Risk Management Metrics and Targets * Other annual reports include regulatory or official company reports that are issued at least annually.Legend: Companies should determine materiality for climate- related issues consistent with how they determine the materiality of other information included in their annual financial filings. The Task Force cautions companies against prematurely concluding that climate -related risks and opportunities are not material based on perceptions of the longer- term nature of some climate -related risks. Companies need to make financial disclosures in accordance with their national disclosure requirements. If certain elements of the recommendations are incompatible with national disclosure requirements for financial filings , companies are encouraged to disclose those elements through other reports that are issued at least annually. 1. The Task Force recommends companies in non- financial groups with over 1 billion USDE in annual revenue that are more exposed to climate -related risks to disclose Strategy and Metrics and Targets information in other annual reports. 2. Scope 1 and Scope 2 GHG emissions should be disclosed irrespective of materiality Source: TCFD, Annex : Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate -related Financial Disclosures , 2021",
    "new_id": 582
  },
  {
    "id": 54295,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between materiality assessments and GHG emissions disclosures as described in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Scope 1 and Scope 2 GHG emissions should be disclosed without a materiality assessment, but Scope 3 emissions require one unless deemed immaterial.",
      "A": "All Scope 1, Scope 2, and Scope 3 GHG emissions must undergo a materiality assessment before disclosure.",
      "B": "Scope 1 and Scope 2 GHG emissions are subject to materiality assessments, while Scope 3 emissions are disclosed independent of such assessments.",
      "D": "Organizations are encouraged to disclose Scope 3 GHG emissions only if they exceed the materiality threshold, while Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions are always disclosed.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "36-37",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD WS 1.pdf",
    "source_text": "36Recommendations Four widely adoptable recommendations tied to: governance, strategy, risk management, and metrics and targets. These were introduced in the final 2017 TCFD recommendations publicationRecommendations Recommended DisclosuresGuidance for All Sectors Supplemental Guidance for Certain Sectors Additional Supporting MaterialsRecommended Disclosures Specific recommended disclosures companies should include in their financial filings to provide decision -useful information Guidance for All Sectors Guidance providing context and suggestions for implementing the recommended disclosures for all companies Supplemental Guidance for Certain Sectors Guidance that highlights important considerations for certain sectors and provides a fuller picture of potential climate -related financial impacts in those sectors Supplemental guidance is provided for the financial sector and for non- financial sectors potentially most affected by climate change Additional Supporting Materials Additional information and guidance to help preparers implement key components of the TCFD recommendations (e.g., Guidance on Metrics, Targets, and Transition Plans, etc.)Structure of the Recommendations The following resources should be read in order to understand the full scope of the TCFD framework Recommendations and Guidance Structure Source: TCFD , Annex: Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate -related Financial Disclosures , 2021\n\n[Page 37]\n37Application of Recommendations Who Should Disclose? To promote more informed investing, lending, and insurance underwriting decisions, the Task Force recommends all financial and non- financial organizations with public debt or equity implement its recommendations. Because climate -related risks and opportunities are relevant for organizations across all sectors, the Task Force encourages all organizations to implement these recommendations. In addition, the Task Force believes that asset managers and asset owners, including public- and private -sector pension plans, endowments, and foundations, should implement its recommendations. Which Recommendations Involve an Assessment of Materiality? The disclosures related to the Strategy and Metrics and Targets recommendations involve an assessment of materiality, with the exception of Scope 1 and Scope 2 GHG emissions under the Metrics and Targets recommendation. The Task Force believes all organizations should disclose absolute Scope 1 and Scope 2 GHG emissions independent of a materiality assessment. The disclosure of Scope 3 GHG emissions is subject to materiality; however, the Task Force encourages organizations to disclose such emissions. Source: TCFD , Annex: Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate -related Financial Disclosures , 2021",
    "new_id": 583
  },
  {
    "id": 54340,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why the trend in top risks over the years 2015–2021 implies a growing recognition of interconnected environmental and societal threats, as described in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The consistent ranking of 'extreme weather' alongside 'climate action failure' suggests that both direct physical impacts and systemic policy challenges are being acknowledged.",
      "A": "The inclusion of 'infectious diseases' as a top risk in 2021 reflects a singular focus on health crises unrelated to climate change.",
      "B": "The replacement of 'interstate conflict' with 'biodiversity loss' indicates a declining concern for geopolitical stability compared to environmental issues.",
      "C": "The prioritization of 'cyberattacks' demonstrates that technological risks outweigh environmental concerns in global assessments.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "7-8",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD WS 1.pdf",
    "source_text": "7Impacts of Climate Change (continued) Climate action failure and its consequences, including extreme weather, environmental damage, and biodiversity loss, are recognized as several of the top risks globally Rising Importance of Environmental Threats Trend in top five risks in terms of likelihood, 2015 -2021Economic Environmental Geopolitical Societal Technological 2015 Interstate conflict Extreme weather Failure of national governance State collapse or crisis Unemployment2016 Involuntary migration Extreme weather Climate action failure Interstate conflict Natural catastrophes2017 Extreme weather Involuntary migration Natural disasters Terrorist attacks Data fraud or theft2019 Extreme weather Climate action failure Natural disasters Data fraud or theft Cyberattacks2018 Extreme weather Natural disasters Cyberattacks Data fraud or theft Climate action failure2020 Extreme weather Climate action failure Natural disasters Biodiversity loss Human -made environmental disasters2021 Extreme weather Climate action failure Human environmental damage Infectious diseases Biodiversity loss Note: The top 5 risks for each year presented in this chart were identified the year prior through the annual World Economic Forum Global Risks Perception Survey. These surveys were conducted among the World Economic Forum’s multi -stakeholder communities, members of the I nstitute of Risk Management since 2015, and the professional networks of its Advisory Board since 2016. Source: WEF : Global Risks Report 2021\n\n[Page 8]\n8Physical RisksAcute •Increased severity of extreme weather events such as cyclones and floods Chronic•Changing weather patterns and rising mean temperature and sea levels Transition RisksPolicy and Legal•Increased pricing of GHG emissions •Enhanced emissions -reporting, obligations •Mandates on and regulation of existing products and services •Exposure to litigation Technology•Substitution of existing products and services with lower emissions options •Unsuccessful investment in new technologies •Costs to transition to lower emissions technology Market•Changing customer behavior •Uncertainty in market signals •Increased cost of raw materials Reputation•Shifts in consumer preferences •Stigmatization of sector •Increased stakeholder concern or negative stakeholder feedback Source: TCFD, Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate -related Financial Disclosures , 2017Climate -Related Risks On one hand, climate change exposes companies to climate -related risks, which include physical risks and transition risks Examples of Climate -Related Risks (Non Exhaustive)",
    "new_id": 584
  },
  {
    "id": 54341,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the implicit relationship between financial implications of climate change and the rising importance of environmental threats, as discussed in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The financial implications of climate change, including altered risk-return profiles, align with the growing recognition of environmental threats as top global risks affecting economic stability.",
      "B": "Companies resilient to climate-related risks are likely to face reduced investor interest due to their focus on long-term viability rather than short-term gains.",
      "C": "The increasing prominence of environmental threats like extreme weather and biodiversity loss has led to a decreased emphasis on financial transparency by companies.",
      "D": "Climate action failure is considered a less significant risk compared to technological disruptions, which have consistently dominated global risk assessments since 2015.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "6-7",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD WS 1.pdf",
    "source_text": "6Impacts of Climate Change (continued) Climate change has potential financial implications for companies across all sectors What are the Financial Implications of Climate Change? Climate change poses significant financial challenges and opportunities: •Transition to a lower -carbon economy potential to generate new investment opportunities . •Risk-return profile potential to change significantly for companies exposed to climate- related risks as they may be more affected by physical impacts of climate change, climate policy, and new technologies. The financial crisis of 2007- 2008 resulted in increased demand for transparency from companies on their governance structures, strategies, and risk management practices , to provide the context in which financial results are achieved. Critical for companies to consider the impact of climate change and disclose related material information . Companies that invest in activities that may not be viable in the longer term: •may be less resilient to risks related to climate change and •their investors may experience lower financial returns . Investors need better information on how companies —across a wide range of sectors —have prepared or are preparing for a lower -carbon economy. Those companies that meet this need may have a competitive advantage over others. Sources TCFD, Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate -related Financial Disclosures , 2017 TCFD, 2019 Status Report , 2019\n\n[Page 7]\n7Impacts of Climate Change (continued) Climate action failure and its consequences, including extreme weather, environmental damage, and biodiversity loss, are recognized as several of the top risks globally Rising Importance of Environmental Threats Trend in top five risks in terms of likelihood, 2015 -2021Economic Environmental Geopolitical Societal Technological 2015 Interstate conflict Extreme weather Failure of national governance State collapse or crisis Unemployment2016 Involuntary migration Extreme weather Climate action failure Interstate conflict Natural catastrophes2017 Extreme weather Involuntary migration Natural disasters Terrorist attacks Data fraud or theft2019 Extreme weather Climate action failure Natural disasters Data fraud or theft Cyberattacks2018 Extreme weather Natural disasters Cyberattacks Data fraud or theft Climate action failure2020 Extreme weather Climate action failure Natural disasters Biodiversity loss Human -made environmental disasters2021 Extreme weather Climate action failure Human environmental damage Infectious diseases Biodiversity loss Note: The top 5 risks for each year presented in this chart were identified the year prior through the annual World Economic Forum Global Risks Perception Survey. These surveys were conducted among the World Economic Forum’s multi -stakeholder communities, members of the I nstitute of Risk Management since 2015, and the professional networks of its Advisory Board since 2016. Source: WEF : Global Risks Report 2021",
    "new_id": 585
  },
  {
    "id": 54342,
    "question": "Which conclusion can be drawn regarding the Task Force's rationale for distinguishing between Scope 1, Scope 2, and Scope 3 GHG emissions disclosures, as outlined in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions must be disclosed universally without materiality assessments, whereas Scope 3 disclosures depend on materiality but are still encouraged to provide a fuller picture of potential impacts.",
      "A": "Scope 3 emissions are considered less relevant to climate-related financial impacts than Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions.",
      "C": "The Task Force prioritizes Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions disclosures to ensure uniformity across all sectors, while Scope 3 disclosures remain optional due to their complexity.",
      "D": "Scope 3 emissions are deemed immaterial by definition, which is why they are excluded from mandatory reporting requirements.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "36-37",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD WS 1.pdf",
    "source_text": "36Recommendations Four widely adoptable recommendations tied to: governance, strategy, risk management, and metrics and targets. These were introduced in the final 2017 TCFD recommendations publicationRecommendations Recommended DisclosuresGuidance for All Sectors Supplemental Guidance for Certain Sectors Additional Supporting MaterialsRecommended Disclosures Specific recommended disclosures companies should include in their financial filings to provide decision -useful information Guidance for All Sectors Guidance providing context and suggestions for implementing the recommended disclosures for all companies Supplemental Guidance for Certain Sectors Guidance that highlights important considerations for certain sectors and provides a fuller picture of potential climate -related financial impacts in those sectors Supplemental guidance is provided for the financial sector and for non- financial sectors potentially most affected by climate change Additional Supporting Materials Additional information and guidance to help preparers implement key components of the TCFD recommendations (e.g., Guidance on Metrics, Targets, and Transition Plans, etc.)Structure of the Recommendations The following resources should be read in order to understand the full scope of the TCFD framework Recommendations and Guidance Structure Source: TCFD , Annex: Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate -related Financial Disclosures , 2021\n\n[Page 37]\n37Application of Recommendations Who Should Disclose? To promote more informed investing, lending, and insurance underwriting decisions, the Task Force recommends all financial and non- financial organizations with public debt or equity implement its recommendations. Because climate -related risks and opportunities are relevant for organizations across all sectors, the Task Force encourages all organizations to implement these recommendations. In addition, the Task Force believes that asset managers and asset owners, including public- and private -sector pension plans, endowments, and foundations, should implement its recommendations. Which Recommendations Involve an Assessment of Materiality? The disclosures related to the Strategy and Metrics and Targets recommendations involve an assessment of materiality, with the exception of Scope 1 and Scope 2 GHG emissions under the Metrics and Targets recommendation. The Task Force believes all organizations should disclose absolute Scope 1 and Scope 2 GHG emissions independent of a materiality assessment. The disclosure of Scope 3 GHG emissions is subject to materiality; however, the Task Force encourages organizations to disclose such emissions. Source: TCFD , Annex: Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate -related Financial Disclosures , 2021",
    "new_id": 586
  },
  {
    "id": 54343,
    "question": "Which statement accurately captures a nuanced relationship between climate-related opportunities and their financial impacts, as described in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The use of lower-emission energy sources and improved building efficiency reduces sensitivity to carbon costs while also potentially increasing asset value.",
      "A": "Climate-related opportunities primarily reduce operational costs by ensuring complete independence from fossil fuels, which eliminates exposure to price fluctuations.",
      "B": "Access to new markets is considered an opportunity because it guarantees increased revenue through government partnerships alone.",
      "D": "Resource diversification inherently ensures supply chain reliability under all possible environmental conditions without additional adaptations.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "13-14",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD WS 1.pdf",
    "source_text": "13Development and/or expansion of low emission goods and servicesIncreased revenue through demand for lower emissions products and services Access to new marketsIncreased value of fixed assets (e.g., highly rated energy efficient buildings) Reduced exposure to future fossil fuel price increases as well as GHG emissions, and therefore less sensitivity to changes in cost of carbon Increased revenues through access to new and emerging markets (e.g., partnerships with governments, development banks)Move to more efficient buildings Use of lower -emission sources of energyOpportunity Potential Financial Impact Resource substitutes/diversificationIncreased reliability of supply chain and ability to operate under various conditions “Opportunities” refer to the potential for positive or favorable consequences.Climate -Related Opportunities and Financial Impact … which can lead to potential positive financial impacts Examples of Climate -Related Opportunities and Potential Financial Impact Source: TCFD, Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate -related Financial Disclosures , 2017\n\n[Page 14]\n14Discussion question: •What is a financial impact from a climate -related issue that your company might experience?",
    "new_id": 587
  },
  {
    "id": 54344,
    "question": "Which statement best captures the primary reason why the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures focuses on improving disclosure practices for climate-related risks, as described in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "D": "To enable financial market participants and policymakers to better understand and manage growing climate-related risks over time.",
      "A": "To ensure that all companies adopt uniform sustainability standards regardless of industry.",
      "B": "To mandate that non-financial companies exclusively bear the responsibility for disclosing climate-related financial data.",
      "C": "To prioritize the interests of asset managers and asset owners over other stakeholders in the financial sector.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "16-17",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD WS 1.pdf",
    "source_text": "16The G20 Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors asked the Financial Stability Board (FSB) to review how the financial sector can take account of climate- related issues. In response, the FSB established the Task Force on Climate -related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) to develop recommendations for more effective climate- related disclosures. The Task Force’s 32 international members, led by Chair Michael Bloomberg, include providers of capital, insurers, large non -financial companies, accounting and consulting firms, and credit rating agencies.Industry Led and Geographically Diverse Task Force Experts from the Financial Sector Experts from Non -Financial SectorsOther Experts“The FSB is asking the Task Force on Climate- related Financial Disclosures to make recommendations for consistent company disclosures that will help financial market participants understand their climate -related risks . Access to high quality financial information will allow market participants and policymakers to understand and better manage those risks, which are likely to grow with time.” -Mark Carney ( FSB Chair) , Speaking at the COP21 Paris Climate Change Conference, December 2015 (emphasis added)Introduction The Task Force on Climate -related Financial Disclosures was created in late 2015 to help identify information needed by the financial sector to appropriately assess and price climate -related risks Note: The Task Force uses the term “companies” to refer to entities with public debt or equity as well as asset managers and asset owners, including public -and private -sector pension plans, endowments, and foundations.\n\n[Page 17]\n17 Introduction (continued) Better disclosure of the financial impacts of climate -related risks and opportunities on a company is a key goal of the Task Force’s work Source: TCFD, Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate -related Financial Disclosures , 2017",
    "new_id": 588
  },
  {
    "id": 55579,
    "question": "Which of the following scenarios would be excluded from the entity's disclosure of data breaches based on the conditions outlined in the Managed Care – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "A breach involving unauthorized access to personal health data that poses no discernible risk to individuals or the entity’s business performance.",
      "B": "A breach where only personal data was accessed, but it resulted in significant economic disadvantage to affected individuals.",
      "C": "A breach that compromised both personal data and personal health data, with a negligible impact on the entity’s operations but potential harm to individuals.",
      "D": "A breach affecting physical computer systems caused by natural hazards, which damaged infrastructure but did not expose any personal data.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "9",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Managed Care.pdf",
    "source_text": "3The entity shall describe the systems used to ensure compliance with applicable jurisdictional laws or regulations related to the collection, usage, storage and disposal of personal health data and personal data. 4The entity shall describe its efforts to ensure compliance in the context of how it implements these three categories of system security: 4.1 administrative safeguards, which are defined as documented, formal policies and procedures to manage the selection and execution of security measures to protect data and manage the conduct of staff in relation to the protection of data; 4.2 physical safeguards, which are defined as the protection of physical computer systems and the buildings holding such systems from natural and environmental hazards and inappropriate intrusion or removal; and 4.3 technical safeguards, which are defined as processes put in place to protect information, authenticate users and control individual access to information. 5Relevant practices to discuss include: internal monitoring practices; technology and security programmes to prevent data breaches; training programmes and protocols for employees who handle personal health data or personal data, and disposal methods for paper and electronic personal health data records. 6The entity shall disclose if it employs increased security measures to ensure the security of personal health data, including a discussion of those additional measures. 7The entity should exclude any information that compromises the security of its systems or its customers ’ personal health data or personal data. HC-MC-230a.2. (1) Number of data breaches, (2) percentage involving (a) personal data only and (b) personal health data, (3) number of customers affected in each category, (a) personal data only and (b) personal health data 1The entity shall disclose (1) the total number of data breaches identified during the reporting period. 1.1 A data breach is defined as an unauthorised occurrence on, or conducted through, an entity ’s information systems that jeopardises the confidentiality, integrity or availability of an entity ’s information systems or any information contained therein. 1.1.1 Information systems are defined as information resources owned or used by the entity, including physical or virtual infrastructure controlled by such information resources, or components thereof, organised for the collection, processing, maintenance, use, sharing, dissemination or disposition of an entity ’s information to maintain or support operations. 1.2 The scope of the disclosure excludes occurrences in which an entity has reasonable and supportable belief that the occurrence (i) does not pose a risk of damage to the entity ’s business performance or prospects and (ii) does not pose a risk of economic or social disadvantage to individuals. 2The entity shall disclose (2) the percentage of data breaches in which customers ’ (a) personal data, but not personal health data, was subject to the data breach. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |MANAGED CARE |9",
    "new_id": 589
  },
  {
    "id": 55580,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes the relationship between medical loss ratio calculations and the entity's obligation to ensure customer access to coverage irrespective of health status or pre-existing conditions, as outlined in the Managed Care – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "The entity’s compliance with regulations regarding customer access to coverage is independent of its medical loss ratio, though both aim to improve overall population health outcomes.",
      "A": "Medical loss ratio calculations are directly adjusted based on the number of individuals with pre-existing conditions covered by the entity.",
      "C": "Entities must allocate a fixed percentage of their medical loss ratio specifically toward covering individuals with pre-existing conditions.",
      "D": "Regulations governing customer access to coverage require entities to prioritize quality improvement activities over incurred claims in medical loss ratio calculations.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "12-13",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Managed Care.pdf",
    "source_text": "Access to Coverage Topic Summary Entities in the Managed Care industry may improve a population ’s access to health care by limiting plan costs and rate increases for health insurance in jurisdictions where private health insurance is prevalent. These improvements most significantly affect segments of the population that tend to have lower rates of insurance coverage. These entities generally must also comply with regulations intended to control plan costs, including medical loss ratios, as well as ensuring all applicants have access to coverage regardless of health status, gender or pre-existing conditions. Increased regulatory focus on health care costs and compliance with evolving regulations continue to present challenges for the industry. Metrics HC-MC-240a.1. Percentage of total health care insurance premiums spent directly on medical claims and efforts to improve the quality of care 1The entity shall disclose the percentage of total health care insurance premiums it spent directly on medical claims and efforts to improve the quality of care (the entity ’s medical loss ratio). 1.1 The entity shall calculate this percentage as the sum of its incurred claims plus its expenditures for activities that improve quality of care, divided by its health care insurance premium revenue. 1.1.1 Incurred claims are defined as the total amount spent on medical claims paid to policyholders, including payments made to health care providers for services rendered. 1.1.2 Activities to improve health care quality include activities, initiatives, and investments undertaken by the entity to enhance the overall delivery, effectiveness, safety and outcomes of health care services provided to patients. These quality improvement expenses may include patient safety programmes, preventive care efforts, health management programmes, and investments in health care technology. 1.2 The entity may use applicable jurisdictional definitions in calculating its medical loss ratio. In such cases, the entity shall disclose the jurisdictional definition used in making its calculation. 2The entity shall disclose its medical loss ratio consolidated for all business lines and for each of the entity ’s business segments according to its disaggregation of financial information which may include categories such as: 2.1 small employer group; 2.2 large employer group; and 2.3 individual retail. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |MANAGED CARE |12\n\n[Page 13]\nHC-MC-240a.4. Description of policies and practices regarding customer access to coverage 1The entity shall describe its policies and practices regarding customer access to coverage, including how it integrates access considerations in determining increases in plan pricing. 1.1 The description shall include how the entity integrates considerations such as pre-existing conditions and health status. 1.1.1 Pre-existing condition refers to any medical condition, illness, or injury that existed prior to the application for or enrolment in a health care plan, including chronic conditions, previous surgeries and ongoing medical treatments. 1.1.2 Health status refers to the overall physical and mental well-being of an individual, which may be affected by factors such as medical history, current health conditions, lifestyle choices and family medical history. 2The entity shall disclose whether it is subject to applicable jurisdictional laws or regulations regarding customer access to coverage and identify any systems used to monitor compliance with such laws or regulations. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |MANAGED CARE |13",
    "new_id": 590
  },
  {
    "id": 55581,
    "question": "Which of the following scenarios would most likely indicate a failure to adequately address the strategic risks posed by climate change, as outlined in the Managed Care – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "An entity focuses exclusively on the potential increase in waterborne diseases while ignoring changes in food availability and malnutrition rates.",
      "A": "An entity incorporates projections of increased allergic responses and asthma rates into its risk models but does not account for migration patterns of tropical diseases.",
      "B": "An entity develops comprehensive strategies for managing heat-induced illnesses but neglects to assess the implications of extreme weather events on plan affordability.",
      "D": "An entity adopts measures to mitigate morbidity impacts from vector-borne diseases without evaluating the effects of climate change on geographical disease incidence.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "19-20",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Managed Care.pdf",
    "source_text": "Climate Change Impacts on Human Health Topic Summary An increase in extreme weather events associated with climate change could have significant health impacts. These events, coupled with the potential spread of infectious diseases and food and water scarcity, may present material implications for the Managed Care industry through an increase in encounters with the health care system. Entities that manage the risks posed by extreme weather events and potential changes in the incidence, morbidity and mortality of illnesses and diseases may protect shareholder value better. Metrics HC-MC-450a.1. Discussion of the strategy to address the effects of climate change on business operations and how specific risks presented by changes in the geographical incidence, morbidity and mortality of illnesses and diseases are incorporated into risk models 1The entity shall discuss its strategic business approach to addressing significant risks related to the effects of climate change, which may include changes in the following aspects of illnesses and diseases: 1.1 Geographical incidence 1.2 Morbidity 1.3 Mortality 2Relevant disclosure may include discussion of: 2.1 Increases in allergic responses, asthma rates and heat-induced illness 2.2 Migration of tropical diseases such as malaria, dengue fever and other vector-borne tropical diseases to non-tropical regions 2.3 Increases in waterborne diseases, such as cholera, because of increased natural disaster incidence 2.4 Increased rates of human developmental diseases such as malnutrition because of decreased food availability 3 The entity shall discuss any projected impacts on revenue, costs or plan affordability. 4The entity may discuss how it incorporates the effects of climate change into its risk assessment and risk adjustment activities. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |MANAGED CARE |19\n\n[Page 20]\n| |20 sasb.org/contact",
    "new_id": 591
  },
  {
    "id": 56464,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between the methods for calculating advertising impressions made on children and the entity's obligation to disclose dietary guideline compliance, as outlined in the Restaurants – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The calculation of impressions made on children requires multiplying audience share by total impressions, irrespective of whether the advertising is primarily directed at children.",
      "A": "The entity must calculate the total number of impressions made on children using gross rating points exclusively, regardless of other data collection methods mentioned.",
      "B": "An entity can avoid disclosing the specific dietary guidelines used if the percentage of impressions promoting compliant products is below a jurisdictional threshold.",
      "C": "Advertising impressions made on children are only included in disclosures if they exceed the expected share of children in the audience.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "21-22",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Restaurants.pdf",
    "source_text": "4If children ’s meal options in a portion of an entity ’s operations are not tracked in such a manner that allows for precise measurement, estimation is acceptable. 4.1 In such a case, the entity shall disclose the estimation method used to calculate the sales of combinations of children ’s meal options and the percentage of operations for which it was employed. FB-RN-260a.3. Percentage of advertising impressions (1) made on children and (2) made on children promoting products that meet dietary guidelines for children 1 The entity shall disclose (1) the percentage of advertising impressions made on children. 1.1 An advertising impression is a measure of the number of times an advertisement is seen, heard, watched or read. 1.1.1 Advertising impressions may include those made through media such as television, radio, print, the internet (entity-owned and third-party websites), mobile apps, interactive games (including advergames), video games, computer games, DVDs and other video formats, and through word-of- mouth, licensed characters, celebrity endorsements and film tie-ins. 1.2 For the purposes of this disclosure, the definition of children shall be based on applicable jurisdictional laws or regulations. 1.2.1 If an entity ’s jurisdiction has no definition of children, then children are defined as age 12 and under. 1.2.2 The entity shall disclose the applicable jurisdictional laws or regulations used. 1.3 The percentage is calculated as the number of advertising impressions made on children divided by the total number of advertising impressions made. 1.3.1 The number of advertising impressions made on children is calculated as the expected share of children in the audience (viewers, listeners, readers or visitors) at the time of the media buy multiplied by the expected total number of advertising impressions made, regardless of whether the advertising is primarily directed at children. 1.3.2 The number of advertising impressions made on children shall be calculated regardless of whether the expected share of children in the audience is above or below any quantitative thresholds used to determine whether the advertising is primarily directed at children, based on applicable jurisdictional laws or regulations. 2The entity shall disclose (2) the percentage of advertising impressions made on children that promote products which meet international, national, regional or industry dietary guidelines for children. 2.1 Dietary guidelines for children are defined as international, national, regional or industry guidelines or criteria developed to promote healthy diets among children. Dietary guidelines must be publicly available and contain, at minimum, quantitative thresholds for the health attributes of applicable products or product categories. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |RESTAURANTS |21\n\n[Page 22]\n2.2 The percentage is calculated as the number of advertising impressions made on children that promote products that meet applicable dietary guidelines for children, divided by the total number of advertising impressions made on children. Note to FB-RN-260a.3 1The entity shall disclose the specific dietary guidelines for children used to calculate the percentage of advertising impressions made on children that promote products that meet such guidelines. 2 The entity shall disclose its method for collecting data and estimating the number of advertising impressions made on children. Data collection may include: 2.1 gross rating points and target ratios for television, radio and print advertising; 2.2 average visits per month, average page visits per month and targeted index by age for entity-owned websites; or 2.3 total number of advertising impressions viewed and child audience share for third-party websites, mobile apps, interactive games (including advergames), video games and computer games. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |RESTAURANTS |22",
    "new_id": 592
  },
  {
    "id": 56478,
    "question": "Which interpretation accurately reflects the implications of the disclosure requirements for meal options consistent with dietary guidelines, as described in the Restaurants – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The calculation of compliant meal combinations is based on one-third of daily nutritional values, and the disclosed revenue encompasses both entity-owned and franchise locations.",
      "B": "Restaurants must disclose the percentage of all possible meal combinations meeting at least half of the daily nutritional values as defined by applicable guidelines.",
      "C": "The disclosed revenue from compliant meal options includes only those meals where customers explicitly request no substitutions or additions to default menu items.",
      "D": "Entities are required to prioritize advertising meal combinations that meet regulatory standards over those that do not, to align with consumer health preferences.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "19",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Restaurants.pdf",
    "source_text": "Nutritional Content Topic Summary Public health concerns around obesity have focused on the Restaurants industry. Restaurants are increasingly encouraged to improve the nutritional content of menu offerings and to increase transparency around the content of menu offerings, such as publishing calorie counts. Demand in the Restaurants industry is increasingly driven by consumer preferences for choices that are more healthful. Entities that can offer more nutritious menu options may capture new markets for health-conscious consumers and improve consumer market share. A higher share of nutritious options may have a beneficial effect on an entity ’s reputation and revenue growth in the long term. Metrics FB-RN-260a.1. (1) Percentage of meal options consistent with dietary guidelines and (2) revenue from these options 1The entity shall disclose (1) the percentage of meal options consistent with applicable jurisdictional legal or regulatory dietary guidelines. 1.1 Dietary guidelines include those provided by governmental agencies or regulators that contain daily nutritional values. 1.2 A meal option is defined as an entrée, side and beverage for limited-service restaurants and an entrée and a beverage for full-service restaurants. 1.2.1 The entity shall use menu items commonly paired together by customers, advertised together as combinations, or placed together as a specially promoted meal combination to determine possible meal combinations. 1.2.2 For restaurants where choices are generally à la carte, the entity shall use a consistent approach for calculating meal options using menu items generally paired together as meals. 1.3 The entity shall use the nutritional content for the standard menu items served to the customer by default, without a request for item or ingredient substitutes or additions, to calculate the nutritional content of a meal option. 1.4 The percentage is calculated as the number of possible combinations of meal options consistent with one- third of the daily nutritional values in the applicable dietary guidelines, divided by the total number of possible combinations of meal options offered by the entity. 2The entity shall disclose (2) its total revenue from the combinations of meal options consistent with the applicable dietary guidelines. 3 The scope of the disclosure shall include both entity-owned and franchise locations. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |RESTAURANTS |19",
    "new_id": 593
  },
  {
    "id": 56479,
    "question": "Which of the following accurately reflects a necessary condition for calculating the percentage of pork produced without the use of gestation crates, as described in the Restaurants – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "The calculation requires distinguishing pork sourced from systems where breeding sows were never housed in restrictive, non-bedded enclosures with concrete floors.",
      "A": "The calculation must account for all pork products, including processed items like bacon and sausages, regardless of certification.",
      "C": "The weight of pork purchased must exclude any products derived from animals housed in enclosures allowing dynamic movements such as turning around.",
      "D": "The total weight of pork purchased includes only raw cuts, while processed pork products are excluded from the calculation.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "27",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Restaurants.pdf",
    "source_text": "2The entity shall disclose (2) the percentage of food purchased that has been certified to a third-party environmental or social standard. 2.1 The percentage shall be calculated as the cost of food (and food products) purchased that has been certified to a third-party environmental or social standard divided by the total cost of food (and food products) purchased. 2.2 Examples of certifications to third-party environmental and social standards include: 2.2.1 Fairtrade International 2.2.2 Fair Trade USA 2.2.3 Marine Stewardship Council 2.2.4 Rainforest Alliance Certified 2.2.5 Roundtable on Responsible Soy Association (RTRS) 2.2.6 Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) 3The entity shall generally indicate which third-party environmental and social standards it uses. FB-RN-430a.2. Percentage of (1) eggs that originated from a cage-free environment and (2) pork that was produced without the use of gestation crates 1The entity shall disclose (1) the percentage of eggs purchased that originated from a cage-free environment. 1.1 Eggs that originated from a cage-free environment are defined as those produced by hens housed in a space that allows for unrestricted access to food and water and provides freedom to roam within the space during the laying cycle. 1.1.1 The scope also includes eggs that originated from a free-range environment. 1.2 The percentage shall be calculated as the number of eggs purchased that originated from a cage-free environment divided by the total number of eggs purchased. 2The entity shall disclose (2) the percentage of pork, by weight, that was produced without the use of gestation crates. 2.1 A gestation crate is defined as an enclosure for housing an individual breeding sow, if the enclosure can enclose an unmoving sow, but is restrictive enough to prevent dynamic movements, such as turning around. Gestation crates are typically non-bedded, with concrete floors and metal stalls. 2.2 The percentage shall be calculated as the weight of pork purchased that was produced without using a gestation crate divided by the total weight of pork purchased. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |RESTAURANTS |27",
    "new_id": 594
  },
  {
    "id": 56480,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between data collection methods for advertising impressions and the challenges of ensuring consistent labour standards across entity-owned and franchise restaurants, as described in the Restaurants – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "While collecting data on advertising impressions prioritizes digital platforms like mobile apps and interactive games, labour practices focus exclusively on entity-owned restaurants to mitigate brand image risks posed by franchised locations.",
      "A": "Data collection methods for advertising impressions, such as gross rating points and average visits per month, are directly influenced by the high turnover rates in both entity-owned and franchise restaurants.",
      "B": "The exclusion of franchise restaurants from the disclosure scope for turnover metrics mirrors the exclusion of third-party websites from the calculation of advertising impressions made on children.",
      "D": "Methods for estimating advertising impressions, including target ratios and child audience shares, are designed to address inconsistencies in applying dietary guidelines, similar to how turnover rate disclosures aim to standardize labour practices industry-wide.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "22-23",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Restaurants.pdf",
    "source_text": "2.2 The percentage is calculated as the number of advertising impressions made on children that promote products that meet applicable dietary guidelines for children, divided by the total number of advertising impressions made on children. Note to FB-RN-260a.3 1The entity shall disclose the specific dietary guidelines for children used to calculate the percentage of advertising impressions made on children that promote products that meet such guidelines. 2 The entity shall disclose its method for collecting data and estimating the number of advertising impressions made on children. Data collection may include: 2.1 gross rating points and target ratios for television, radio and print advertising; 2.2 average visits per month, average page visits per month and targeted index by age for entity-owned websites; or 2.3 total number of advertising impressions viewed and child audience share for third-party websites, mobile apps, interactive games (including advergames), video games and computer games. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |RESTAURANTS |22\n\n[Page 23]\nLabour Practices Topic Summary The Restaurants industry is labour-intensive, and many of the staff are hourly, part-time or seasonal workers. The industry is among the top job creators and is an entry point for young and migrant workers to join the workforce. Restaurant employees in franchised or licensed locations may be employed by a third party. In addition, because many restaurant chains exist across continents, ensuring consistent labour standards can be a challenge for restaurant employees in both entity-owned and franchise locations. Labour issues at franchises affect brand image because customers cannot make a distinction between entity-owned and franchised restaurants. Restaurants that can effectively manage human capital by offering competitive wages, safe working environments and other opportunities for professional growth may improve employee morale while reducing turnover rates and the associated administrative costs involved in employee acquisition and training. Metrics FB-RN-310a.1. (1) Voluntary and (2) involuntary turnover rate for restaurant employees 1The entity shall disclose the employee turnover rate as a percentage for restaurant employees. 1.1 Restaurants employees are defined as employees that work on-site at a restaurant. 1.2 Turnover shall be disclosed separately for (1) voluntary and (2) involuntary departures. 2The entity shall calculate (1) the voluntary turnover rate as the number of employee-initiated voluntary separations (for example, resignations or retirements) during the reporting period, divided by the average number of workers employed during the reporting period. 3The entity shall calculate (2) the involuntary turnover rate as the number of entity-initiated separations (for example, dismissal, downsizing, redundancy or non-renewal of contract) during the reporting period, divided by the average number of workers employed during the reporting period. 4The disclosure scope includes entity-owned restaurants. 5The disclosure scope excludes franchise restaurants. 6 The disclosure scope excludes corporate staff and executives. FB-RN-310a.2. (1) Average hourly wage, by region and (2) percentage of restaurant employees earning minimum wage, by region 1The entity shall disclose (1) the average hourly wage it paid to restaurant employees for each region for which it conducts segment financial reporting. 1.1 Restaurant employees are defined as non-manager employees at entity-owned and franchise locations. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |RESTAURANTS |23",
    "new_id": 595
  },
  {
    "id": 56481,
    "question": "Which scenario would most significantly alter an entity's reported percentage of water consumed in regions with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress, according to the Restaurants – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "An entity relocates a significant portion of its operations to a region with Low Baseline Water Stress but maintains the same total water consumption levels.",
      "A": "An entity begins sourcing water exclusively from non-freshwater sources, such as seawater, in regions classified as High Baseline Water Stress.",
      "B": "An entity implements water-efficient kitchen equipment that reduces overall water consumption by 20%, evenly distributed across all operational locations.",
      "C": "An entity increases its use of municipal water supplies in regions classified as Extremely High Baseline Water Stress without altering total water consumption.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "10-11",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Restaurants.pdf",
    "source_text": "Water Management Topic Summary Water is used in restaurant operations, from cooking and dishwashing to cleaning. The restaurant type, size and equipment all affect water use. Restaurants located in water-stressed regions may be exposed to water usage restrictions or face high water costs. Long-term historical increases in the costs of water, and expectations around continued increases because of overconsumption and constrained supplies resulting from population growth, pollution and climate change, indicate the increasing importance of effective water management. Entities can reduce water use and associated operational costs by implementing water-efficient practices and using water-efficient commercial kitchen equipment. Metrics FB-RN-140a.1. (1) Total water withdrawn, (2) total water consumed; percentage of each in regions with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress 1 The entity shall disclose the amount of water, in thousands of cubic metres, withdrawn from all sources. 1.1 Water sources include surface water (including water from wetlands, rivers, lakes and oceans), groundwater, rainwater collected directly and stored by the entity, and water and wastewater obtained from municipal water supplies, water utilities or other entities. 2The entity may disclose portions of its supply by source if, for example, significant portions of withdrawals are from non-freshwater sources. 2.1 Fresh water may be defined according to the local laws and regulations where the entity operates. If no legal definition exists, fresh water shall be considered to be water that has less than 1,000 parts per million of dissolved solids. 2.2 Water obtained from a water utility in compliance with jurisdictional drinking water regulations can be assumed to meet the definition of fresh water. 3The entity shall disclose the amount of water, in thousands of cubic metres, consumed in its operations. 3.1 Water consumption is defined as: 3.1.1 Water that evaporates during withdrawal, use and discharge 3.1.2 Water that is directly or indirectly included in the entity ’s product or service 3.1.3 Water that does not otherwise return to the same catchment area from which it was withdrawn, such as water returned to another catchment area or the sea. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |RESTAURANTS |10\n\n[Page 11]\n4The entity shall analyse all its operations for water risks and identify activities that withdraw and consume water in locations with High (40 –80%) or Extremely High (>80%) Baseline Water Stress as classified by the World Resources Institute ’s (WRI) Water Risk Atlas tool, Aqueduct. 5The entity shall disclose water withdrawn in locations with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress as a percentage of the total water withdrawn. 6The entity shall disclose water consumed in locations with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress as a percentage of the total water consumed. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |RESTAURANTS |11",
    "new_id": 596
  },
  {
    "id": 56638,
    "question": "Which factor is primarily responsible for the observed underestimation of sea level trends in climate models during the first half of the 20th century, according to The Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate: A Special Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change?",
    "options": {
      "A": "A bias in modeled Greenland surface mass balance and glacier ice loss.",
      "B": "The exclusion of thermal expansion contributions in early model simulations.",
      "C": "An overestimation of groundwater depletion effects near regions like India.",
      "D": "Inaccurate representation of vertical land movement corrections in tide gauge records.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "351",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC SROCC.pdf",
    "source_text": "341 Sea Level Rise and Implications for Low-Lying Islands, Coasts and Communities Chapter 44In terms of interannual to multi-decadal variability, there is a general agreement between the simulated regional sea level and tide gauge records, over the period 1900–2015 (see inset figures in Figure 4.6). The relatively large, short-term oscillations in observed sea level (black lines in insets in Figure 4.6), which are due to the natural internal climate variability, are included in general within the modelled internal variability of the climate system represented by the blue shaded area (5–95% uncertainty). But, as for GMSL, climate models tend to systematically underestimate the observed sea level trends from tide gauge records, particularly in the first half of the 20th century. This underestimation is explained by a bias identified in modelled Greenland SMB, and glacier ice loss around Greenland in the early 20th century (see Section 4.2.2.2.6; Slangen et al., 2017b). The correction of this bias improves the agreement between the spatial variability in sea level trends from observations and from climate models (see Figure 4.6). Climate models indicate that the spatial variability in sea level trends observed by tide-gauge records over the 20th century is dominated by the GIA contribution and the thermal expansion contribution over 1900–2015. Locally all contributions to sea level changes are important as any contribution can cause significant local deviations. Around India for example, groundwater depletion is responsible for the low 20th century SLR (because the removal of groundwater mass generated a local decrease in geoid that made local SLR slower; Meyssignac et al., 2017c). These results show the ability of models to reproduce the major 20th century regional sea level changes due to GIA, thermal expansion, glacier mass loss and ice sheet SMB. This is tangible progress since AR5. But some doubts remain regarding the ability of climate models to reproduce local variations such as the glaciers and the Greenland SMB contributions to sea level in the region around the southern tip of Greenland (Slangen et al., 2017b) or such as the thermal expansion in some eddy active regions (Sérazin et al., 2016). Because of these doubts there is still medium confidence in climate models to project future regional sea level changes associated with thermal expansion, glacier mass loss and ice sheet SMB. Coupled climate models have not simulated the other contributions to 20th century sea level, including the growing ice sheet dynamical contribution and land water storage changes. Relative sea level change (mm) (e) Lusi (Shanghai) 0100 –100200 –200(c) Cuxhaven 0100 –100200 –200(a) New York 0100 –100200 –200 (f) Lautoka (Fiji) (d) Burullus (Alexandria) (b) Venice (g) Zanzibar (h) Papeete (Tahiti) Adjusted to remove non-GIA vertical land movement Adjusted to remove non-GIA vertical land movement Observed Model estimates corrected for the bias Model estimate s Relative sea level (mm)0 100 200 300 –100 –200 –300(c) (b) (d) (g)(e) (j) (l)(f) (h)(a) (k) (i) year year year year Legend(i) Buenos Aires 0100 –100200 –200 1900 1950 2000(j) Guam 1900 1950 2000(k) Balboa (Panama City) Adjusted to remove non-GIA vertical land movemen t 1900 1950 2000(l) Sydney 1900 1900 1900 Figure 4.6 | 20th century simulated regional sea level changes by coupled climate models and comparison with a selection of local tide gauge time series. In the upper left corner: map of changes in simulated relative sea level (RSL) for the period 1901–1920 to 1996–2015 estimated from climate model outputs. Insets: Observed RSL changes (black lines) from selected tide gauge stations for the period 1900–2015. For comparison, the estimate of the simulated RSL change at the tide gauge station is also shown (blue plain line for the model estimates and blue dashed line for the model estimates corrected for the bias in glaciers mass loss and Greenland surface mass balance (SMB) over 1900–1940, see Section 4.2.2.2.6). The relatively large, short-term oscillations in observed local sea level (black lines) are due to the natural internal climate variability. For Mediterranean tide gauges, that is, Venice and Alexandria, the local simulated sea level has been computed with the simulated sea level in the Atlantic ocean at the entrance of the strait of Gibraltar following (Adloff et al., 2018). Tide gauge records have been corrected for vertical land motion (VLM) not associated with GIA ",
    "new_id": 597
  },
  {
    "id": 56647,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between risk assessments for ocean ecosystems and the factors considered in the projections, as described in The Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate: A Special Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Although the projections incorporate multiple climatic drivers like warming and acidification, they explicitly exclude human interventions and future non-climatic factors from the risk assessments.",
      "A": "Risk assessments account for both climatic and non-climatic drivers, ensuring a comprehensive evaluation of all potential influences on ecosystems.",
      "C": "The projections are based solely on changes in sea surface temperature, with no consideration of other physical or biogeochemical variables such as oxygen levels or carbon fluxes.",
      "D": "Risks are evaluated exclusively through the lens of species distribution changes, ignoring broader impacts on ecosystem structure and biodiversity.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "74",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC SROCC.pdf",
    "source_text": "64 Technical Summary TS1.52345 present da y Abyssal plainsEstuaries Salt marshesMangrove forestsSeagrass meadowsSandy beachesWarm water coralsRocky shoresKelp forestsEpipelagic** Cold water corals(d) Impacts and risks to ocean ecosystems from climate change 1234Global mean sea surface temperature (SST) change relative to pre-industrial levels (ºC ) Confidence level for transition = Very high = High = Medium = Low = Transition rangeGlobal mean surface temperature (GMST) change relative to pre-industrial levels (ºC) 1 0 0 **see figure caption for definitio nHigh Red: Significant and widespread impacts/risks .Level of added impacts/risk s Very high Undetectable White: Impacts/risks are undetectable. Moderate Yellow: Impacts/risks are detectable and attributable to climate change with at least medium confidence.Purple: Very high probability of severe impacts/risks and the presence of significant irreversibility or the persistence of climate-related hazards, combined with limited ability to adapt due to the nature of the hazard or impacts/risks. Figure TS.8 | Projected changes, impacts and risks for ocean regions and ecosystems. (a) depth integrated net primary production (NPP from CMIP5)8, (b) total animal biomass (depth integrated, including fishes and invertebrates from FISHMIP)9, (c) maximum fisheries catch potential and (d) impacts and risks for coastal and open ocean ecosystems. The three left panels represent the simulated (a,b) and observed (c) mean values for the recent past (1986–2005), the middle and right panels represent projected changes (%) by 2081–2100 relative to recent past under low (RCP2.6) and high (RCP8.5) greenhouse gas emissions scenario (see Table TS.2), respectively. Total animal biomass in the recent past (b, left panel) represents the projected total animal biomass by each spatial pixel relative to the global average. (c) *Average observed fisheries catch in the recent past (based on data from the Sea Around Us global fisheries database); projected changes in maximum fisheries catch potential in shelf seas are based on the average outputs from two fisheries and marine ecosystem models. To indicate areas of model inconsistency, shaded areas represent regions where models disagree in the direction of change for more than: (a) and (b) 3 out of 10 model projections, and (c) one out of two models. Although unshaded, the projected change in the Arctic and Antarctic regions in (b) total animal biomass and (c) fisheries catch potential have low confidence due to uncertainties associated with modelling multiple interacting drivers and ecosystem responses. Projections presented in (b) and (c) are driven by changes in ocean physical and biogeochemical conditions e.g., temperature, oxygen level, and net primary production projected from CMIP5 Earth system models. **The epipelagic refers to the uppermost part of the ocean with depth <200 m from the surface where there is enough sunlight to allow photosynthesis. (d) Assessment of risks for coastal and open ocean ecosystems based on observed and projected climate impacts on ecosystem structure, functioning and biodiversity. Impacts and risks are shown in relation to changes in Global Mean Surface Temperature (GMST) relative to pre-industrial level. Since assessments of risks and impacts are based on global mean Sea Surface Temperature (SST), the corresponding SST levels are shown10. The assessment of risk transitions is described in Chapter 5 Sections 5.2, 5.3, 5.2.5 and 5.3.7 and Supplementary Materials SM5.3, Table SM5.6, Table SM5.8 and other parts of the underlying report. The figure indicates assessed risks at approximate warming levels and increasing climate-related hazards in the ocean: ocean warming, acidification, deoxygenation, increased density stratification, changes in carbon fluxes, sea level rise, and increased frequency and/or intensity of extreme events. The assessment considers the natural adaptive capacity of the ecosystems, their exposure and vulnerability. Impact and risk levels do not consider risk reduction strategies such as human interventions, or future changes in non-climatic drivers. Risks for ecosystems were assessed by considering biological, biogeochemical, geomorphological and physical aspects. Higher risks associated with compound effects of climate hazards include habitat and biodiversity loss, changes in species composition and distribution ranges, and impacts/risks on ecosystem structure and functioning, including changes in",
    "new_id": 598
  },
  {
    "id": 56658,
    "question": "Which factor most directly undermines the long-term viability of ecosystem-based adaptation (EbA) options as a response to sea level rise, according to the implicit relationships within The Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate: A Special Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The prioritization of short-term economic interests over conservation policies.",
      "A": "The lack of enforcement of coastal protection policies in urban areas.",
      "B": "The unaffordability of EbA measures in poorer coastal regions.",
      "D": "The destruction of habitats through enhanced erosion and groundwater salinization.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "43",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC SROCC.pdf",
    "source_text": "33 SPMSummary for Policymakers Responses Potential effectiveness Hard protection Coral conservation Coral restoration Wetland conservation Wetland restorationSediment– based protectionAdvantages Co–benefits Drawbacks Economic efficiencyGovernance challenges Coastal advance Coastal accommodationin terms of reducing sea level rise (SLR) risks (technical/biophysical limits) Often unaffordable for poorer areas. Conflicts between objectives (e.g., conservation, safety and tourism), conflicts about the distribution of public budgets, lack of finance {4.3.3.2, 4.4.2.2.6} Permits for implementation are difficult to obtain. Lack of finance. Lack of enforcement of conservation policies. EbA options dismissed due to short–term economic interest, availability of land {4.4.2.3.6} Often unaffordable for poorer areas. Social conflicts with regards to access and distribution of new land {4.4.2.4.6}Very high if land prices are high as found in many urban coasts {4.4.2.4.7}Groundwater salinisa– tion, enhanced erosion and loss of coastal ecosystems and habitat {4.4.2.4.5}Generates land and land sale revenues that can be used to finance adaptation {4.4.2.4.5}Predictable levels of safety {4.4.2.2.4}Up to multiple metres of SLR {4.4.2.2.4} Early warning systems require effective insti– tutional arrangements {4.4.2.6.6}Very high for early warning systems and building–scale measures {4.4.2.5.7}Does not prevent flooding/impacts {4.4.2.5.5}Maintains landscape connectivity {4.4.2.5.5}Mature technology; sediments deposited during floods can raise elevation {4.4.2.5.5}Very effective for small SLR {4.4.2.5.4} (Flood–proofing buildings, early warning systems for flood events, etc.)Limited evidence on benefit–cost ratios; Depends on population density and the availability of land {4.4.2.3.7} Safety levels less predictable, development benefits not realized {4.4.2.3.5, 4.4.2.3.2}Long–term effectiveness depends on ocean warming, acidification and emission scenarios {4.3.3.5.2., 4.4.2.3.2} Safety levels less predictable, a lot of land required, barriers for landward expan– sion of ecosystems has to be removed {4.4.2.3.5, 4.4.2.3.2}Habitat gain, biodiversity, carbon sequestration, income from tourism, enhanced fishery productivity, improved water quality. Provision of food, medicine, fuel, wood and cultural benefits {4.4.2.3.5}Opportunity for community involvement, {4.4.2.3.1}Effective up to 0.5 cm yr–¹ SLR. Strongly limited by ocean warming and acidification. Constrained at 1.5°C warming and lost at 2°C at many places. {4.3.3.5.2, 4.4.2.3.2, 5.3.4} Effective up to 0.5–1 cm yr–¹ SLR, decreased at 2°C {4.3.3.5.1, 4.4.2.3.2, 5.3.7}(Marshes, Mangroves) (Marshes, Mangroves) High if the value of assets behind protection is high, as found in many urban and densely populated coastal areas {4.4.2.2.7}Destruction of habitat through coastal squeeze, flooding & erosion downdrift, lock–in, disastrous consequence in case of defence failure {4.3.2.4, 4.4.2.2.5}Predictable levels of safety {4.4.2.2.4}Multifunctional dikes such as for recreation, or other land use {4.4.2.2.5}Up to multiple metres of SLR {4.4.2.2.4} Effective but depends on sediment availability {4.4.2.2.4}High flexibility {4.4.2.2.4}Preservation of beaches for recreation/ tourism {4.4.2.2.5}Destruction of habitat, where sediment is sourced {4.4.2.2.5}High if tourism revenues are high {4.4.2.2.7}Conflicts about the distribution of public budgets {4.4.2.2.6}Confidence levels (assessed for effectiveness):The table illustrates responses and their characteristics. It is not exhaustive. Whether a response is applicable depends on geography and context. = Low = Medium = High = Very High(c) Responses to rising mean and extreme sea levels Enabling conditions Generic steps of adaptive decision making(d)Choosing and enabling sea level rise responses Implementation Monitoring and corrective action Stage setting Dynamic plan • Long–term perspective • Cross–scale coordination • Address vulnerability and equity • Inclusive public participation • Capability to address complexity Identify risks, objectives, options, uncertainties and criteria for evaluating options Develop initial plan (combinations of options over time) plus corrective actions to be carried out based on observed situationof initial plan and monitoring system for progressing change and success Monitor and take corrective action upon observed situationRetreat Ecosystem based adaptation Planned relocation Forced displacementReconciling the divergent interests arising from rel",
    "new_id": 599
  },
  {
    "id": 56840,
    "question": "Which factor, when combined with population growth and rural exodus, is explicitly identified as a driver increasing exposure and vulnerability to sea level rise in coastal areas, as stated in The Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate: A Special Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Tourism development leading to infrastructure expansion in risk-prone zones.",
      "A": "Climate change-induced shifts in agricultural productivity.",
      "B": "The displacement of indigenous populations due to sociocultural land tenure systems.",
      "C": "Anthropogenic subsidence caused by groundwater extraction.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "381",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC SROCC.pdf",
    "source_text": "371 Sea Level Rise and Implications for Low-Lying Islands, Coasts and Communities Chapter 44decades; Marino, 2012; Duvat et al., 2017; Fawcett et al., 2017), and reported some progress in the development of context-specific studies, especially on coastal megacities, major deltas and small islands (Cross-Chapter Box 9, Box 4.1). AR5 also concluded with very high confidence that both RSL rise and related impacts are influenced by a variety of local social and/ or environmental processes unrelated to climate (e.g., anthropogenic subsidence, glacial isostatic adjustment, sediment supply and coastal squeeze). Some of these processes are partly attributable as anthropogenic drivers, and although they may or may not be directly related to RSL rise, they do cause changes in coastal ecosystem habitat connectivity and ecosystem health conditions, for instance, and consequently influence the ability of coastal social-ecological systems as a whole to cope with and adapt to SLR and its impacts. However, the scientific literature still barely deals with the exposure and vulnerability of social-ecological systems to SLR specifically. Papers predominantly analyse the immediate and delayed consequences of extreme events such as TCs, storms and distant swells (see Section 6.3.3), for instance, and the resulting exposure and vulnerability ‘in the context of SLR’ (Woodruff et al., 2013). One reason for this touches on the difficulty for society to fully comprehend and for science to fully analyse long-term gradual changes like SLR (Fincher et al., 2014; Oppenheimer and Alley, 2016; Elrick-Barr et al., 2017). Consequently, Sections 4.3.2.2 to 4.3.2.5 concentrate on highlighting the anthropogenic or systemic drivers that have the potential to influence exposure and vulnerability to slow-onset sea level related hazards. 4.3.2.2 Settlement Trends Major changes in coastal settlement patterns have occurred in the course of the 20th century, and are continuing to take place due to various complex interacting processes (Moser et al., 2012; Bennett et al., 2016) that together configure and concentrate exposure and vulnerability to climate change and SLR along the coast (Newton et al., 2012; Bennett et al., 2016). These processes include population growth and demographic changes (Smith, 2011; Neumann et al., 2015), urbanisation and a rural exodus, tourism development, and displacement or (re)settlement of some indigenous communities (Ford et al., 2015). This has resulted in a growing number of people living in the Low Elevation Coastal Zone (LECZ, coastal areas below 10 m of elevation; around 11% of the world’s population in 2010; Neumann et al., 2015; Jones and O’Neill, 2016; Merkens et al., 2016) and in significant infrastructure and assets being located in risk-prone areas ( high confidence ). High density coastal urban development is commonplace in both developed and developing countries, as documented in recent case studies, for example in Canada (Fawcett et al., 2017), China (Yin et al., 2015; Lilai et al., 2016; Yan et al., 2016), Fiji (Hay, 2017), France (Genovese and Przyluski, 2013; Chadenas et al., 2014; Magnan and Duvat, 2018), Israel (Felsenstein and Lichter, 2014), Kiribati (Storey and Hunter, 2010; Duvat et al., 2013), New Zealand (Hart, 2011) and the USA (Heberger, 2012; Grifman et al., 2013; Liu et al., 2016b). This has implications for levels of SLR risk at regional and local scales ( medium evidence, high agreement ). In Latin America and the Caribbean, for example, it is estimated that 6–8% of the population live in areas that are at high or very high risk of being affected by coastal hazards (Reguero et al., 2015; Calil et al., 2017; Villamizar et al., 2017), with higher percentages in Caribbean islands (Mycoo, 2018). In the Pacific, ~57% of Pacific Island countries’ built infrastructure are located in risk-prone coastal areas (Kumar and Taylor, 2015). In Kiribati, due to the flow of outer, rural populations to limited, low-elevated capital islands, together with constraints inherent in the sociocultural land tenure system, the built area located <20 m from the shoreline quadrupled between 1969 and 2007–2008 (Duvat et al., 2013). Other examples of rural exodus are reported in the recent literature, for example in the Maldives (Speelman et al., 2017). Population densification also affects rural areas’ exposure and vulnerability, and interacts with other factors shaping settlement patterns, such as the fact that ‘indigenous peo",
    "new_id": 600
  },
  {
    "id": 56856,
    "question": "Which adaptation response is most directly associated with supporting both ecological resilience and increased biodiversity, while also addressing habitat range shifts, according to The Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate: A Special Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Nature-based solutions",
      "B": "Ecosystem restoration and protection",
      "C": "Assisted evolution and relocation",
      "D": "Hard engineering responses",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "542",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC SROCC.pdf",
    "source_text": "532 Chapter 5 Changing Ocean, Marine Ecosystems, and Dependent Communities5Table 5.8 | Summary of reported Adaptation responses (A), the Impacts (I) they aimed to address, and the expected Benefits (B) in human systems within Physical, Ecological, Social, Governance, Economic and Knowledge categories. Legend: a + sign indicates robust evidence , a triangle indicates medium evidence and an underline indicates limited evidence . Dark blue cells indicate high agreement , blue indicates medium agreement and light blue indicates either low agreement (denoted by presence of a sign) if sufficient papers were reviewed for an assessment or no assessment (if less than three papers were assessed per cell). Papers used for this assessment can be found in SM5.6. Impacts (I) Adaptation responses (A) Coastal communities Built infrastructure Fisheries and aquaculture Coastal tourism Government Health Benefits (B) IABIABIABIABIABIABPhysicalCoastal physical processes disruptedSupporting physical processes + + + Physical processes supported Catchment physical processes disruptedHard engineering responses + ++Coastal infrastructure resilience increased Coastal infrastructure damageSoft engineering responses and buffers+_ + _Improved infrastructure functionality DIsruption of urban systemsIntegrated hard and soft engineeringΔ _+Increased structural heterogeneity Land subsidenceManaged retreat and coastal realignment_EcologicalEcosystem degradation and lossEcosystem restoration and protection++ ++__ _Ecosystem/ecological resilience supported Biodiversity and genetic diversity lossBioengineering Δ Δ + Physical processes supported Habitat range shiftsAssisted evolution and relocationCoastal infrastructure resilience increased Sub-lethal species impacts Nature based solutions _ Δ_+ _ Increased biodiversity Invasive alien speciesHabitat range shifts accommodated Improved organismal fitness Genetic heterogeneity supported Strengthened socio- ecological systemSocialDecreased access to ecosystem servicesImproving access to/storage of natural resourcesΔΔ Δ +Access to sustainable ecosystem services Local decline in agriculture and fisheriesImproving agricultural or fisheries practices+_ ++Improved access to community services Increasing living costsSupporting nature- based industries_Increasing resilience in human systems Livelihoods impacts Sustainable resource use +__ + ΔImproved socio- economic services Increased food insecurityMaintaining or switching livelihoods_ _ +_+Improved employment and livelihoods Public health risks increasedCommunity participatory programmes_+ ++ _ Improved health Cultural and traditional knowledge impactsDeveloping adaptive networksImproved community participation Gender-related impactsSustainable household management__ Better informed communities Increased social vulnerabilityImproving access to community services+ +Improved integration of knowledge systems Decreased access to local government servicesEmpowering communities and addressing inequalityΔEmpowering women and children Socio-economic entrapment and declineBuilding socio- ecological resilienceΔ Increased adaptive capacity Global declines in foodstocks Improved disaster preparedness",
    "new_id": 601
  },
  {
    "id": 56992,
    "question": "Which statement accurately captures the relationship between climate change impacts on the ocean and the feasibility of achieving Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), based on the interlinkages described in The Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate: A Special Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Achieving SDG 14 targets, such as eliminating illegal fishing, will indirectly support the achievement of all other SDGs due to their interlinkages.",
      "A": "Climate change impacts on the ocean will directly hinder SDG 14 alone, with no significant influence on other SDGs.",
      "C": "The interlinkages among SDGs imply that achieving SDG 5 is entirely independent of climate change effects on marine ecosystems.",
      "D": "Climate change impacts on the ocean have a clear and direct effect on all SDGs, with high confidence in both direct and indirect pathways.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "530",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC SROCC.pdf",
    "source_text": "520 Chapter 5 Changing Ocean, Marine Ecosystems, and Dependent Communities5women disproportionately engage in rice crop cultivation in coastal flood plain (Linares, 2009), and are thus exposed to the risks on their livelihood from rising sea levels and resulting salinisation (Dennis et al. 1995). Flooding in Bangladesh has increased the vulnerability of women to harassment and abuse as the flooding upends normal life and increases crime rates (Azad et al. 2013). As such, climate change may negatively affect our ability to achieve “gender equality” (SDG 5) (Salehyan, 2008). Impacts on living conditions as well as changing recreational, aesthetic, and spiritual experiences also affect our ability to achieve ‘sustainable cities and communities’ (SDG 11) (Section 5.4.2.2.1). The consequences of climate change in the ocean to achieving the remaining SDGs are less clear. However, the SDGs are interlinked, and achieving SDG 14, and especially the targets of increasing economic benefits to SIDS and Least Developed Countries, as well as eliminating illegal fishing and overfishing, will benefits all other SDGs (Singh et al. 2017). The interlinkages among SDGS mean climate change impact on the ocean will affect all other SDGs beside SDG14 in various ways, some possible direct and many indirect (low confidence ). Overall, climate change impacts on the ocean will negatively affect the chance of achieving the SDGs and sustaining their benefits (medium confidence ). 5.5 Risk-reduction Responses and their Governance 5.5.1 Ocean-based Mitigation 5.5.1.1 Context for Blue Carbon and Overview Assessment There is political and scientific agreement on the need for a wide range of mitigation actions to avoid dangerous climate change (UNEP , 2017; IPCC, 2018). Opportunities to reduce emissions by the greater use of ocean renewable energy are identified in Section 5.4.2.3.2. Here, in accordance with the approved scoping of this report, the assessment of mitigation options is limited to the management of natural ocean processes, that is, requiring policy intervention, with a focus on ‘blue carbon’. Natural processes per se , although important to the climate system and the global carbon cycle, are not a mitigation response. Two management approaches are possible: first, actions to maintain the integrity of natural carbon stores, thereby decreasing their potential release of greenhouse gases, whether caused by human or climate- drivers; and second, through actions that enhance the longterm (century-scale) removal of greenhouse gases from the atmosphere by marine systems, primarily by biological means. These mitigation approaches match those proposed using terrestrial natural processes (Griscom et al. 2017), with extensive afforestation and reforestation included in all climate models that limit future warming to 1.5ºC (de Coninck et al. 2018). As on land, reliable carbon accounting is a critical consideration (Grassi et al. 2017), together with confidence in the longterm security of carbon storage. The feasibility of climatically-significant (and societally acceptable) mitigation using marine natural processes therefore depends on a robust quantitative understanding of how human actions can affect the uptake and release of greenhouse gases from different marine environments, interacting with natural biological, physical and chemical processes. Whilst CO 2 is the most important greenhouse gas, marine fluxes of methane and nitrous oxide can also be important, for both coastal regions and the open ocean (Arévalo-Martínez et al. 2015; Borges et al. 2016; Hamdan and Wickland, 2016). The term ‘blue carbon’ was originally used to cover biological carbon in all marine ecosystems (Nellemann et al. 2009). Subsequent use of the term has focused on carbon-accumulating coastal habitats structured by rooted plants, such as mangroves, tidal salt marshes and seagrass meadows, that are relatively amenable to management (McLeod et al. 2011; Pendleton et al. 2012; Thomas, 2014; Macreadie et al. 2017a; Alongi, 2018; Windham-Myers et al. 2019; Lovelock and Duarte, 2019). Comparisons across the full range of freshwater and saline wetland types are assisted by standardised approaches (Nahlik and Fennessy, 2016; Vázquez-González et al. 2017). Seaweeds (macroalgae) can also be considered as coastal blue carbon (Krause-Jensen and Duarte, 2016; Krause-Jensen et al. 2018; Raven, 2018), however, because of differences in their carbon processing, their climate mitigation p",
    "new_id": 602
  },
  {
    "id": 57037,
    "question": "Which factor is most likely to directly exacerbate the risk of Saprolegnia fungus infections in Arctic freshwater fish, based on the interplay of environmental stressors and pathogen dynamics described in The Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate: A Special Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Increased nutrient export from thawing permafrost, which enhances food resources for fish but also increases pathogen virulence.",
      "A": "Warmer water temperatures that reduce dissolved oxygen levels, leading to physiological stress in cold-water species like Arctic Grayling.",
      "B": "Changes in the timing and magnitude of seasonal flows, causing mismatches in spawning and rearing habitat availability.",
      "D": "Thinning ice reducing overwintering habitat, indirectly increasing fish density in remaining habitats and elevating infection rates.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "266",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC SROCC.pdf",
    "source_text": "256 Chapter 3 Polar Regions3likely to lead to enhanced local sources of anthropogenic chemicals of emerging Arctic concern, including siloxanes, parabens, flame retardants, and per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (AMAP , 2017c) . For legacy pollutants, there is high confidence that black carbon and persistent organic pollutants (e.g., hexachlorocyclohexanes, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, and polychlorinated biphenyls) can be transferred downstream and affect water quality (Hodson, 2014) . Lakes can become sinks of these contaminants, while floodplains can be contaminated (Sharma et al.,2015) . There is high confidence that habitat loss or change due to climate change impact Arctic fishes. Thinning ice on lakes and streams changes the overwintering habitat for aquatic fauna by impacting winter water volumes and dissolved oxygen levels (Leppi et al., 2016) . Surface water loss, reduced surface water connectivity among aquatic habitats, and changes to the timing and magnitude of seasonal flows (Section 3.4.1.2) result in a direct loss of spawning, feeding, or rearing habitats (Poesch et al., 2016) . Changes to permafrost landscapes have reduced freshwater habitat available for fish and other aquatic biota, including aquatic invertebrates upon which the fish depend for food (Chin et al., 2016) . Gullying deepens channels (Rowland et al., 2011; Liljedahl et al., 2016) that otherwise may connect lake habitats occupied by fishes. This can lead to the loss of surface water connectivity, limit fish access to key habitats, and lower fish diversity (Haynes et al., 2014; Laske et al., 2016) . Small connecting stream channels, which are vulnerable to drying, provide necessary migratory pathways for fishes, allowing them to access spawning and summer rearing grounds (Heim et al., 2016; McFarland et al., 2017) . Changes to the timing, duration and magnitude of high surface flow events in early and late summer threaten Arctic fish dispersal and migration activities (Heim et al., 2016) (high confidence ). Timing of important life history events such as spawning can become mismatched with changing stream flows (Lique et al., 2016) . There is regional evidence that migration timing has shifted earlier and winter egg incubation temperature has increased for pink salmon ( Oncorhynchus gorbuscha ), directly related to warming (Taylor, 2007) . While long-term, pan-Arctic data on run timing of fishes are limited, phenological shifts could create mismatches with food availability or habitat suitability in both marine and freshwater environments for anadromous species, and in freshwater environments for freshwater resident species. Changes to the Arctic growing season (Xu et al., 2013a) increase the risk of drying of surface water habitats and pose a potential mismatch in seasonal availability of food in rearing habitats. Freshwater systems across the Arctic are relatively shallow, and thus are expected to warm ( high confidence ). This may make some surface waters inhospitably warm for cold water species such as Arctic Grayling ( Thymallus arcticus ) and whitefishes ( Coregonus spp.), or may increase the risk of Saprolegnia fungus that appears to have recently spread rapidly, infecting whitefishes at much higher rates in Arctic Alaska than noted in the past (Sformo et al., 2017) . High infection rates may be driven by stress or nutrient enrichment from thawing permafrost, which increases pathogen virulence with fish (Wedekind et al., 2010) . Warmer water and longer growing seasons will also affect food abundance because invertebrate life histories and production are temperature and degree-day dependent (Régnière et al., 2012) . Increased nutrient export from permafrost loss (Frey et al., 2007) , facilitated by warmer temperatures, will likely increase food resources for consumers, but the impact on lower trophic levels within food webs is not clearly understood. Box 3.4 | Impacts and Risks for Polar Biodiversity from Range Shifts and Species Invasions Related to Climate Change In polar regions climate-induced changes in terrestrial, ocean and sea ice environments, together with human introduction of non-native species, have expanded the range of some temperate species and contracted the range of some polar fish and ice-associated species (Section 3.2.3.2; Duffy et al., 2017) ( high confidence for detection , medium confidence for attribution). In some cases, spatial shifts in distribution have also been influenced by fluctuations in popu",
    "new_id": 603
  },
  {
    "id": 57080,
    "question": "Which inference best captures the relationship between environmental stressors and meiofaunal responses, as implied in The Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate: A Special Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Meiofauna exhibit region-specific opposing responses to environmental stressors, yet they consistently demonstrate sensitivity to such changes.",
      "A": "Meiofauna are robust to environmental changes because their responses vary significantly across regions.",
      "B": "The direction of meiofaunal responses to environmental stressors is consistent, but the magnitude differs by region.",
      "C": "Environmental stressors like hypoxia and elevated CO2 have negligible impacts on meiofauna due to their adaptive nature.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "499",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC SROCC.pdf",
    "source_text": "489 Changing Ocean, Marine Ecosystems, and Dependent Communities Chapter 55reduces fecundity and embryo development rate in a bathyal polychaete. Where both oxygen and CO 2 stress occur together on bathyal slopes, oxygen can be the primary driver of change (Taylor et al. 2014; Sato et al. 2018). Nematodes are sensitive to changes in temperature (Danovaro et al. 2001; Danovaro et al. 2004; Yodnarasri et al. 2008) and elevated CO 2 (Barry et al. 2004; Fleeger et al. 2006; Fleeger et al. 2010). There is low agreement about the direction of meiofaunal responses among studies, reflecting opposing responses in different regions. However, there is high agreement that meiofauna are sensitive to change in environment and food supply ( medium confidence ). Additional research is needed across all taxa on how hypoxia and pH interact (Gobler and Baumann, 2016). Continental slopes, seamounts and canyons (200–2500 m) are projected to experience significant warming, pH decline, oxygen loss and decline in POC flux by 2081–2100 (compared to 1951–2000) under RCP8.5 (Table 5.5). In contrast, the average changes are projected to be 30–50% less under RCP2.6 (Table 5.5) by 2081–2100. Most ocean regions at bathyal depths (200–2500 m) except the Southern and Arctic Oceans are predicted to experience on average declining export POC flux under RCP8.5 by 2081–2100 (Yool et al. 2017; FAO, 2019) with the largest declines of 0.7–8.1 mg C m–2 d–1 in the Northeast Atlantic (FAO, 2019). There is a strong macroecological relationship between depth, export POC flux, biomass and zonation of macrobenthos on continental slopes (Wei et al. 2011), such that lower POC fluxes will alter seafloor community biomass and structure (medium confidence ) (See also Section 5.2.4.1). This is modified on the local scale by near-bottom currents, which alter sediment grain size, food availability, and larval dispersal (Wei et al. 2011). Declines in faunal biomass (6.1 ± 1.6% 95% C.I) are predicted for 96.6 ± 1.2% of seamounts under RCP8.5 by 2091–2100 relative to 2006–2015, driven by a projected 13.8 ± 3.3% drop in POC flux (Jones et al. 2014). The majority (85%) of mapped canyons are projected to experience comparable benthic biomass declines (Jones et al. 2014). By 2100 under RCP8.5, pH reductions exceeding -0.2 pH units are projected in ~23% of north Atlantic deep sea canyons and 8% of seamounts (Gehlen et al. 2014), with potential negative consequences for their cold water coral habitats (See Box 5.2). Mean temperature (warming) signals are projected to emerge from background variability before 2040 in canyons of the Antarctic, northwest Atlantic, and South Pacific (FAO, 2019). Enhanced stratification and change in the intensity and frequency of downwelling processes under atmospheric forcing (including storms and density- driven cascading events would alter organic matter transported through canyons (Allen and Durrieu de Madron, 2009) ( low confidence ). Changes in the quantity and quality of transferred particulate organic matter, as well as physical disturbance during extreme events cause a complex combination of positive and negative impacts at different depths along the canyon floor (Canals et al. 2006; Pusceddu et al. 2010). Canyons and slopes are recognised as hosting many methane seeps and other chemosynthetic habitats (e.g., whale and wood falls) supported by massive transport of terrestrial organic matter (Pruski et al. 2017); their climate vulnerabilities are discussed below. Seamounts have been proposed to serve as refugia for cold water corals facing shoaling aragonite saturation horizons (Tittensor et al. 2011), but could become too warm for deep-water corals in some regions (e.g., projections off Australia) (Thresher et al. 2015) ( one study, low confidence ). Seamounts are major spawning grounds for fishes; reproduction on seamounts may be disrupted by warming (Henry et al. 2016) ( one study, low confidence ). In the north Atlantic, models suggest seamounts are an important source of cold water coral larvae that maintain resilience under shifting NAO conditions (Fox et al. 2016), thus loss of suitable seamount habitat may have far-reaching consequences (Gehlen et al. 2014) ( low confidence ) (also see Box 5.2). Table 5.5 | Projected climate changes from the present to 2081–2100 given as mean (min, max) at the deep seafloor for continental slopes, canyons, seamounts and cold water corals mapped from 200–2500 m under RCP8.5 and RCP2.6 Projections are b",
    "new_id": 604
  },
  {
    "id": 57085,
    "question": "Which factor, when combined with accelerating permafrost thaw, most directly exacerbates coastal erosion in the Arctic communities discussed in The Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate: A Special Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The assumption of stable coastlines leading to increased nearshore infrastructure.",
      "B": "The construction of hard engineered defenses such as dikes and sluice gates.",
      "C": "Salinisation of water resources due to storm surges and brackish flooding.",
      "D": "Seasonal sea ice reducing the protective barrier against wave action.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "394",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC SROCC.pdf",
    "source_text": "384 Chapter 4 Sea Level Rise and Implications for Low-Lying Islands, Coasts and Communities4(Anthony et al., 2015; Brown and Nicholls, 2015; Li et al., 2017) as well as salinity intrusion, which is impacting coastal aquifers, soils and surface waters (Anthony et al., 2015; Brown and Nicholls, 2015; Li et al., 2017). Salinisation of water and soil resources remains a coastal phenomenon (Smajgl et al., 2015), but salinity intrusion can reach far inland in some extreme years and significantly contribute to risk at the delta scale (Section 4.3.3.4.2). Both deltas are partly protected with hard engineered defences such as dikes and sluice gates to prevent riverine flooding, and polders and dikes in some coastal stretches to prevent salinity intrusion and storm surges (Smajgl et al., 2015; Rogers and Overeem, 2017; Warner et al., 2018a). Today, in both deltas, the measures implemented to restore natural buffers are still limited to mangroves ecosystems (Quan et al., 2018a; Rahman et al., 2018), and the measures aiming at reducing subsidence are underdeveloped (Schmidt, 2015; Schmitt et al., 2017). Assuming stable population densities in the future, coastal flooding will contribute increasingly to risk at the delta level (Brown and Nicholls, 2015; Brown et al., 2018a; Dang et al., 2018). Coastal erosion will increase (Anthony et al., 2015; Liu et al., 2017a; Uddin et al., 2019) and salinisation of coastal waters and soils will be more significant (Tran Anh et al., 2018; Vu et al., 2018; Rakib et al., 2019) and will strongly impact agriculture and water supply for the entire delta (Jiang et al., 2018; Timsina et al., 2018; Nhung et al., 2019). Without increased adaptation, coastal ecosystems will be largely destroyed at 110 cm of SLR (Schmitt et al., 2017; Mehvar et al., 2019; Mukul et al., 2019). Given the size of these deltas, it is only under high emission scenarios, that flooding, erosion and salinisation lead to high risk at the entire delta scale. Arctic communities (SM4.3.8.4, Panel B in Figure 4.3) – Five small indigenous settlements located on the Arctic Coastal Plain are considered in this analysis: Bykovsky (Lena Delta, Russian Federation), Shishmaref and Kivalina (Alaska, USA), and Shingle Point and Tuktoyaktuk (Mackenzie Delta, Canada). They lie on exposed coasts composed of unlithified ice-rich sediments in permafrost, in areas with seasonal sea ice and slow to moderate SLR. These communities have populations ranging from 380 to 900 (fewer and seasonal at Shingle Point) that are heavily dependent on marine subsistence resources (Forbes, 2011; Ford et al., 2016a). Shishmaref and Kivalina are located on low-lying barrier islands highly susceptible to rising sea level (Marino, 2012; Bronen and Chapin, 2013; Fang et al., 2018; Rolph et al., 2018). Shingle Point is situated on an active gravel spit; Tuktoyaktuk is built on low ground with high concentrations of massive ice; and Bykovsky is mostly situated on an ice-rich eroding terrace about 20 m above sea level. All the selected communities are remote from regions of rapid positive GIA; many other areas in the Arctic experience rapid GIA uplift (James et al., 2015; Forbes et al., 2018) and have very low sensitivity to SLR, which may in fact help to reduce shoaling. Especially in the Arctic, anthropogenic drivers in recent decades resulted in the induced settlement of indigenous peoples in marginalised climate-sensitive communities (Ford et al., 2016b) and the construction of infrastructure in nearshore areas, with the assumption of stable coastlines. This resulted in increased exposure to coastal hazards. Coastal erosion is already a major problem in all of the case studies, where space for building is usually limited. Accelerating permafrost thaw is promoting rapid erosion of ice-rich sediments, e.g., at Bykovsky (Myers, 2005; Lantuit et al., 2011; Vanderlinden et al., 2018) and Tuktoyaktuk (Lamoureux et al., 2015; Ford et al., 2016a). Related to this, Kivalina, Shishmaref, Shingle Point, Tuktoyaktuk, and parts of the Lena delta (less so for Bykovsky) are already facing high risk of flooding. Shishmaref, for example, experienced 10 flooding events between 1973 and 2015 that resulted in emergency declarations (Bronen and Chapin, 2013; Lamoureux et al., 2015; Irrgang et al., 2019). There is however no evidence of salinisation in the selected communities, but brackish water flooding of the outer Mackenzie Delta caused by a 1999 storm surge (a rare event due to upwell",
    "new_id": 605
  },
  {
    "id": 57086,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why the Southern Ocean's contribution to global ocean heat content appears larger in recent years compared to earlier decades, as discussed in The Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate: A Special Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Comparatively greater warming occurred in the earlier part of the 2005–2017 period, making the long-term average appear smaller by comparison.",
      "A": "The introduction of Argo profiling floats after 2005 led to an artificial inflation of heat gain estimates due to improved measurement technology.",
      "C": "Anthropogenic factors, such as greenhouse gas emissions and ozone depletion, intensified after 2005, causing a sudden spike in Southern Ocean warming.",
      "D": "The redistribution of heat from lower latitudes to the Southern Ocean increased disproportionately during the 2005–2017 timeframe.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "227",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC SROCC.pdf",
    "source_text": "217 Polar Regions Chapter 33While Atlantic Water Layer temperatures appear to show less variability since 2008, total heat content in this layer continues to increase (Polyakov et al., 2017) . Recent changes have been dubbed the ‘Atlantification’ of the Northern Barents Sea and Eurasian Basin (Arthun et al., 2012; Lind et al., 2018) , characterised by weaker stratification and enhanced Atlantic Water Layer heat fluxes further northeast (medium confidence ). Polyakov et al. (2017) estimate 2–4 times larger heat fluxes in 2014–2015 compared with 2007–2008. In the Canadian Basin, the maximum temperature of the Pacific Water Layer increased by ~0.5ºC between 2009 and 2013 (Timmermans et al., 2014) , with a doubling in integrated heat content over 1987–2017 (Timmermans et al., 2018) . Over 2001–2014, heat transport associated with Bering Strait inflow increased by 60%, from around 10 TW in 2001 to 16 TW in 2014, due to increases in both volume flux and temperature (Woodgate et al., 2015; Woodgate, 2018) (low confidence ). The Southern Ocean is important for the transfer of heat from the atmosphere to the global ocean, including heat from anthropogenic warming (Frölicher et al., 2015; Shi et al., 2018). The Southern Ocean accounted for ~75% of the global ocean uptake of excess heat during 1870 –1995 (Figure SM3.2; Frölicher et al., 2015), of which ~43% resided in the Southern Ocean with the remainder redistributed to lower latitudes. Over 1970–2017, observations show that the upper 2000 m of the ocean south of 30ºS was responsible for 35–4 3% of the increase in global ocean heat content (Table 3.1). Both models and observations show that, relative to its size (Table SM3.1), the Southern Ocean is disproportionately important in the increase in global upper ocean heat content ( high confidence ). Multi-decadal warming of the Southern Ocean has been attributed to anthropogenic factors, especially the role of greenhouse gases but also ozone depletion (Armour et al., 2016; Shi et al., 2018; Swart et al., 2018; Irving et al., 2019) ( medium confidence ). Surface warming during 1982–2016 was strongest along the northern flank of the ACC , contrasting with cooling further south (Figure 3.3). Interior warming was strongest in the upper 2000 m, peaking around 40ºS–50ºS (Armour et al., 2016) (SM3.2.1; Figures SM3.2 and SM3.3). There is high confidence that this pattern of change is driven by upper-ocean overturning circulation and mixing (Cross-Chapter Box 7 in Chapter 3), whereby heat uptake at the surface by newly upwelled waters is transmitted to the ocean interior in intermediate depth layers (Armour et al., 2016). Whilst temperature trends in the ACC itself are driven predominantly by air-sea flux changes (Swart et al., 2018), the warming on its northern side appears strongly influenced by wind-forced changes in the thickness and depth of the mode water layer (Desbruyeres et al., 2017; Gao et al., 2018) (medium confidence ). Below the surface south of the ACC, warming extends close to Antarctica, intruding onto the continental shelf in the Amundsen-Bellingshausen Sea where temperature increases of 0.1ºC–0.3ºC per decade have been observed over 1983–2012 (Schmidtko et al., 2014) (Section 3.3.1.5). This latter warming may be driven by changes in wind forcing (Spence et al., 2014), and exhibits significant decadal variability (Jenkins et al., 2018). After around 2005, improved upper ocean heat content estimates became available via Argo profiling floats (Section 1.8.1 ; Section 5.2). For 2005–2017, multiple datasets show that the heat gain ed by the Southern Ocean south of 30ºS was 45–6 2% of the global ocean heat gain (Table 3.1) (equivalent figures for other indicative Southern Ocean extents are in Table SM3.2). This accords with Roemmich et al. (2015), who found that during 2006–2013 the ocean south of 20ºS accounted for 67–98% of total heat gain in the upper 2000 m of the global ocean. ( The smaller proportion for 2005 –2017 c.f. 2006 –2013 is due to comparatively greater warming in the earlier part of the common period). The recent Southern Ocean heat gain is thus larger than its long-term trend over either the preceding several decades (1970–2004, 30–51%, Table SM3.3) or the full period 1970–2017 (35–43%; Table 3.1 and above). There is high confidence that the Southern Ocean has increased its role in global ocean heat content in recent years compared with the past several decades. Attribution of this increased role is current",
    "new_id": 606
  },
  {
    "id": 57092,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the relationship between governance adaptations and their effectiveness in addressing climate-induced challenges in marine ecosystems, as discussed in The Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate: A Special Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change?",
    "options": {
      "C": "While some governance adaptations show potential, their true effectiveness cannot be determined without rigorous evaluation against specific goals.",
      "A": "Governance adaptations are inherently ineffective unless they explicitly integrate assisted evolution techniques for coral restoration.",
      "B": "Existing governance structures are fully capable of addressing climate-induced challenges if financial support is increased.",
      "D": "The success of governance adaptations is guaranteed if cooperation and integration among international entities are achieved.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "465",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC SROCC.pdf",
    "source_text": "455 Changing Ocean, Marine Ecosystems, and Dependent Communities Chapter 55Observed widespread decline in warm water corals has led to the consideration of alternative restoration approaches to enhance climate resilience. Approaches, such as ‘coral reef gardening’ have been tested, and ecological engineering and other approaches such as assisted evolution, colonisation and chimerism are being researched for reef restoration. However, the effectiveness of these approaches to increase resilience to climate stressors and their large-scale implementation for reef restoration will be limited unless warming and ocean acidification are rapidly controlled ( high confidence ). {Box 5.5, 5.5.2} Existing ocean governance structures are already facing multi-dimensional, scale-related challenges because of climate change. This trend of increasing complexity will continue ( high confidence ). The mechanisms for the governance of marine Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction (ABNJ), such as ocean acidification, would benefit from further development ( high confidence ). There is also scope to increase the overall effectiveness of international and national ocean governance regimes by increasing cooperation, integration and widening participation ( medium confidence ). Diverse adaptations of ocean related governance are being tried, and some are producing promising results. However, rigorous evaluation is needed of the effectiveness of these adaptations in achieving their goals. {5.5.3} There are a broad range of identified barriers and limits for adaptation to climate change in ecosystems and human systems ( high confidence ). Limitations include the space that ecosystems require, non-climatic drivers and human impacts that need to be addressed as part of the adaptation response, the lowering of adaptive capacity of ecosystems because of climate change, and the slower ecosystem recovery rates relative to the recurrence of climate impacts, availability of technology, knowledge and financial support and existing governance structures ( medium confidence ). {5.5.2}",
    "new_id": 607
  },
  {
    "id": 57097,
    "question": "Which statement accurately captures the nuanced relationship between the cost of retreat and its effectiveness in reducing sea-level rise (SLR) risks, based on the interplay of evidence presented in The Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate: A Special Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Retreat is considered effective regardless of cost, but maintenance costs persist unless populations are moved entirely out of hazard zones.",
      "A": "The cost of retreat is directly proportional to its effectiveness, as higher costs ensure complete elimination of both short-term and long-term SLR risks.",
      "B": "High costs associated with retreat are justified only when social networks and economic opportunities in destination areas are preserved without additional subsidies.",
      "C": "The effectiveness of retreat is contingent upon policy barriers to mobility, which are influenced by the availability of empirical cost estimates.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "407",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC SROCC.pdf",
    "source_text": "397 Sea Level Rise and Implications for Low-Lying Islands, Coasts and Communities Chapter 44and 2050 to a small in-migration (Kumari et al., 2018). However, this range includes migration stimulated by freshwater availability as well as SLR and episodic flooding. A generalised radiation or diffusion model predicts 0.9 million people will migrate due to SLR in Bangladesh by 2050 and 2.1 million by 2100, largely internally, with substantial implications for nutrition, shelter and employment in destination areas (Davis et al., 2018). A global dynamic general equilibrium framework (Desmet et al., 2018) provides a more comprehensive approach to accounting for economic factors including changes to trade, innovation, and agglomeration, and political factors, such as policy barriers to mobility, all of which influence the migration response to environmental change. Agent-based models attempt to simulate decisions by individuals who face a variety of socioeconomic and environmental changes (Kniveton et al., 2012). However, neither general equilibrium nor agent-based frameworks have been applied yet to migration responses to SLR. Econometric models, common in climate/migration studies (Millock, 2015), likewise have yet to be applied to the SLR context, except for a single case study where an econometric model was used to interpret the outcome of a discrete choice experiment (Buchanan et al., 2019). For example, an interesting distinction between migration responses to long term temperature and precipitation trends in contrast to extreme events like flooding has been noted (Bohra-Mishra et al., 2014; Mueller et al., 2014), but similar econometric studies have yet to be done comparing responses to gradual land loss versus flooding during ESL events. 4.4.2.6.3 Cost of retreat We have limited evidence of estimates on the cost of retreat. There are few cost estimates in the literature and these are based on stylised assumptions as little empirical data is available. The cost of managed relocation, including land acquisition, building of roads and infrastructure and other subsidies, was found to vary from 10,000–270,000 GBP per home in United Kingdom Coastal Change Pathfinder projects (Regeneris Consulting, 2011), and between 10,000 USD in Fiji and 100,000 USD per person in Alaska and in the Isle of Jean Charles in the USA (Hino et al., 2017). For people involved in planned relocation in Shaanxi Province, Northwest China, households receive subsidies ranging from 1200–5100 USD (Lei et al., 2017). The Louisiana’s National Disaster Resilience Competition, Phase II Application states that the proposed relocation of 40 households in the Isle de Jean Charles in Louisiana is estimated to cost 48,379,249 USD, including the cost for land acquisition, infrastructure and construction of new dwellings (State of Louisiana, 2015). Generally, maintenance costs do not arise if people are moved completely out of the hazard zone (Suppasri et al., 2015; Hino et al., 2017). In cases in which people are only moved so that short-term but not long-term risk is reduced, follow up costs for further responses will occur. The individual costs associated with displacement after an environmental disaster are difficult to obtain. In the literature, there are limited estimates of the social costs to residents of Guadeloupe, Saint Croix, St. Thomas, Puerto Rico, and the southeast USA displaced after Hurricanes Hugo (1989) and Katrina (2005). A survey conducted across 18 parishes (i.e. counties) in Louisiana in 2006 revealed that non-displaced households had an average income of 36,000 USD compared to an average income of 30,000 USD recorded for displaced households (Hori and Schafer, 2010). 4.4.2.6.4 Effectiveness of retreat There is very high confidence that retreat is effective in reducing the risks and impacts of SLR as retreat directly reduces exposure of human settlements and activities (Gioli et al., 2016; Shayegh et al., 2016; Hauer, 2017; Morrison, 2017). 4.4.2.6.5 Co-benefits and drawbacks of retreat The other outcomes of retreat responses, beyond the one of effectively reducing SLR risks and impacts, are complex and affect both origin and destination. Generally, retreat impacts social networks, access to services and economic and social opportunities, and several well-being indicators (Jones and Clark, 2014; Adams, 2016; Herath et al., 2017; Kura et al., 2017; McNamara et al., 2018). The socioeconomic benefits of migration to individuals and households m",
    "new_id": 608
  },
  {
    "id": 57098,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between governance, international frameworks, and adaptation to cryosphere changes, as described in The Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate: A Special Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Effective governance and international frameworks have untapped potential to support adaptation, but there is limited evidence of their current efficacy in addressing cryosphere-specific risks.",
      "B": "Effective governance is primarily dependent on international treaties to address cryosphere risks, which are already well-monitored within existing frameworks.",
      "C": "While international cooperation exists for some regions, evidence suggests these frameworks comprehensively monitor and mitigate cryosphere-related impacts.",
      "D": "Disaster risk reduction relies solely on local governance structures, rendering international agreements irrelevant to managing cryosphere changes.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "145",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC SROCC.pdf",
    "source_text": "135 High Mountain Areas Chapter 22 Enablers and response options to promote adaptation and sustainable development in high mountain areas The already committed and unavoidable climate change affecting all cryosphere elements, irrespective of the emission scenario, points to integrated adaptation planning to support and enhance water availability, access, and management (medium confidence ). Integrated management approaches for water across all scales, in particular for energy, agriculture, ecosystems and drinking water supply, can be effective at dealing with impacts from changes in the cryosphere. These approaches also offer opportunities to support social-ecological systems, through the development and optimisation of storage and the release of water from reservoirs ( medium confidence ), while being cognisant of potential negative implications for some ecosystems. Success in implementing such management options depends on the participation of relevant stakeholders, including affected communities, diverse knowledge and adequate tools for monitoring and projecting future conditions, and financial and institutional resources to support planning and implementation ( medium confidence ). {2.3.1, 2.3.3, 2.4} Effective governance is a key enabler for reducing disaster risk, considering relevant exposure factors such as planning, zoning, and urbanisation pressures, as well as vulnerability factors such as poverty, which can challenge efforts towards resilience and sustainable development for communities (medium confidence ). Reducing losses to disasters depend on integrated and coordinated approaches to account for the hazards concerned, the degree of exposure, and existing vulnerabilities. Diverse knowledge that includes community and multi-stakeholder experience with past impacts complements scientific knowledge to anticipate future risks. {CCB-1, 2.3.2, 2.4} International cooperation, treaties and conventions exist for some mountain regions and transboundary river basins with potential to support adaptation action. However, there is limited evidence on the extent to which impacts and losses arising from changes in the cryosphere are specifically monitored and addressed in these frameworks . A wide range of institutional arrangements and practices have emerged over the past three decades that respond to a shared global mountain agenda and specific regional priorities. There is potential to strengthen them to also respond to climate-related cryosphere risks and open opportunities for development through adaptation ( limited evidence, high agreement ). The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), Sendai Framework and Paris Agreement have directed some attention in mountain-specific research and practice towards the monitoring and reporting on targets and indicators specified therein. {2.3.1, 2.4}",
    "new_id": 609
  },
  {
    "id": 57100,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why the projected increase in extreme positive Indian Ocean Dipole (IOD) events might be overestimated, according to The Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate: A Special Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Bias in CMIP5 models and internal variability may amplify projections of extreme positive IOD event frequency.",
      "A": "The faster warming in the eastern equatorial Indian Ocean compared to the western region could lead to model inaccuracies.",
      "C": "The weakening of equatorial westerly winds is insufficient to account for changes in oceanic currents.",
      "D": "The inter-model spread in dynamic processes related to IOD changes is too small to affect predictions significantly.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "624",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC SROCC.pdf",
    "source_text": "Chapter 6 Extremes, Abrupt Changes and Managing Risks6 6 614of the global ocean area (Cheng et al. 2017; Makarim et al. 2019). The tropical Indian Ocean SST has warmed by 1.04ºC during 1950–2015, while the tropical SST warming is 0.83ºC and the global SST warning is 0.65ºC. More than 90% of the surface warming in the Indian Ocean has been attributed to changes in GHG emissions (Dong et al. 2014), with the heat redistributed in the basin via local ocean and atmospheric dynamics (Liu et al. 2015b), the ITF (Section 6.6.1; Susanto et al. 2012; Sprintall and Revelard, 2014; Lee et al. 2015b; Susanto and Song, 2015; Zhang et al. 2018) and the Walker circulation (Roxy et al. 2014; Abish et al. 2018). The dynamic processes related to the projected changes in IOD under global warming have a large inter-model spread (Cai et al. 2013). The frequency of extreme positive IOD events are projected to increase by almost a factor of three, from a one-in-seventeen-year event in the 20th century to a one-in-six-year event in the 21st century ( low confidence ). The bias in the CMIP5 models and internal variability could enlarge the projected increase in the extreme positive IOD events (Li et al. 2016a; Hui and Zheng, 2018). The increase in IOD events is not linked to the change in the frequency of El Niño events but instead to mean state change—with weakening of both equatorial westerly winds and eastward oceanic currents in association with a faster warming in the western than the eastern equatorial Indian Ocean (Cai et al. 2014b). A combination of extreme ENSO and IOD events has led to a northward shift in the Intertropical Convergence Zone (ITCZ) during 1979–2015, which is expected to increase further in the future (Freitas et al. 2017). 6.5.2 Impacts on Human and Natural Systems Increasing frequency of extreme ENSO and IOD events have the potential to have widespread impacts on natural and human systems in many parts of the globe. Though the occurrence of the extreme 2015–2016 El Niño has produced a large body of literature, it is still not clear how climate change may have altered such an impact, nor how such impacts might change in the future with increasing frequency of extreme ENSO events. We highlight here some studies that have attempted to assess the joint impact of mean change and variability. In addition to observed high variability of rainfall, severe weather events and impacts on TCs activity (Yonekura and Hall, 2014; Zhang and Guan, 2014; Wang and Liu, 2016; Zhan, 2017), extreme El Nino events have substantial impacts on natural systems which include those on marine ecosystems (Sanseverino et al. 2016; Mogollon and Calil, 2017; Ohman et al. 2017), such as severe and repeated bleaching of corals (Hughes et al. 2017a; Hughes et al. 2017b; Eakin et al. 2018), and glacial growth and retreat (Thompson et al. 2017). On the other hand, impacts on human, including managed systems are: increased incidences of forest fires (Christidis et al. 2018b; Tett et al. 2018), degraded air quality (Koplitz et al. 2015; Chang et al. 2016; Zhai et al. 2016) such as the dense haze over most parts of Indonesia and the neighboring countries in Southeast Asia as a result of prolonged Indonesian wildfires, thus imposing adverse impacts on public health in the affected areas (Koplitz et al. 2015; WMO, 2016), decreased agricultural yields in many parts of the globe (e.g., in most of the Pacific Islands countries, Thailand, eastern and southern Africa and others which resulted food insecurity, particularly in eastern and southern Africa (UNSCAP , 2015; WMO, 2016; Christidis et al. 2018b; Funk et al. 2018), and regional uptick in the number of reported cases of plague and hantavirus in Colorado and New Mexico, cholera in Tanzania, dengue in Brazil and Southeast Asia (Anyamba et al. 2019) and Zika virus in South America (Caminade et al. 2017), including increases in heat stroke cases (Christidis et al. 2018b). Substantial economic losses had resulted from droughts and floods across various parts of the globe due to teleconnections. For instance, direct losses of 10 billion USD (Sun and Miao, 2018; Yuan et al. 2018) and 6.5 billion USD (Christidis et al. 2018b) were estimated to have been incurred from severe urban inundation in cities along the Yangtze River in China and the extreme drought in Thailand, respectively. ENSO events affect TCs activity through variations in the low-level wind anomalies, vertical wind shear, mid-level relative humidity, s",
    "new_id": 610
  },
  {
    "id": 57105,
    "question": "Which inference about the limitations of DeConto and Pollard's (2016) model can be drawn from the text in The Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate: A Special Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Because their model physics are sensitive to melt water through hydrofracturing, this makes the timing and magnitude of their simulated ice loss too uncertain to include in SROCC.",
      "A": "Their model fully captures all relevant glaciological processes, including hydrofracturing and ice cliff instability.",
      "B": "The model's reliance on meltwater-induced hydrofracturing leads to overconfidence in projections beyond 2100.",
      "D": "DeConto and Pollard’s findings are consistent with CMIP5 climate simulations regarding the timing of extensive surface meltwater.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "360",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC SROCC.pdf",
    "source_text": "350 Chapter 4 Sea Level Rise and Implications for Low-Lying Islands, Coasts and Communities4parameterisations, but the glaciological processes themselves are supported by more detailed modelling and observations (Scambos et al., 2009; Banwell et al., 2013; Ma et al., 2017; Wise et al., 2017; Parizek et al., 2019). DeConto and Pollard (2016) provide four ensembles for RCP2.6, RCP4.5, and RCP8.5 scenarios, representing two alternative ocean model treatments and two alternative palaeo sea level targets used to tune their model physical parameters. However, their ensembles do not explore the full range of model parameter space or provide a probabilistic assessment (Kopp et al., 2017; Edwards et al., 2019). Under RCP2.6, DeConto and Pollard (2016) find very little GMSL rise from Antarctica by 2100 (0.02– 0.16 m), consistent with the findings of Golledge et al. (2015) and Bulthuis et al. (2019). In contrast, their four ensemble means range between 0.26–0.58 m for RCP4.5, and 0.64–1.14 m for RCP8.5. In RCP8.5, rates of GMSL rise from Antarctica exceed 5 cm yr–1 in the 22nd century and contribute as much as 15 m of GMSL rise by 2500, largely due to the ice cliff calving process. The climate forcing used by DeConto and Pollard (2016) simulates the appearance of extensive surface meltwater several decades earlier than indicated by other CMIP5 climate simulations (Trusel et al., 2015). Because their model physics are sensitive to melt water through hydrofracturing, this makes the timing and magnitude of their simulated ice loss too uncertain to include in SROCC sea level projections. However, their results do demonstrate the potential for brittle ice sheet processes not considered by AR5 to exert a strong influence on future rates of GMSL rise and the possibility that GMSL beyond 2100 could be considerably higher than the likely range projected by models that do not include these processes. 4.2.3.2 Global and Regional Projections of Sea Level Rise In addition to the model including MICI from DeConto and Pollard (2016), only a subset of studies (Levermann et al., 2014; Golledge et al., 2015; Ritz et al., 2015; Bulthuis et al., 2019; Golledge et al., 2019), and statistical emulation of DeConto and Pollard (2016) by Edwards et al. (2019) provide continental-scale estimates of future Antarctic ice loss, under a range of GHG emissions scenarios. They all provide probabilistic information, but vary considerably, both in their physical approaches and their resulting projections of Antarctica’s future contribution to GMSL. Such variations facilitate the first quantitative uncertainty assessment of the full dynamical contribution of Antarctica, which could not be made by Church et al. (2013) in AR5. The assessment by Church et al. (2013), based on a single statistical-physical model, reported median values (and likely ranges) of 0.05 m (-0.04–0.13) and 0.04 m (-0.06–0.12), for RCP4.5 and RCP8.5, respectively, for the total Antarctic contribution in 2081–2100 relative to 1986–2005, and added the following: ‘Based on current understanding, only the collapse of marine-based sectors of the AIS, if initiated, could cause GMSL to rise substantially above the likely range during the 21st century. This potential additional contribution cannot be precisely quantified but there is medium confidence that it would not exceed several tenths of a metre of SLR during the 21st century (Church et al., 2013). Given the above-mentioned publications after AR5, Antarctica’s contribution to sea level change was reassessed and now include the possibility of MISI allowing for a more complete assessment of the likely range of the projections for three RCP scenarios. Our assessment is based on process-based numerical models of the AIS, driven by diverse climate scenarios. Results are discussed in the context of an expert elicitation study (Bamber et al., 2019), probabilistic studies (Perrette et al., 2013; Slangen et al., 2014a; Grinsted et al., 2015; Jackson and Jevrejeva, 2016) and a sensitivity study (Schlegel et al., 2018) assessing the uncertainty in snow accumulation, ocean-induced melting, ice viscosity, basal friction, bedrock elevation and the effect of ice shelves on ice mass loss in 2100, Figure 4.4. Ritz et al. (2015) is difficult to contextualise as they only provided estimates for the A1B scenario and not for the RCP scenarios. Despite this limitation their results, which are close to the other studies, are included as if they represent RCP8.5 and ",
    "new_id": 611
  },
  {
    "id": 57107,
    "question": "Which statement accurately captures the relationship between human communities and their exposure to ocean and cryosphere changes, as described in The Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate: A Special Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Populations in low-lying coastal zones and small island states face significant risks from sea level rise, while high mountain communities are primarily affected by changes in the cryosphere.",
      "A": "Communities in high mountain regions are more exposed to sea level rise than those in low-lying coastal zones due to their proximity to glaciers.",
      "B": "Indigenous populations in the Arctic are uniquely vulnerable because they account for nearly half of the region’s total population and rely directly on shrinking cryosphere resources.",
      "C": "Extreme weather events linked to ocean changes impact only inland communities, sparing those living in polar areas and high mountains.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "15",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC SROCC.pdf",
    "source_text": "5 SPMSummary for PolicymakersStartup Box | The Importance of the Ocean and Cryosphere for People 7 High mountain areas include all mountain regions where glaciers, snow or permafrost are prominent features of the landscape. For a list of high mountain regions covered in this report, see Chapter 2. Population in high mountain regions is calculated for areas less than 100 kilometres from glaciers or permafrost in high mountain areas assessed in this report. {2.1} Projections for 2050 give the range of population in these regions across all five of the Shared Socioeconomic Pathways. {Cross-Chapter Box 1 in Chapter 1} 8 Population in the low elevation coastal zone is calculated for land areas connected to the coast, including small island states, that are less than 10 metres above sea level. {Cross-Chapter Box 9} Projections for 2050 give the range of population in these regions across all five of the Shared Socioeconomic Pathways. {Cross-Chapter Box 1 in Chapter 1}All people on Earth depend directly or indirectly on the ocean and cryosphere. The global ocean covers 71% of the Earth surface and contains about 97% of the Earth’s water. The cryosphere refers to frozen components of the Earth system1. Around 10% of Earth’s land area is covered by glaciers or ice sheets. The ocean and cryosphere support unique habitats, and are interconnected with other components of the climate system through global exchange of water, energy and carbon. The projected responses of the ocean and cryosphere to past and current human-induced greenhouse gas emissions and ongoing global warming include climate feedbacks, changes over decades to millennia that cannot be avoided, thresholds of abrupt change, and irreversibility. {Box 1.1, 1.2} Human communities in close connection with coastal environments, small islands (including Small Island Developing States, SIDS), polar areas and high mountains7 are particularly exposed to ocean and cryosphere change, such as sea level rise, extreme sea level and shrinking cryosphere. Other communities further from the coast are also exposed to changes in the ocean, such as through extreme weather events. Today, around 4 million people live permanently in the Arctic region, of whom 10% are Indigenous. The low-lying coastal zone8 is currently home to around 680 million people (nearly 10% of the 2010 global population), projected to reach more than one billion by 2050. SIDS are home to 65 million people. Around 670 million people (nearly 10% of the 2010 global population), including Indigenous peoples, live in high mountain regions in all continents except Antarctica. In high mountain regions, population is projected to reach between 740 and 840 million by 2050 (about 8.4–8.7% of the projected global population). {1.1, 2.1, 3.1, Cross-Chapter Box 9, Figure 2.1} In addition to their role within the climate system, such as the uptake and redistribution of natural and anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO 2) and heat, as well as ecosystem support, services provided to people by the ocean and/or cryosphere include food and water supply, renewable energy, and benefits for health and well-being, cultural values, tourism, trade, and transport. The state of the ocean and cryosphere interacts with each aspect of sustainability reflected in the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). {1.1, 1.2, 1.5}",
    "new_id": 612
  },
  {
    "id": 57108,
    "question": "Which statement accurately captures the relationship between ecosystem-based adaptation (EbA) and the constraints or conditions necessary for its success, as discussed in The Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate: A Special Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The success of ecosystem-based adaptation is contingent upon the lowest levels of warming, and addressing ecological, financial, institutional and governance constraints.",
      "B": "Ecosystem-based adaptation is universally effective across all levels of warming, provided that financial and institutional support is available.",
      "C": "Geographic barriers and habitat fragmentation are negligible concerns for EbA, as community-supported restoration efforts can independently ensure success.",
      "D": "Restoration tools like coral gardening are viable under any warming scenario, as they primarily depend on science-based approaches rather than temperature thresholds.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "40",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC SROCC.pdf",
    "source_text": "30 SPMSummary for PolicymakersStrengthening Response Options C.2 The far-reaching services and options provided by ocean and cryosphere-related ecosystems can be supported by protection, restoration, precautionary ecosystem-based management of renewable resource use, and the reduction of pollution and other stressors ( high confidence ). Integrated water management ( medium confidence ) and ecosystem-based adaptation ( high confidence ) approaches lower climate risks locally and provide multiple societal benefits. However, ecological, financial, institutional and governance constraints for such actions exist ( high confidence ), and in many contexts ecosystem-based adaptation will only be effective under the lowest levels of warming ( high confidence ). {2.3.1, 2.3.3, 3.2.4, 3.5.2, 3.5.4, 4.4.2, 5.2.2, 5.4.2, 5.5.1, 5.5.2, Figure SPM.5} C.2.1 Networks of protected areas help maintain ecosystem services, including carbon uptake and storage, and enable future ecosystem-based adaptation options by facilitating the poleward and altitudinal movements of species, populations, and ecosystems that occur in response to warming and sea level rise ( medium confidence ). Geographic barriers, ecosystem degradation, habitat fragmentation and barriers to regional cooperation limit the potential for such networks to support future species range shifts in marine, high mountain and polar land regions ( high confidence ). {2.3.3, 3.2.3, 3.3.2, 3.5.4, 5.5.2, Box 3.4} C.2.2 Terrestrial and marine habitat restoration, and ecosystem management tools such as assisted species relocation and coral gardening, can be locally effective in enhancing ecosystem-based adaptation ( high confidence ). Such actions are most successful when they are community-supported, are science-based whilst also using local knowledge and Indigenous knowledge, have long-term support that includes the reduction or removal of non-climatic stressors, and under the lowest levels of warming ( high confidence ). For example, coral reef restoration options may be ineffective if global warming exceeds 1.5ºC, because corals are already at high risk ( very high confidence ) at current levels of warming. {2.3.3, 4.4.2, 5.3.7, 5.5.1, 5.5.2, Box 5.5, Figure SPM.3} C.2.3 Strengthening precautionary approaches, such as rebuilding overexploited or depleted fisheries, and responsiveness of existing fisheries management strategies reduces negative climate change impacts on fisheries, with benefits for regional economies and livelihoods ( medium confidence ). Fisheries management that regularly assesses and updates measures over time, informed by assessments of future ecosystem trends, reduces risks for fisheries ( medium confidence ) but has limited ability to address ecosystem change. {3.2.4, 3.5.2, 5.4.2, 5.5.2, 5.5.3, Figure SPM.5} C.2.4 Restoration of vegetated coastal ecosystems, such as mangroves, tidal marshes and seagrass meadows (coastal ‘blue carbon’ ecosystems), could provide climate change mitigation through increased carbon uptake and storage of around 0.5% of current global emissions annually ( medium confidence ). Improved protection and management can reduce carbon emissions from these ecosystems. Together, these actions also have multiple other benefits, such as providing storm protection, improving water quality, and benefiting biodiversity and fisheries (high confidence ). Improving the quantification of carbon storage and greenhouse gas fluxes of these coastal ecosystems will reduce current uncertainties around measurement, reporting and verification ( high confidence ). {Box 4.3, 5.4, 5.5.1, 5.5.2, Annex I: Glossary} C.2.5 Ocean renewable energy can support climate change mitigation, and can comprise energy extraction from offshore winds, tides, waves, thermal and salinity gradient and algal biofuels. The emerging demand for alternative energy sources is expected to generate economic opportunities for the ocean renewable energy sector (high confidence ), although their potential may also be affected by climate change ( low confidence ). {5.4.2, 5.5.1, Figure 5.23}",
    "new_id": 613
  },
  {
    "id": 59740,
    "question": "Which of the following statements accurately reflects a nuanced implication about the interplay between external financing mechanisms and their impact on achieving SDGs, as suggested by the data in Progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals Report of the Secretary-General?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Despite rising remittance flows, the persistent annual SDG investment gap suggests that such inflows alone are insufficient to meet development needs without significant scaling of other financial resources.",
      "A": "Remittances have overtaken ODA as the largest source of external finance for all developing countries due to their consistent double-digit growth rates.",
      "C": "The increase in global FDI flows in 2023 indicates broad-based improvements in sustainable development investments across most developing nations.",
      "D": "The decline in sustainable development grants has been entirely offset by proportional increases in both concessional loans and mobilized private finance since 2021.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "24",
    "ref_doc": "SDG Progress 2024.pdf",
    "source_text": "A/79/79 E/2022/55 24/26 statistical systems. However, a substantial $4 trillion annual investment gap for developing countries to achieve the SDGs, persistent and crippling issues such as unprecedentedly high external debt levels , and limited access to online connectivity in low -income countries underscore the need for sustained co llaboration and enhanced cooperation and support in a landscape of worsening international cooperation and geopolitical tensions . Finance • Target 17.1: 2022 data from approximately 130 countries show that globally, government revenue accounts for approximately 33% of GDP. The average overall tax burden or revenue in the form of taxes is 26% of GDP among advanced economies and 18% of GDP among emerging market and developing economies. In 2019, the overall average of proportion government expenditure funded by taxes was about 66% among advanced economies and 61% among emerging market and developing economies. The overall average sharply declined following the pa ndemic to about 52% in 2020 but rebounded in 2021 and 2022 for both groups of economies (to 62% for advanced economies and 59% for emerging and developing countries) , however, still lower than the pre -pandemic level. • Target 17.2: In 2023, ODA by member cou ntries of the Development Assistance Committee (DAC) amounted to $223.7 billion, representing 0.37% of DAC members’ combined GNI . Total ODA in 2023 rose by 1.8% in real terms compared to 2022 and by 47% compared to 2015. This was the fifth consecutive year ODA reached a new high . The increase was primarily due to aid for Ukraine, humanitarian aid and contributions to international organisations. • Target 17.3: o In 2022, financial resources for developing countries from multiple sources reported by 101 bilateral and multilateral providers amounted to $276.6 billion in official resources, $55.3 billion mobilized from private finance and $10.2 billion from private grants for development. Sustainable development grants (both official and private) decreased in 2022, compared to 2021. However, sustainable concessional development loans increased by 6%, while non -concessional loans decreased and mobilized private finance increased by 21%, compensating the decrease of 2021. o Global F oreign Direct Investment (FD I) flows in 2023 amounted to an estimated $1.37 trillion, a marginal increase over 2022. However, the increase was due largely to higher values in a small number of conduit economies; excluding these conduits, global FDI flows were 18% lower. The number of international investment projects announced in developing countries in sectors relevant to the SDGs – including infrastructure, renewables, water and sanitation, food security, health and education – remained flat. o The annual SDG investment gap in developing countries is now about $4 trillion. If the SDG investment needs to 2030 are to be met, some $30 trillion of additional investment must be found over the next eight years. More than half of the gap, or $2.2 trillion, relates to the energy transition alone. o In the post -COVID period, remittances have proved to be resilient and become a premier source of external finance for developing countries. In 2022, remittance flows to low - and middle -income countries increased by 8%, to reach $647 bil lion. This increase is remarkable, given that it followed a 10.6% growth rate in 2021. The remittance growth rate is expected to moderate to about 4% in 2023.",
    "new_id": 614
  },
  {
    "id": 59742,
    "question": "Which of the following best reflects a nuanced challenge in achieving health-related SDG targets, based on the interplay between progress and setbacks across multiple indicators as outlined in Progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals Report of the Secretary-General?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Increased access to HIV treatment has significantly reduced new infections, but uneven progress in addressing TB and malaria highlights persistent systemic vulnerabilities.",
      "A": "The decline in under-five mortality rates has been uniform across all regions since 2015, ensuring consistent global advancement toward Target 3.2.",
      "B": "Universal coverage of essential health services has nearly been achieved, as evidenced by minimal changes in population access after 2015.",
      "D": "The reduction in tobacco use among adults aged 15+ can be solely attributed to successful policy implementation without regional disparities.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "8",
    "ref_doc": "SDG Progress 2024.pdf",
    "source_text": "A/79/79 E/2022/55 8/26 • Target 3.2 : In 2022, global under -five deaths was 4.9 million, down from 9.9 million in 2000 and 6.0 million in 2015. The under -five mortality rate fell to 37 deaths per 1,000 live births in 2022 —51% lower than in 2000 and a 14% decline since 2015. Similarly, the global neonatal mortality rate fell to 17 deaths per 1,000 live births in 2022, a 44% and 12% decrease from the 2000 and 2015 levels , respectively. • Target 3.3 : Mixed p rogress is observed towards the SDG target of ending communicable diseases a). There were an estimated 1.3 million new HIV infections in 2022, 27% fewer t han in 2015, and 38% fewer than in 2010. Increased access to HIV treatment has averted almost 20.8 million AIDS -related deaths in the past three decades. b). The reported global number of people newly diagnosed with TB was 7.5 million in 2022, the highest since 1995. On the other hand, the annual number of people who died from TB decreased in 2022 after two consecutive years of increase due to COVID -19 pandemic. c). In 2022, there were an estimated 249 million malaria cases globally, exceeding the pre -pandemic level of 233 million in 2019. d). In 2022, 1.62 billion people required interventions and care for neglected tropical diseases (NTDs), a 26.1% of decline from 2010. As of December 2023, 50 countries, territories and areas have eliminated at least one NTD. • Target 3.5: Global drug -related treatment coverage has decreased from approximately 11% in 2015 to under 9% in 2022. Alarmingly, treatment coverage for women consistently lags behind that for men across all regions. In 2022, over 13% of men with drug use disorders received treatment globally, while less than 6% of women did. Moreover, data on treatment coverage for alcohol use disorders vary widely, ranging from a mere 0.3% to a maximum of 14% in reporting countries. • Target 3.7 : The proportion of women of reproductive age (aged 15 -49 years) who have their need for family planning satisfied with modern methods increased slightly from 76.5% to 77.6% between 2015 and 2024. This corresponds to an increase of 75 million women of reproductive age using modern methods since 2015. The adolescent birth rate has globally declined from 47.2 births per 1,000 girls and women aged 15 to 19 years in 2015 to 40 .7 in 2024 . • Target 3.8 : The proportion of the population not covered by essential health services decreased by about 15% between 2000 and 2021, with minimal progress made after 2015. In 2021, about four and a half billion people were not covered by essential health services . • Target 3.a : In 2022, t he global prevalence of current tobacco use among the population aged 15+ was estimated at 20.9%. This translates to around 1.25 billion adult tobacco users in the world. The prevalence has declined since 2015 when it was 23.9%, and the number of users has decreased by 50 million. • Target 3.b: Coverage of the third dose of vaccine protecting against diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis (DTP -3) recovered to 84% in 2022, an improvement from 81% in 2021 but still below the 2019 level of 86%. In 2022, 20.5 million children remained vulnerable to vaccine -preventable diseases. The current 2 -dose measles vaccine coverage of 74% is insufficient to prevent outbreaks. HPV vaccine declined significantly during the pandemic, but 2022 saw the first encouraging signs of recovery in vaccination with 15% full scheduled coverage among girls. • Target 3.c: While a recent study shows that the projected global shortage of health workers by 2030 has reduced from 18 million to 10 million, the aging of the population induce s an increased health need and further widens this gap. An additional 1.8 million health workers are needed in fifty- four countries (mostly",
    "new_id": 615
  },
  {
    "id": 60291,
    "question": "Which of the following accurately reflects a necessary condition for an entity to disclose incidents of non-compliance with water quality regulations, as described in the Meat, Poultry & Dairy – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The incident must have resulted in a formal enforcement action, such as administrative penalty orders or judicial actions.",
      "A": "The incident must involve continuous discharges exceeding maximum daily averages but not include non-continuous discharges.",
      "B": "The incident must be reported regardless of whether it led to formal enforcement, as long as it violates any permit terms.",
      "C": "The incident must solely pertain to violations of pre-treatment requirements and exclude hazardous substance discharges.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "16-17",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Meat, Poultry & Dairy.pdf",
    "source_text": "3.1 Effects include those associated with costs, revenue, liabilities, continuity of operations and reputation. 4The entity shall discuss its short- and long-term strategies or plan to mitigate water management risks, which may include: 4.1 The scope of its strategy, plans, goals or targets, such as how they relate to various business units, geographies or water-consuming operational processes; 4.2 Any water management goals or targets it has prioritised, and an analysis of performance against those goals or targets; 4.2.1 Goals and targets include those associated with reducing water withdrawals, reducing water consumption, reducing water discharges, reducing aquatic impingements, improving the quality of water discharges and maintaining regulatory compliance. 4.3 The activities and investments required to achieve the plans, goals or targets, and any risks or limiting factors that might affect achievement of the plans or targets; and 4.4 Disclosure of strategies, plans, goals or targets shall be limited to activities that were ongoing (active) or reached completion during the reporting period. 5For water management targets, the entity shall additionally disclose: 5.1 Whether the target is absolute or intensity-based, and the metric denominator if it is an intensity-based target; 5.2 The time lines for the water management plans, including the start year, the target year and the base year; and 5.3 The mechanism(s) for achieving the target, including: 5.3.1 Efficiency efforts, such as the use of water recycling or closed-loop systems; 5.3.2 Product innovations such as redesigning products or services to require less water; 5.3.3 Process and equipment innovations, such as those that enable the reduction of aquatic impingements or entrainments; 5.3.4 Use of tools and technologies (for example, the World Wildlife Fund Water Risk Filter, The Global Water Tool and Water Footprint Network Footprint Assessment Tool) to analyse water use, risk and opportunities; 5.3.5 Collaborations or programmes in place with the community or other organisations. 5.4 The percentage reduction or improvement from the base year, in which the base year is the first year against which water management targets are evaluated towards the achievement of the target. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |MEAT, POULTRY & DAIRY |16\n\n[Page 17]\n6The entity shall discuss whether its water management practices result in any additional life cycle effects or trade- offs in its organisation, including trade-offs in land use, energy production and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and why the entity chose these practices despite life cycle trade-offs. FB-MP-140a.3. Number of incidents of non-compliance associated with water quality permits, standards and regulations 1The entity shall disclose the total number of incidents of non-compliance, including violations of a technology- based standard and exceedances of quantity or quality-based standards. 2The scope of disclosure includes incidents governed by applicable jurisdictional statutory permits and regulations, which include the discharge of a hazardous substance, violation of pre-treatment requirements or total maximum daily load (TMDL) exceedances. 3The scope of disclosure shall only include incidents of non-compliance that resulted in a formal enforcement action(s). 3.1 Formal enforcement actions are defined as governmental recognised actions that address a violation or threatened violation of water quantity or quality laws, regulations, policies or orders, and can result in administrative penalty orders, administrative orders and judicial actions, among others. 4Violations shall be disclosed, regardless of their measurement methodology or frequency. These include violations for: 4.1 Continuous discharges, limitations, standards and prohibitions that are generally expressed as maximum daily, weekly and monthly averages; and 4.2 Non-continuous discharges or limitations that are generally expressed in terms of frequency, total mass, maximum rate of discharge and mass or concentration of specified pollutants. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |MEAT, POULTRY & DAIRY |17",
    "new_id": 616
  },
  {
    "id": 60307,
    "question": "Which of the following most accurately reflects a necessary condition for an entity's comprehensive strategy to address climate change impacts on feed sourcing and livestock supply, as described in the Meat, Poultry & Dairy – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The entity must evaluate risks or opportunities across all life cycle phases, including cultivation, transportation, and processing, while excluding GHG emissions strategies.",
      "B": "The entity must prioritize greenhouse gas emission mitigation strategies as part of its primary risk assessment framework.",
      "C": "The entity is required to use global gridded crop models or IPCC research exclusively when developing climate change scenarios.",
      "D": "The entity should focus solely on water availability as the central factor influencing feed and livestock production risks.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "33-34",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Meat, Poultry & Dairy.pdf",
    "source_text": "2.1 The entity shall identify contract producers that withdraw and consume water in locations with High (40–80%) or Extremely High (>80%) Baseline Water Stress as classified by the World Resources Institute ’s (WRI) Water Risk Atlas tool, Aqueduct. FB-MP-440a.3. Discussion of strategy to manage opportunities and risks to feed sourcing and livestock supply presented by climate change 1The entity shall discuss the risks or opportunities presented by climate change scenarios to its feed sourcing and livestock supply. 1.1 Feed-sourcing risks and opportunities include those at the cultivation, milling and other processing and transportation phases of animal feed production. 1.2 Livestock production risks and opportunities include those affecting all life cycle phases of bringing animal protein to market, including breeding, grazing, feedlot, slaughter, processing and distribution/transportation of live animals and processed animal protein products. 2The entity may identify the risks presented by climate change, which may include availability of water, shifts in rangeland quality, disease migration and more frequent extreme weather events. 3The entity may discuss how climate change scenarios will manifest (for example, at the point they will affect the entity’s supply chain), how each type of feed (for example, soybean meal, cornmeal and other grains, or hay) or livestock (for example, beef cattle, dairy cattle, pigs or poultry) may be affected, and how other operating conditions (for example, transportation and logistics or physical infrastructure) will be affected. 4The entity shall discuss efforts to assess and monitor the impacts of climate change and the related strategies to adapt to any risks or recognise any opportunities. 4.1 For feed, strategies may include use of insurance, investments in hedging instruments, supply chain diversification, and ecosystem and biodiversity management. 4.2 For livestock, strategies may include use of insurance, investments in hedging instruments, supply chain diversification, ecosystem and biodiversity management, and development of tolerant livestock breeds. 5The entity may discuss the probability that risks and opportunities will come to fruition, the likely magnitude of the effect on financial results and operating conditions, and the time frame over which such risks and opportunities are expected to manifest. 6The entity may include discussion of the methods or models used to develop the climate change scenario(s) it uses, including the use of global gridded crop models or scientific research provided by governmental and non- governmental organisations (for example, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Climate Scenario Process). 7The scope of disclosure includes the impact of climate change on the entity ’s operations, but it excludes the entity’s strategy and risks and opportunities related to the mitigation of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions generated through its operations (addressed in FB-MP .110a.2). SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |MEAT, POULTRY & DAIRY |33\n\n[Page 34]\n| |34 sasb.org/contact",
    "new_id": 617
  },
  {
    "id": 60310,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why an entity might report a higher total recordable incident rate (TRIR) despite having fewer severe injuries, assuming all other factors remain constant, as described in the Meat, Poultry & Dairy – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "The entity now includes significant injuries diagnosed by licensed professionals, even if they do not result in lost workdays or medical treatment beyond first aid.",
      "A": "The entity has redefined 'first aid' to include more treatments, thus increasing the number of recordable incidents.",
      "C": "The entity has expanded its workforce significantly, leading to a proportional increase in reported hours worked.",
      "D": "The entity has started reporting non-work-related injuries and illnesses as part of its TRIR calculation.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "25-26",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Meat, Poultry & Dairy.pdf",
    "source_text": "3An animal that receives both medically important and not medically important antibiotics shall be included in both percentage calculations. 4The scope includes animal protein from operations that the entity owns and operates, operations with which it contracts animal production (for example, independent producers) and operations that otherwise supply animal protein to the entity (for example, for processing by the entity). SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |MEAT, POULTRY & DAIRY |25\n\n[Page 26]\nWorkforce Health & Safety Topic Summary The Meat, Poultry & Dairy industry has relatively high injury rates compared with other industries given the prevalence of industrial machinery, chemicals, and a fast-paced, loud working environment. Common acute and chronic industrial hazards include musculoskeletal disorders, exposure to chemicals and pathogens, and traumatic injuries from machines and tools. Worker injuries or deaths may result in low worker morale and productivity, and prohibitive legal, financial and reputational risks to the entity. Regulators may levy fines against entities for worker health and safety standard non-compliance or mandate employee training to reduce preventable accidents. By developing a strong safety culture and reducing employees ’ exposure to potentially harmful situations, an entity can safeguard against accidents and proactively improve workforce health and safety. Metrics FB-MP-320a.1. (1) Total recordable incident rate (TRIR) and (2) fatality rate for (a) direct employees and (b) contract employees 1The entity shall disclose its total recordable incident rate (TRIR) for work-related injuries and illnesses. 1.1 An injury or illness is considered a recordable incident if it results in death, days away from work, restricted work or transfer to another job, medical treatment beyond first aid, or loss of consciousness. Additionally, a significant injury or illness diagnosed by a physician or other licensed health care professional is considered a recordable incident, even if it does not result in death, days away from work, restricted work or job transfer, medical treatment beyond first aid or loss of consciousness. 1.1.1 First aid is defined as emergency care or treatment for an ill or injured person before regular medical aid can be provided. 1.1.2 The entity may use applicable jurisdictional criteria for definitions of a recordable incident and a non-recordable incident such as first aid. The entity shall disclose the legal, regulatory or industry framework used as the source for these criteria and definitions. 2The entity shall disclose its fatality rate for work-related fatalities. 3All disclosed rates shall be calculated as: (statistic count × 200,000) / total number of hours worked by all employees in the year reported. 3.1 The ‘200,000’ in the rate calculation represents the total number of hours 100 full-time workers working 40 hours per week for 50 weeks per year can provide annually. 4 The scope of the disclosure includes work-related incidents only. 4.1 Work-related incidents are injuries and illnesses resulting from events or exposures in the work environment. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |MEAT, POULTRY & DAIRY |26",
    "new_id": 618
  },
  {
    "id": 60311,
    "question": "Which scenario would most likely lead to a combination of increased price volatility, supply disruptions, and reduced market opportunities for entities in the meat, poultry, and dairy industries, as described in the Meat, Poultry & Dairy – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Selecting suppliers based solely on cost efficiency without regard to their location's water stress classification or resource management practices.",
      "A": "Prioritizing contracts with producers located in regions classified as having Low Baseline Water Stress while sourcing feed exclusively from regions with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress.",
      "B": "Focusing on suppliers who actively manage resource scarcity risks but sourcing all animal feed from regions with Low Baseline Water Stress.",
      "D": "Engaging contract producers in regions with Moderate Baseline Water Stress while ensuring that less than 10% of animal feed is sourced from High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress areas.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "32",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Meat, Poultry & Dairy.pdf",
    "source_text": "Animal & Feed Sourcing Topic Summary Meat, poultry and dairy entities source animal and animal feed from a range of suppliers depending on animal species. The industry ’s ability to reliably source animals and animal feed at desired price points may be affected by climate change, water scarcity, land management and other resource scarcity considerations. Entities that select and work with suppliers who are less resource-intensive and who actively manage adaptation to climate change and other resource scarcity risks, may reduce price volatility and supply disruptions. Additionally, such entities may improve their brand reputation and develop new market opportunities. Failure to effectively manage sourcing risks may result in higher costs of capital, reduced margins and constrained revenue growth. Metrics FB-MP-440a.1. Percentage of animal feed sourced from regions with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress 1The entity shall disclose the percentage of animal feed sourced from regions with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress. 1.1 Animal feed includes soybean meal, cornmeal and other grains, and other fodder provided to livestock, but excludes forage. 2The scope of disclosure shall include feed grown or manufactured by the entity and feed purchased by the entity. 3The percentage shall be calculated as the weight of animal feed sourced from regions with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress divided by the total weight of animal feed sourced by the entity. 3.1 The entity shall identify animal feed sourced from locations with High (40 –80%) or Extremely High (>80%) Baseline Water Stress as classified by the World Resources Institute ’s (WRI) Water Risk Atlas tool, Aqueduct. FB-MP-440a.2. Percentage of contracts with producers located in regions with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress 1The entity shall disclose the percentage of contracts with producers located in regions with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress. 1.1 A contract producer (or grower) is a party with which the entity has an agreement under which the party typically agrees to provide facilities, labour, utilities and care for livestock owned by the entity in return for payment. 2The percentage shall be calculated as the value of contracts associated with entities located in water-stressed regions divided by the total value of contracts associated with contract production of animal protein. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |MEAT, POULTRY & DAIRY |32",
    "new_id": 619
  },
  {
    "id": 60312,
    "question": "Which scenario best reflects a potential consequence of water management practices as described in the text, assuming an entity fails to address water-related risks effectively in the Meat, Poultry & Dairy – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "An entity faces increased regulatory scrutiny and production limitations due to excessive wastewater discharge in regions with High Baseline Water Stress.",
      "A": "An entity reduces its operational costs by exclusively sourcing freshwater from regions with Low Baseline Water Stress.",
      "B": "An entity avoids all water-related risks by consuming only non-freshwater sources, regardless of regional water scarcity conditions.",
      "C": "An entity relocates its facilities to coastal areas to utilize seawater, thereby eliminating concerns about freshwater consumption and effluent management.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "14",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Meat, Poultry & Dairy.pdf",
    "source_text": "Water Management Topic Summary The Meat, Poultry & Dairy industry is water-intensive both in raising livestock and industrial processing. Additionally, entities in the industry typically generate wastewater or effluent, from both animal production and processing activities. As water scarcity becomes an issue of growing importance because of population growth, increasing consumption per capita, poor water management and climate change, entities in the industry may face higher operational costs or lost revenues because of water shortages or regulations resulting in production reduction. Entities can manage water- related risks and opportunities through capital investments and assessment of facility locations relative to water scarcity risks, improvements to operational efficiency, and partnerships with regulators and communities on issues related to water access and effluent. Metrics FB-MP-140a.1. (1) Total water withdrawn, (2) total water consumed; percentage of each in regions with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress 1The entity shall disclose the amount of water, in thousands of cubic metres, withdrawn from all sources. 1.1 Water sources include surface water (including water from wetlands, rivers, lakes and oceans), groundwater, rainwater collected directly and stored by the entity, and water and wastewater obtained from municipal water supplies, water utilities or other entities. 2The entity may disclose portions of its supply by source if, for example, significant portions of withdrawals are from non-freshwater sources. 2.1 Fresh water may be defined according to the local laws and regulations where the entity operates. If no legal definition exists, fresh water shall be considered to be water that has less than 1,000 parts per million of dissolved solids. 2.2 Water obtained from a water utility in compliance with jurisdictional drinking water regulations can be assumed to meet the definition of fresh water. 3The entity shall disclose the amount of water, in thousands of cubic metres, consumed in its operations. 3.1 Water consumption is defined as: 3.1.1 Water that evaporates during withdrawal, use and discharge 3.1.2 Water that is directly or indirectly incorporated into the entity ’s product or service 3.1.3 Water that does not otherwise return to the same catchment area from which it was withdrawn, such as water returned to another catchment area or the sea SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |MEAT, POULTRY & DAIRY |14",
    "new_id": 620
  },
  {
    "id": 60313,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between regulatory risks, GHG emissions sources, and potential mitigation strategies, as described in the Meat, Poultry & Dairy – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Regulatory risks arise primarily from unregulated methane emissions, which entities could mitigate using technologies that capture animal emissions.",
      "B": "Entities can fully eliminate regulatory risks by offsetting all Scope 1 emissions through carbon credits.",
      "C": "The primary focus of future regulations will likely target fossil fuel usage, making energy efficiency improvements irrelevant for compliance.",
      "D": "Methane emissions during enteric fermentation are negligible compared to other sources, thus posing minimal regulatory risk.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "9",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Meat, Poultry & Dairy.pdf",
    "source_text": "Greenhouse Gas Emissions Topic Summary The Meat, Poultry & Dairy industry generates significant Scope 1 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from both livestock and energy-intensive industrial processes. GHG emissions contribute to climate change and create additional regulatory compliance costs and risks for meat, poultry and dairy entities because of climate change mitigation policies. The majority of the industry ’s emissions stem directly from the animals themselves through the release of methane during enteric fermentation, and from manure storage and processing. The direct emissions from raising and producing livestock represent a significant portion of total GHG emissions released among all sources. Currently, these emissions sources are not regulated widely, which presents uncertainties regarding the future of GHG regulations for the industry. Entities in this industry also use large quantities of fossil fuels to meet energy needs, generating additional direct GHG emissions and increasing exposure to regulatory risks. Future emission regulations could result in additional operating or compliance costs. By implementing new technologies to capture animal emissions and focusing on energy efficiency, entities may mitigate regulatory risk and volatile energy costs while also limiting GHG emissions. Metrics FB-MP-110a.1. Gross global Scope 1 emissions 1The entity shall disclose its gross global Scope 1 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to the atmosphere of the seven GHGs covered under the Kyoto Protocol —carbon dioxide (CO 2), methane (CH 4), nitrous oxide (N 2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), sulphur hexafluoride (SF 6), and nitrogen trifluoride (NF 3). 1.1 Emissions of all GHGs shall be consolidated and disclosed in metric tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalents (CO 2-e), and calculated in accordance with published 100-year time horizon global warming potential (GWP) values. To date, the preferred source for GWP values is the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fifth Assessment Report (2014). 1.2 Gross emissions are GHGs emitted into the atmosphere before accounting for offsets, credits or other similar mechanisms that have reduced or compensated for emissions. 2Scope 1 emissions are defined and shall be calculated according to the methodology contained in The Greenhouse Gas Protocol: A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard (GHG Protocol), Revised Edition, March 2004, published by the World Resources Institute and the World Business Council on Sustainable Development (WRI/WBCSD). 2.1 Acceptable calculation methodologies include those that conform to the GHG Protocol as the base reference, but provide additional guidance, such as industry- or region-specific guidance. Examples may include: 2.1.1 GHG Reporting Guidance for the Aerospace Industry published by the International Aerospace Environmental Group (IAEG); SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |MEAT, POULTRY & DAIRY |9",
    "new_id": 621
  },
  {
    "id": 60347,
    "question": "Which scenario would most likely be considered non-compliant with the energy consumption disclosure requirements outlined in the Drug Retailers – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "An entity discloses total energy consumption in gigajoules while excluding direct fuel usage because it was deemed negligible compared to electricity consumption.",
      "A": "An entity calculates its total energy consumption using higher heating values but excludes self-generated renewable energy from its scope.",
      "C": "An entity reports total energy consumption including purchased electricity and fuel usage, but calculates the percentage of renewable energy based solely on grid electricity purchases paired with RECs.",
      "D": "An entity includes renewable energy produced on-site in its renewable energy percentage but does not explicitly document whether the associated RECs were retained or sold.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "7-8",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Drug Retailers.pdf",
    "source_text": "Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORYUNIT OF MEASURECODE Number of pharmacy locations Quantitative Number HC-DR-000.A Total area of retail space QuantitativeSquare metres (m²)HC-DR-000.B Number of prescriptions filled, percentage for controlled substancesQuantitativeNumber, Percentage (%)HC-DR-000.C Number of pharmacists6Quantitative Number HC-DR-000.D 6Pharmacists are employees who dispense drugs prescribed by physicians and other health practitioners and provide information to patients about medications and their use. Pharmacists may advise physicians and other health practitioners on the selection, dosage, interactions and side effects of medications. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |DRUG RETAILERS |7\n\n[Page 8]\nEnergy Management in Retail Topic Summary Chain drug retailers operate thousands of locations that consume large quantities of energy. Electricity is used primarily for lighting and refrigeration. Many retail locations may operate 24 hours a day, thereby increasing energy demand. Operational energy efficiency and diversification among a range of energy supply sources may mitigate exposure to rising energy costs and limit an entity ’s indirect greenhouse gas emissions. Metrics HC-DR-130a.1. (1) Total energy consumed, (2) percentage grid electricity and (3) percentage renewable 1 The entity shall disclose (1) the total amount of energy it consumed as an aggregate figure, in gigajoules (GJ). 1.1 The scope of energy consumption includes energy from all sources, including energy purchased from external sources and energy produced by the entity itself (self-generated). For example, direct fuel usage, purchased electricity, and heating, cooling and steam energy are all included within the scope of energy consumption. 1.2 The scope of energy consumption includes only energy directly consumed by the entity during the reporting period. 1.3 In calculating energy consumption from fuels and biofuels, the entity shall use higher heating values (HHV), also known as gross calorific values (GCV), which are measured directly or taken from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2The entity shall disclose (2) the percentage of energy it consumed that was supplied from grid electricity. 2.1 The percentage shall be calculated as purchased grid electricity consumption divided by total energy consumption. 3The entity shall disclose (3) the percentage of energy it consumed that was renewable energy. 3.1 Renewable energy is defined as energy from sources that are replenished at a rate greater than or equal to their rate of depletion, such as geothermal, wind, solar, hydro and biomass. 3.2 The percentage shall be calculated as renewable energy consumption divided by total energy consumption. 3.3 The scope of renewable energy includes renewable fuel the entity consumed, renewable energy the entity directly produced and renewable energy the entity purchased, if purchased through a renewable power purchase agreement (PPA) that explicitly includes renewable energy certificates (RECs) or Guarantees of Origin (GOs), a Green ‐e Energy Certified utility or supplier programme, or other green power products that explicitly include RECs or GOs, or for which Green ‐e Energy Certified RECs are paired with grid electricity. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |DRUG RETAILERS |8",
    "new_id": 622
  },
  {
    "id": 60354,
    "question": "Which of the following best reflects a condition under which an entity is NOT required to disclose a data breach according to the definitions and requirements outlined in the Drug Retailers – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "An unauthorized access event that poses no risk of damage to business performance and no economic or social disadvantage to individuals.",
      "A": "An occurrence that jeopardizes the confidentiality of personal health data but does not affect business performance or individual risks.",
      "B": "An intrusion into information systems that compromises the integrity of personal data and affects fewer than 100 customers.",
      "D": "A breach involving technical safeguards where there is reasonable belief that it could harm the entity’s future prospects.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "11",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Drug Retailers.pdf",
    "source_text": "2.3 With respect to retention, the entity may discuss the data or types of data it retains, the duration of retention, and practices used to ensure that data is stored securely. 3The entity shall discuss the systems used to ensure compliance with applicable jurisdictional laws or regulations related to the collection, usage, storage and disposal of personal health data and personal data. 4The entity shall discuss its efforts to ensure compliance in the context of how it implements these three categories of system security: 4.1 administrative safeguards, which are defined as documented, formal policies and procedures to manage the selection and execution of security measures to protect data and manage the conduct of staff in relation to the protection of data; 4.2 physical safeguards, which are defined as the protection of physical computer systems and the buildings holding such systems from natural and environmental hazards and inappropriate intrusion or removal; and 4.3 technical safeguards, which are defined as processes to protect information, authenticate users and control individual access to information. 5Relevant practices to discuss include internal monitoring practices, technology and security programmes to prevent data breaches, training programmes and protocols for employees who handle personal health data or personal data, and disposal methods for paper and electronic personal health data records. 6The entity shall disclose if it employs increased security measures to ensure the security of personal health data, including a discussion of those additional measures. 7The entity should exclude any information that compromises system security or its customers ’ personal health data or personal data. HC-DR-230a.2. (1) Number of data breaches, (2) percentage involving (a) personal data only and (b) personal health data, (3) number of customers affected in each category, (a) personal data only and (b) personal health data 1The entity shall disclose (1) the total number of data breaches identified during the reporting period. 1.1 A data breach is defined as an unauthorised occurrence on, or conducted through, an entity ’s information systems that jeopardises the confidentiality, integrity or availability of an entity ’s information systems or any information contained therein. 1.1.1 Information systems are defined as information resources, owned or used by the entity, including physical or virtual infrastructure controlled by such information resources, or components thereof, organised for the collection, processing, maintenance, use, sharing, dissemination or disposition of an entity ’s information to maintain or support operations. 1.2 The scope of the disclosure excludes occurrences in which an entity has reasonable and supportable belief that the occurrence (i) does not pose a risk of damage to the entity ’s business performance or prospects and (ii) does not pose a risk of economic or social disadvantage to individuals. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |DRUG RETAILERS |11",
    "new_id": 623
  },
  {
    "id": 60355,
    "question": "Which scenario would most likely fall outside the scope of monetary losses as defined by the disclosure requirements in the Drug Retailers – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Legal defense fees incurred during a trial resulting from regulatory enforcement actions related to controlled substances.",
      "A": "A settlement payment made to resolve a civil lawsuit alleging failure to report theft of controlled substances.",
      "B": "A fine imposed by a regulator for non-compliance with jurisdictional drug monitoring program obligations.",
      "C": "Restitution paid as part of a deferred prosecution agreement addressing illegal dispensing of controlled substances.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "17",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Drug Retailers.pdf",
    "source_text": "Management of Controlled Substances Topic Summary Drug Retailers are distributors and sellers of a wide variety of controlled substances. Within this industry, the high volume of drugs processed and dispensed, along with the extensive retail and distribution networks of larger entities, increase the risk of theft, loss and illegal drug dispensing. These actions may result in adverse social externalities, including public health consequences related to drug abuse and the illicit drug trade. Drug Retailers may participate in jurisdictional drug monitoring programmes to mitigate some of the social issues associated with dispensing controlled substances. Furthermore, regulatory enforcement may result in fines and licence suspensions. Strong internal management of controlled substances may mitigate these risks and protect shareholder value in the long term. Metrics HC-DR-260a.2. Total amount of monetary losses as a result of legal proceedings associated with controlled substances 1The entity shall disclose the total amount of monetary losses incurred during the reporting period resulting from legal proceedings associated with controlled substances. 2The legal proceedings shall include any adjudicative proceeding involving the entity, whether before a court, a regulator, an arbitrator or otherwise. 3The losses shall include all monetary liabilities to the opposing party or to others (whether as the result of settlement, verdict after trial or otherwise), including fines and other monetary liabilities incurred during the reporting period because of civil actions (for example, civil judgements or settlements), regulatory proceedings (for example, penalties, disgorgement or restitution) and criminal actions (for example, criminal judgements, penalties or restitution) brought by any entity (for example, governmental, business or individual). 4The scope of monetary losses shall exclude legal and other fees and expenses incurred by the entity in its defence. 5The scope of the disclosure shall include legal proceedings associated with the enforcement of applicable jurisdictional laws or regulations. Note to HC-DR-260a.2 1The entity shall briefly describe the nature (for example, judgement or order issued after trial, settlement, guilty plea, deferred prosecution agreement or non-prosecution agreement) and context (for example, failure to report theft) of all monetary losses resulting from legal proceedings. 2The entity shall describe any corrective actions implemented in response to the legal proceedings. This may include specific changes in operations, management, processes, products, business partners, training or technology. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |DRUG RETAILERS |17",
    "new_id": 624
  },
  {
    "id": 63281,
    "question": "Which of the following best reflects an implicit assumption underlying the prioritization of 'inclusive and sustainable urbanization' (Target 11.3) alongside disaster risk reduction (Target 11.5) and environmental impact mitigation (Target 11.6), according to The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development’s 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) based on The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development’s 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Improving urban resilience and sustainability is likely to indirectly reduce economic losses from disasters while mitigating adverse environmental effects.",
      "B": "Urban areas inherently pose fewer risks to cultural and natural heritage than rural areas, making their protection less urgent.",
      "C": "Disaster risk management is exclusively a national responsibility and does not require integration with urban planning processes.",
      "D": "The environmental impact of cities can be fully mitigated without addressing issues of inclusivity or participatory planning.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "12",
    "ref_doc": "SDG Overview.pdf",
    "source_text": "Goal 11. Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable Target 11.1 By 2030, ensure access for all to adequate, safe and affordable housing and basic services and upgrade slums Target 11.2 By 2030, provide access to safe, affordable, accessible and sustainable transport systems for all, improving road safety, notably by expanding public transport, with special attention to the needs of those in vulnerable situations, women, children, persons with disabilities and older persons Target 11.3 By 2030, enhance inclusive and sustainable urbanization and capacity for participatory, integrated and sustainable human settlement planning and management in all countries Target 11.4 Strengthen efforts to protect and safeguard the world’s cultural and natural heritage Target 11.5 By 2030, significantly reduce the number of deaths and the number of people affected and substantially decrease the direct economic losses relative to global gross domestic product caused by disasters, including water-related disasters , with a focus on protecting the poor and people in vulnerable situations Target 11.6 By 2030, reduce the adverse per capita environmental impact of cities , including by paying special attention to air quality and municipal and other waste management Target 11.7 By 2030, provide universal access to safe, inclusive and accessible, green and public spaces, in particular for women and children, older persons and persons with disabilities Target 11.a Support positive economic, social and environmental links between urban, peri-urban and rural areas by strengthening national and regional development planning Target 11.b By 2020, substantially increase the number of cities and human settlements adopting and implementing integrated policies and plans towards inclusion, resource efficiency, mitigation and adaptation to climate change, resilience to disasters , and develop and implement, in line with the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015– 2030, holistic disaster risk management at all levels Target 11.c Support least developed countries , including through financial and technical assistance, in building sustainable and resilient buildings utilizing local materials",
    "new_id": 625
  },
  {
    "id": 63387,
    "question": "Which of the following represents a necessary but insufficient step toward achieving Goal 1, based on the outlined targets in TRANSFORMING OUR WORLD: THE 2030 AGENDA FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Eradicating extreme poverty globally by ensuring no one lives on less than $1.25 a day by 2030.",
      "A": "Implementing nationally appropriate social protection systems for all by 2030.",
      "C": "Ensuring equal rights to economic resources and access to basic services for men and women in vulnerable situations.",
      "D": "Reducing vulnerability to climate-related extreme events for the poor and those in vulnerable situations.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "19",
    "ref_doc": "SDG Agenda.pdf",
    "source_text": "!!Goal!1.!End!poverty!in!all!its!forms!everywhere!+1.1+By+2030,+eradicate+extreme+poverty+for+all+people+everywhere,+currently+measured+as+people+living+on+less+than+$1.25+a+day++1.2+By+2030,+reduce+at+least+by+half+the+proportion+of+men,+women+and+children+of+all+ages+living+in+poverty+in+all+its+dimensions+according+to+national+definitions++1.3+Implement+ nationally+ appropriate+ social+ protection+ systems+ and+ measures+ for+ all,+including+floors,+and+by+2030+achieve+substantial+coverage+of+the+poor+and+the+vulnerable++1.4+By+2030,+ensure+that+all+men+and+women,+in+particular+the+poor+and+the+vulnerable,+have+equal+rights+to+economic+resources,+as+well+as+access+to+basic+services,+ownership+and+control+over+ land+ and+ other+ forms+ of+ property,+ inheritance,+ natural+ resources,+ appropriate+ new+technology+and+financial+services,+including+microfinance+1.5+By+2030,+build+the+resilience+of+the+poor+and+those+in+vulnerable+situations+and+reduce+their+exposure+and+vulnerability+to+climateJrelated+extreme+events+and+other+economic,+social+and+environmental+shocks+and+disasters+1.a+Ensure+significant+mobilization+of+resources+from+a+variety+of+sources,+including+through+enhanced+development+cooperation,+in+order+to+provide+adequate+and+predictable+means+for+developing+countries,+in+particular+least+developed+countries,+to+implement+programmes+and+policies+to+end+poverty+in+all+its+dimensions+1.b+Create+sound+policy+frameworks+at+the+national,+regional+and+international+levels,+based+on+proJpoor+and+genderJsensitive+development+strategies,+to+support+accelerated+investment+in+poverty+eradication+actions+++!!Goal!2.!End!hunger,!achieve!food!security!and!improved!nutrition!and!promote!sustainable!agriculture!+2.1+By+2030,+end+hunger+and+ensure+access+by+all+people,+in+particular+the+poor+and+people+in+vulnerable+situations,+including+infants,+to+safe,+nutritious+and+sufficient+food+all+year+round++2.2+By+2030,+end+all+forms+of+malnutrition,+including+achieving,+by+2025,+the+internationally+agreed+ targets+ on+ stunting+ and+ wasting+ in+ children+ under+ 5+ years+ of+ age,+ and+ address+ the+nutritional+needs+of+adolescent+girls,+pregnant+and+lactating+women+and+older+persons++2.3+By+2030,+double+the+agricultural+productivity+and+incomes+of+smallJscale+food+producers,+in+particular+women,+indigenous+peoples,+family+farmers,+pastoralists+and+fishers,+including+through+secure+and+equal+access+to+land,+other+productive+resources+and+inputs,+knowledge,+financial+services,+markets+and+opportunities+for+value+addition+and+nonJfarm+employment++2.4+By+ 2030,+ ensure+ sustainable+ food+ production+ systems+ and+ implement+ resilient+agricultural+ practices+ that+ increase+ productivity+ and+ production,+ that+ help+ maintain+ecosystems,+ that+ strengthen+ capacity+ for+ adaptation+ to+ climate+ change,+ extreme+ weather,+drought,+flooding+and+other+disasters+and+that+progressively+improve+land+and+soil+quality++2.5+By+ 2020,+ maintain+ the+ genetic+ diversity+ of+ seeds,+ cultivated+ plants+ and+ farmed+ and+domesticated+animals+and+their+related+wild+species,+including+through+soundly+managed+and+",
    "new_id": 626
  },
  {
    "id": 63464,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the implicit relationship between the roles of national parliaments and the United Nations system in achieving sustainable development as described in TRANSFORMING OUR WORLD: THE 2030 AGENDA FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT",
    "options": {
      "C": "National parliaments ensure accountability through legislation and budget adoption, while the UN system supports sustainability goals through coherence and efficiency.",
      "A": "National parliaments are primarily responsible for ensuring accountability, while the UN system focuses on providing financial resources to developing countries.",
      "B": "The UN system is tasked with enacting legislation and adopting budgets, whereas national parliaments are responsible for norm-setting at the global level.",
      "D": "Both national parliaments and the UN system share equal responsibility for broadening the policy space of developing countries in economic governance.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "15",
    "ref_doc": "SDG Agenda.pdf",
    "source_text": "catalyse+ additional+ resource+ mobilization+ from+ other+ sources,+ public+ and+ private.+ ODA+providers+ reaffirm+ their+ respective+ commitments,+ including+ the+ commitment+ by+ many+developed+countries+to+achieve+the+target+of+0.7+per+cent+of+gross+national+income+for+official+development+assistance+(ODA/GNI)+to+developing+countries+and+0.15+per+cent+to+0.2+per+cent+of+ODA/GNI+to+least+developed+countries.+44.+We+acknowledge+the+importance+for+international+financial+institutions+to+support,+in+line+with+their+mandates,+the+policy+space+of+each+country,+in+particular+developing+countries.+We+ recommit+ to+ broadening+ and+ strengthening+ the+ voice+ and+ participation+ of+ developing+countries+—+including+ African+ countries,+ least+ developed+ countries,+ landlocked+ developing+countries,+ small+ island+ developing+ States+ and+ middleJincome+countries+—+in+ international+economic+decisionJmaking,+normJsetting+and+global+economic+governance.+45.+We+ acknowledge+ also+ the+ essential+ role+ of+ national+ parliaments+ through+ their+enactment+of+legislation+and+adoption+of+budgets+and+their+role+in+ensuring+accountability+for+the+effective+implementation+of+our+commitments.+Governments+and+public+institutions+will+also+ work+ closely+ on+ implementation+ with+ regional+ and+ local+ authorities,+ subregional+institutions,+ international+ institutions,+ academia,+ philanthropic+ organizations,+ volunteer+groups+and+others.+46.+We+ underline+ the+ important+ role+ and+ comparative+ advantage+ of+ an+ adequately+resourced,+relevant,+coherent,+efficient+and+effective+United+Nations+system+in+supporting+the+achievement+ of+ the+ Sustainable+ Development+ Goals+ and+ sustainable+ development.+ While+stressing+the+importance+of+strengthened+national+ownership+and+leadership+at+the+country+level,+we+express+our+support+for+the+ongoing+dialogue+in+the+Economic+and+Social+Council+on+the+longerJterm+positioning+of+the+United+Nations+development+system+in+the+context+of+this+Agenda.++!!FollowDup!and!review!+47.+Our+ Governments+ have+ the+ primary+ responsibility+ for+ followJup+ and+ review,+ at+ the+national,+ regional+ and+ global+ levels,+ in+ relation+ to+ the+ progress+ made+ in+ implementing+ the+Goals+and+targets+over+the+coming+15+years.+To+support+accountability+to+our+citizens,+we+will+provide+for+systematic+followJup+and+review+at+the+various+levels,+as+set+out+in+this+Agenda+and+the+Addis+Ababa+Action+Agenda.+The+highJlevel+political+forum+under+the+auspices+of+the+General+Assembly+and+the+Economic+and+Social+Council+will+have+the+central+role+in+overseeing+followJup+and+review+at+the+global+level.+48.+Indicators+ are+ being+ developed+ to+ assist+ this+ work.+ Quality,+ accessible,+ timely+ and+reliable+disaggregated+data+will+be+needed+to+help+with+the+measurement+of+progress+and+to+ensure+that+no+one+is+left+behind.+Such+data+is+key+to+decisionJmaking.+Data+and+information+from+existing+reporting+mechanisms+should+be+used+where+possible.+We+agree+to+intensify+our+efforts+ to+ strengthen+ statistical+ capacities+ in+ developing+ countries,+ particularly+ African+countries,+ least+ developed+ countries,+ landlocked+ developing+ countries,+ small+ island+developing+States+and+middleJincome+countries.+We+are+committed+to+developing+broader+measures+of+progress+to+complement+gross+domestic+product.++",
    "new_id": 627
  },
  {
    "id": 63466,
    "question": "Which combination of actions would most comprehensively address both biodiversity loss and land degradation as implied by TRANSFORMING OUR WORLD: THE 2030 AGENDA FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Combat desertification, restore degraded land and soil, integrate ecosystem values into national planning, and introduce measures to control invasive alien species.",
      "A": "Implement sustainable forest management globally, halt deforestation, and restore degraded forests by 2020 while ending poaching and trafficking of protected species.",
      "B": "Ensure conservation of mountain ecosystems, reduce habitat degradation, protect threatened species, and mobilize financial resources specifically for biodiversity preservation by 2030.",
      "C": "Promote afforestation and reforestation, prevent introduction of invasive species, increase local community capacity for sustainable livelihoods, and achieve a land degradation-neutral world by 2030.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "29",
    "ref_doc": "SDG Agenda.pdf",
    "source_text": "the+ Sea,+ which+ provides+ the+ legal+ framework+ for+ the+ conservation+ and+ sustainable+ use+ of+oceans+and+their+resources,+as+recalled+in+paragraph+158+of+“The+future+we+want”++!!Goal!15.!Protect,!restore!and!promote!sustainable!use!of!terrestrial!ecosystems,!sustainably!manage!forests,!combat!desertification,!and!halt!and!reverse!land!degradation!and!halt!biodiversity!loss!+15.1+By+ 2020,+ ensure+ the+ conservation,+ restoration+ and+ sustainable+ use+ of+ terrestrial+ and+inland+freshwater+ecosystems+and+their+services,+in+particular+forests,+wetlands,+mountains+and+drylands,+in+line+with+obligations+under+international+agreements++15.2+By+ 2020,+ promote+ the+ implementation+ of+ sustainable+ management+ of+ all+ types+ of+forests,+halt+deforestation,+restore+degraded+forests+and+substantially+increase+afforestation+and+reforestation+globally+15.3+By+2030,+combat+desertification,+restore+degraded+land+and+soil,+including+land+affected+by+desertification,+drought+and+floods,+and+strive+to+achieve+a+land+degradationJneutral+world++15.4+By+2030,+ensure+the+conservation+of+mountain+ecosystems,+including+their+biodiversity,+in+ order+ to+ enhance+ their+ capacity+ to+ provide+ benefits+ that+ are+ essential+ for+ sustainable+development++15.5+Take+urgent+and+significant+action+to+reduce+the+degradation+of+natural+habitats,+halt+the+loss+of+biodiversity+and,+by+2020,+protect+and+prevent+the+extinction+of+threatened+species++15.6+Promote+fair+and+equitable+sharing+of+the+benefits+arising+from+the+utilization+of+genetic+resources+and+promote+appropriate+access+to+such+resources,+as+internationally+agreed+15.7+Take+urgent+action+to+end+poaching+and+trafficking+of+protected+species+of+flora+and+fauna+and+address+both+demand+and+supply+of+illegal+wildlife+products++15.8+By+2020,+introduce+measures+to+prevent+the+introduction+and+significantly+reduce+the+impact+of+invasive+alien+species+on+land+and+water+ecosystems+and+control+or+eradicate+the+priority+species++15.9+By+2020,+integrate+ecosystem+and+biodiversity+values+into+national+and+local+planning,+development+processes,+poverty+reduction+strategies+and+accounts++15.a+Mobilize+and+significantly+increase+financial+resources+from+all+sources+to+conserve+and+sustainably+use+biodiversity+and+ecosystems+15.b+Mobilize+significant+resources+from+all+sources+and+at+all+levels+to+finance+sustainable+forest+management+and+provide+adequate+incentives+to+developing+countries+to+advance+such+management,+including+for+conservation+and+reforestation++15.c+Enhance+ global+ support+ for+ efforts+ to+ combat+ poaching+ and+ trafficking+ of+ protected+species,+ including+ by+ increasing+ the+ capacity+ of+ local+ communities+ to+ pursue+ sustainable+livelihood+opportunities+++",
    "new_id": 628
  },
  {
    "id": 63467,
    "question": "Which of the following represents an accurate synthesis of the text’s stance on achieving sustainable development through health, education, and economic growth in TRANSFORMING OUR WORLD: THE 2030 AGENDA FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Equitable access to quality education and healthcare is presented as foundational to fostering sustainable economic growth and reducing inequality.",
      "B": "Universal health coverage is considered secondary to economic growth, as the text emphasizes productivity over healthcare access.",
      "C": "The text prioritizes immediate eradication of communicable diseases over addressing non-communicable diseases due to their impact on life expectancy.",
      "D": "Sustainable agriculture and fisheries are deemed sufficient for ending hunger without necessitating broader systemic changes such as social protection systems.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "11",
    "ref_doc": "SDG Agenda.pdf",
    "source_text": "including+through+social+protection+systems.+We+are+also+determined+to+end+hunger+and+to+achieve+food+security+as+a+matter+of+priority+and+to+end+all+forms+of+malnutrition.+In+this+regard,+we+reaffirm+the+important+role+and+inclusive+nature+of+the+Committee+on+World+Food+Security+and+ welcome+ the+ Rome+ Declaration+ on+ Nutrition+ and+ the+ Framework+ for+ Action.+ We+ will+devote+ resources+ to+ developing+ rural+ areas+ and+ sustainable+ agriculture+ and+ fisheries,+supporting+smallholder+farmers,+especially+women+farmers,+herders+and+fishers+in+developing+countries,+particularly+least+developed+countries.+25.+We+commit+to+providing+inclusive+and+equitable+quality+education+at+all+levels+—+early+childhood,+ primary,+ secondary,+ tertiary,+ technical+ and+ vocational+ training.+ All+ people,+irrespective+of+sex,+age,+race+or+ethnicity,+and+persons+with+disabilities,+migrants,+indigenous+peoples,+children+and+youth,+especially+those+in+vulnerable+situations,+should+have+access+to+lifeJlong+learning+opportunities+that+help+them+to+acquire+the+knowledge+and+skills+needed+to+exploit+opportunities+and+to+participate+fully+in+society.+We+will+strive+to+provide+children+and+youth+with+a+nurturing+environment+for+the+full+realization+of+their+rights+and+capabilities,+helping+our+countries+to+reap+the+demographic+dividend,+including+through+safe+schools+and+cohesive+communities+and+families.+26.+To+promote+physical+and+mental+health+and+wellJbeing,+and+to+extend+life+expectancy+for+all,+we+must+achieve+universal+health+coverage+and+access+to+quality+health+care.+No+one+must+ be+ left+ behind.+ We+ commit+ to+ accelerating+ the+ progress+ made+ to+ date+ in+ reducing+newborn,+child+and+maternal+mortality+by+ending+all+such+preventable+deaths+before+2030.+We+ are+ committed+ to+ ensuring+ universal+ access+ to+ sexual+ and+ reproductive+ healthJcare+services,+including+for+family+planning,+information+and+education.+We+will+equally+accelerate+the+pace+of+progress+made+in+fighting+malaria,+HIV/AIDS,+tuberculosis,+hepatitis,+Ebola+and+other+communicable+diseases+and+epidemics,+including+by+addressing+growing+antiJmicrobial+resistance+and+the+problem+of+unattended+diseases+affecting+developing+countries.+We+are+committed+ to+ the+ prevention+ and+ treatment+ of+ nonJcommunicable+ diseases,+ including+behavioural,+developmental+and+neurological+disorders,+which+constitute+a+major+challenge+for+sustainable+development.+27.+We+ will+ seek+ to+ build+ strong+ economic+ foundations+ for+ all+ our+ countries.+ Sustained,+inclusive+and+sustainable+economic+growth+is+essential+for+prosperity.+This+will+only+be+possible+if+ wealth+ is+ shared+ and+ income+ inequality+ is+ addressed.+ We+ will+ work+ to+ build+ dynamic,+sustainable,+ innovative+ and+ peopleJcentred+ economies,+ promoting+ youth+ employment+ and+women’s+economic+empowerment,+in+particular,+and+decent+work+for+all.+We+will+eradicate+forced+labour+and+human+trafficking+and+end+child+labour+in+all+its+forms.+All+countries+stand+to+benefit+from+having+a+healthy+and+wellJeducated+workforce+with+the+knowledge+and+skills+needed+for+productive+and+fulfilling+work+and+full+participation+in+society.+We+will+strengthen+the+ productive+ capacities+ of+ least+ developed+ countries+ in+ all+ sectors,+ including+ through+structural+ transformation.+ We+ will+ adopt+ policies+ which+ increase+ productive+ capacities,+productivity+ and+ productive+ employment;+ financial+ inclusion;+ sustainable+ agriculture,+pastoralist+and+fisheries+development;+sustainable+industrial+development;+universal+access+to+ affordable,+ reliable,+ sustainable+ and+ modern+ energy+ services;+ sustainable+ transport+systems;+and+quality+and+resilient+infrastructure.+",
    "new_id": 629
  },
  {
    "id": 63490,
    "question": "According to the Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Working Group III Contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which CDR method's potential risks and trade-offs most directly challenge its scalability as a standalone solution for large-scale carbon removal, based on the interplay between its environmental impacts and land-use dynamics?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS), because of land and water use conflicts at very large scales and potential biodiversity loss from unsustainable biomass harvest.",
      "A": "Afforestation/reforestation, due to risks of wildfire, disease, pests, and competition with biodiversity conservation and food production.",
      "C": "Soil carbon sequestration in croplands and grasslands, since nitrous oxide emissions and challenges in monitoring limit its feasibility.",
      "D": "Direct air carbon capture and storage (DACCS), owing to increased energy and water demands that could indirectly lead to higher emissions.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "128",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 WGIII.pdf",
    "source_text": "115TS Technical SummaryTable TS.7 | Summary of status, costs, potentials, risk and impacts, co-benefits, trade-offs and spillover effects and the role in mitigation pathways for CDR methods {12.3.2, 7.4}. (TRL = technology readiness level.) CDR method Status (TRL) Cost1 (USD tCO 2–1) Mitigation potential1 (GtCO 2 yr –1) Risk and impacts Co-benefits Trade-offs and spillover effects Role in mitigation pathways Section Afforestation/ reforestation 8–9 0–240 0.5–10 Reversal of carbon removal through wildfire, disease, pests may occur. Reduced catchment water yield and lower groundwater level if species and biome are inappropriate. Enhanced employment and local livelihoods, improved biodiversity, improved renewable wood products provision, soil carbon and nutrient cycling. Possibly less pressure on primary forest. Inappropriate deployment at large scale can lead to competition for land with biodiversity conservation and food production.Substantial contribution in IAMs and also in bottom-up sectoral studies. {7.4} Soil carbon sequestration in croplands and grasslands8–9 –45–100 0.6–9.3 Risk of increased nitrous oxide emissions due to higher levels of organic nitrogen in the soil; risk of reversal of carbon sequestration. Improved soil quality, resilience and agricultural productivity. Attempts to increase carbon sequestration potential at the expense of production. Net addition per hectare is very small; hard to monitor.In development – not yet in global mitigation pathways simulated by IAMs in bottom-up studies: with medium contribution. {7.4} Peatland and coastal wetland restoration 8–9 Insufficient data 0.5–2.1 Reversal of carbon removal in drought or future disturbance. Risk of increased CH 4 emissions. Enhanced employment and local livelihoods, increased productivity of fisheries, improved biodiversity, soil carbon and nutrient cycling. Competition for land for food production on some peatlands used for food production. Not in IAMs but some bottom-up studies with medium contribution.{7.4} Agroforestry 8–9 Insufficient data0.3–9.4Risk that some land area lost from food production; requires very high skills. Enhanced employment and local livelihoods, variety of products improved soil quality, more resilient systems. Some trade-off with agricultural crop production, but enhanced biodiversity, and resilience of system.No data from IAMs, but in bottom-up sectoral studies with medium contribution.{7.4} Improved forest management 8–9 Insufficient data0.1–2.1 If improved management is understood as merely intensification involving increased fertiliser use and introduced species, then it could reduce biodiversity and increase eutrophication. In case of sustainable forest management, it leads to enhanced employment and local livelihoods, enhanced biodiversity, improved productivity.If it involves increased fertiliser use and introduced species it could reduce biodiversity and increase eutrophication and upstream GHG emissions. No data from IAMs, but in bottom-up sectoral studies with medium contribution.{7.4} Biochar 6–7 10–345 0.3–6.6 Particulate and GHG emissions from production; biodiversity and carbon stock loss from unsustainable biomass harvest. Increased crop yields and reduced non-CO 2 emissions from soil; and resilience to drought. Environmental impacts associated particulate matter; competition for biomass resource. In development – not yet in global mitigation pathways simulated by IAMs. {7.4} Direct air carbon capture and storage (DACCS) 6 100–300 (84–386) 5–40 Increased energy and water use. Water produced (solid sorbent DAC designs only). Potentially increased emissions from water supply and energy generation. In a few IAMs; DACCS complements other CDR methods. {12.3} Bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS)5–6 15–400 0.5–11 Inappropriate deployment at very large scale leads to additional land and water use to grow biomass feedstock. Biodiversity and carbon stock loss if from unsustainable biomass harvest. Reduction of air pollutants, fuel security, optimal use of residues, additional income, health benefits, and if implemented well, it can enhance biodiversity. Competition for land with biodiversity conservation and food production.Substantial contribution in IAMs and bottom-up sectoral studies. Note – mitigation through avoided GHG emissions resulting from bioenergy use is of the same magnitude as the mitigation from CDR (TS.5.6). {7.4} Enhanced weathering (EW) 3–4 50–200 (24–578) 2–4 (<1–95) Mining imp",
    "new_id": 630
  },
  {
    "id": 63558,
    "question": "Which scenario presents a potential contradiction between the environmental benefits of fuel cell vehicles (FCVs) and their broader ecological impacts, as described in the Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Working Group III Contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Mining platinum group metals for FCVs creates ecological stress that outweighs reductions in criteria air pollutants achieved by FCVs.",
      "A": "The reduction of criteria air pollutants by FCVs is offset by significant increases in water footprint due to upstream energy sources.",
      "B": "The recycling of fuel cell stacks generates additional environmental impacts, which undermines claims of zero tailpipe emissions.",
      "D": "Blue hydrogen production pathways eliminate air pollutants near production sites but increase ecotoxicity and eutrophication risks elsewhere.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "1167",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 WGIII.pdf",
    "source_text": "1154 1154 Chapter 10 Transport10 Environmental-ecological Air pollution Toxic waste, ecotoxicity eutrophication Water quantity and quality Biodiversity Hydrogen FCV for land transport+ ± ± LE Role of contextsFuel cells’ only tailpipe emission is water vapour. However, blue hydrogen production pathways may generate air pollutants near the production sites. Overall, FCV would reduce emissions of criteria air pollutants.Mining of platinum group metals may generate additional stress on the environment, compared to conventional technologies. Furthermore, the recycling of fuel cell stacks can generate additional impacts.May increase or decrease water footprint depending on the upstream energy source.Lack of studies assessing the potential impacts of the technology on biodiversity. Line of sightWang, Q., M. Xue, B. Le Lin, Z. Lei, and Z. Zhang, 2020: Well-to-wheel analysis of energy consumption, greenhouse gas and air pollutants emissions of hydrogen fuel cell vehicle in China. J. Clean. Prod., 275, doi:10.1016/ j.jclepro.2020.123061.Velandia Vargas, J.E. and J.E.A. Seabra, 2021: Fuel-cell technologies for private vehicles in Brazil: Environmental mirage or prospective romance? A comparative life cycle assessment of PEMFC and SOFC light-duty vehicles. Sci. Total Environ., 798, 149265, doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.149265. Bohnes, F .A., J.S. Gregg, and A. Laurent, 2017: Environmental Impacts of Future Urban Deployment of Electric Vehicles: Assessment Framework and Case Study of Copenhagen for 2016–2030. Environ. Sci. Technol., 51(23), 13995–14005, doi:10.1021/acs.est.7b01780. Technological Simplicity Technological scalability Maturity and technology readiness Demand reduction and mode shift+ + + Role of contextsApplication of demand reduction and fuel efficiency measures can be scaled and developing countries can leapfrog to most advanced technology. India skipped Euro V, and implemented Euro VI from IV, but this shift will require investment in the short term.Technology to deliver demand reduction and fuel efficiency is readily available. Significant economic benefit in short and long term. Line of sightVashist, D., N. Kumar, and M. Bindra, 2017: Technical Challenges in Shifting from BS IV to BS-VI Automotive Emissions Norms by 2020 in India: A Review. Arch. Curr. Res. Int., 8(1), 1–8, doi:10.9734/ACRI/2017/33781. DEFRA and DoT, 2020: Clean Air Zone Framework: Principles for setting up Clean Air Zones in England., Department of Environment Food & Rural Affairs/Department of Transport, Government of UK, London, UK, 35 pp. Biofuels for land transport, aviation, and shipping± ± + Role of contextsTypically based on internal combustion engines, similar to fossil fuels, however, may require engine recalibration.Biofuels are scalable and may benefit from economies of scale; potential for scale up of sustainable crop production may be limited.There are many biofuels technologies that are already at commercial scale, while some technologies for advanced biofuels are still under development. Line of sightMawhood, R., E. Gazis, S. de Jong, R. Hoefnagels, and R. Slade, 2016: Production pathways for renewable jet fuel: a review of commercialization status and future prospects. Biofuels, Bioprod. Biorefining, 10, 462–484, doi:10.1002/bbb.1644. Puricelli, S. et al., 2021: A review on biofuels for light-duty vehicles in Europe. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., 137, 110398, doi:10.1016/J.RSER.2020.110398. Ammonia for shipping – ± ± Role of contextsRequires either new engines or retrofits for existing engines. It is likely some ammonia will need to be mixed with a secondary fuel due its relatively low burning velocity and high ignition temperature. This would likely require existing powertrains to be modified to accept dual fuel mixes, including ammonia. Exhaust treatment systems are also required to deal with the release of unburnt ammonia emissions.Ammonia supply chains are well established; transport and storage more feasible than hydrogen; scalability of electrolytic production routes remains a challenge for producing low-GHG ammonia.The production, transport and storage of ammonia is mature based on existing international supply chains. The use of ammonia in ships is still at the early stages of research and development. Further research and development will be required for ammonia to be widely used in shipping, including improving the efficiency of combustion, and treatment of exhaust emissions. Ammonia could also potentially be used in fu",
    "new_id": 631
  },
  {
    "id": 63567,
    "question": "Which factor underlying the challenges to scaling up climate finance is most directly responsible for complicating both the deployment of new technologies and the mitigation of risks associated with stranded assets, according to the Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Working Group III Contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The insufficient attention given to soft costs, upstream funding needs, and R&D for new technologies and business models.",
      "A": "The slow implementation of commitments by countries and stakeholders in the financial sector.",
      "B": "The under-pricing of climate risks in capital markets and limited transparency in disclosure schemes.",
      "C": "The mismatch between capital availability in developed nations and future emissions expected in developing countries.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "148",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 WGIII.pdf",
    "source_text": "135TS Technical SummaryGlobal climate finance is heavily focused on mitigation (more than 90% on average between 2017–2020) (high confidence) {15.4, 15.5}. This is despite the significant economic effects of climate change’s expected physical impacts, and the increasing awareness of these effects on financial stability. To meet the needs for rapid deployment of mitigation options, global mitigation investments are expected to need to increase by the factor of three to six (high confidence). The gaps represent a major challenge for developing countries, especially Least-Developed Countries (LDCs), where flows have to increase by the factor of four to seven for specific sectors such as AFOLU, and for specific groups with limited access to, and high costs of, climate finance (high confidence) (Figure TS.25) {15.4, 15.5}. The actual size of sectoral and regional climate financing gaps is only one component driving the magnitude of the challenge. Financial and economic viability, access to capital markets, appropriate regulatory frameworks, and institutional capacity to attract and facilitate investments and ensure safeguards are decisive to scaling- up funding. Soft costs for regulatory environment and institutional capacity, upstream funding needs as well as R&D and venture capital for development of new technologies and business models are often overlooked despite their critical role to facilitate the deployment of scaled-up climate finance (high confidence). {15.4.1, 15.5.2} The relatively slow implementation of commitments by countries and stakeholders in the financial sector to scale up climate finance reflects neither the urgent need for ambitious climate action, nor the economic rationale for ambitious climate action (high confidence). Delayed climate investments and financing – and limited alignment of investment activity with the Paris Agreement – will result in significant carbon lock-ins, stranded assets, and other additional costs. This will particularly impact urban infrastructure and the energy and transport sectors (high confidence). A common understanding of debt sustainability and debt transparency, including negative implications of deferred climate investments on future GDP , and how stranded assets and resources may be compensated, has not yet been developed (medium confidence). {15.6} There is a mismatch between capital availability in the developed world and the future emissions expected in developing countries (high confidence). This emphasises the need to recognise the explicit and positive social value of global cross-border mitigation financing. A significant push for international climate finance access for vulnerable and poor countries is particularly important given these countries’ high costs of financing, debt stress and the impacts of ongoing climate change (high confidence). {15.2, 15.3.2.3, 15.5.2, 15.6.1, 15.6.7} Innovative financing approaches could help reduce the systemic under-pricing of climate risk in markets and foster demand for investment opportunities aligned with the Paris Agreement goals. Approaches include de-risking investments, robust ‘green’ labelling and disclosure schemes, in addition to a regulatory focus on transparency and reforming international monetary system financial sector regulations (medium confidence). Green bond markets and markets for sustainable finance products have grown significantly since AR5 and the landscape continues to evolve. Underpinning this evolution is investors’ preference for scalable and identifiable low-carbon investment opportunities. These relatively new labelled financial products will help by allowing a smooth integration into existing asset allocation models (high confidence). Green bond markets and markets for sustainable finance products have also increased significantly since AR5, but challenges nevertheless remain, in particular, there are concerns about ‘greenwashing’ and the limited application of these markets to developing countries (high confidence). {15.6.2, 15.6.6} New business models (e.g., pay-as-you-go) can facilitate the aggregation of small-scale financing needs and provide scalable investment opportunities with more attractive risk-return profiles (high confidence). Support and guidance for enhancing transparency can promote capital markets’ climate financing by providing quality information to price climate risks and opportunities. Examples include SDG and environmental, social and governance (ESG) disclosure, scen",
    "new_id": 632
  },
  {
    "id": 63707,
    "question": "According to the Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Working Group III Contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which scenario would most likely result in the highest risk of adverse ecosystem and biodiversity impacts while achieving significant carbon removal by 2050?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Extensive afforestation/reforestation (A/R) using non-native, monoculture species.",
      "B": "Large-scale deployment of BECCS with high land-use competition for biomass production.",
      "C": "Widespread implementation of soil carbon sequestration (SCS) without maintaining proper nutrient stoichiometry.",
      "D": "Aggressive adoption of biochar derived from contaminated biomass sources.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "1287",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 WGIII.pdf",
    "source_text": "1274 1274 Chapter 12 Cross-sectoral Perspectives12BECCS and substituted energy systems (Box 7.7). The mitigation effect of BECCS also depends on how deployment affects land carbon stocks and sink strength (Section 7.4.4). As detailed in Chapter 7, the technical potential for gross removals realised through A/R in 2050 is 0.5–10.1 GtCO 2-eq yr–1, and for improved forest management the potential is 1–2.1 GtCO 2-eq yr–1 (including both CDR and emissions reduction). Technical potential for SCS in 2050 is estimated to be 0.6–9.4 GtCO 2-eq yr–1, for agroforestry it is 0.3–9.4 GtCO 2-eq yr–1, and for biochar it is 0.2–6.6 GtCO 2-eq yr–1. Peatland and coastal wetland restoration have a technical potential of 0.5–2.1 GtCO 2-eq yr–1 in 2050, with an estimated 80% of the potential being CDR. Note that these potentials reflect only biophysical and technological conditions and become reduced when factoring in economic, environmental, socio-cultural and institutional constraints (Table 12.6). Costs: Costs across technologies vary substantially (Smith et al. 2016) and were estimated to be USD15–400 tCO 2–1 for BECSS, USD0–240 tCO 2–1 for A/R, –USD45 to +USD100 tCO 2–1 for SCS and USD10–345 tCO 2–1 for biochar. Fuss et al. (2018) estimated abatement cost ranges for BECCS, A/R, SCS and biochar to be 100–200, 5–50, 0–100, and 30–120 tCO 2-eq−1 respectively, corresponding to 2100 potentials. Ranges for economic potential (<USD100 tCO 2–1) reported in Chapter 7 are 0.5–3.0 GtCO 2 yr–1 (A/R); 0.6–1.9 GtCO 2 yr–1 (improved forest management); 0.7–2.5 GtCO 2 yr–1 (SCS); 0.4–1.1 GtCO 2 yr–1 (agroforestry); 0.3–1.8 GtCO 2 yr–1 (biochar); and 0.2–0.8 GtCO 2 yr–1 (peatland and coastal wetland restoration). Risks, impacts, and co-benefits: a brief summary of risks, impacts and co-benefits is provided here and more detail is provided in Chapter 7 and Section 12.5. A/R and biomass production for BECCS and biochar potentially compete for land, water and other resources, implying possible adverse outcomes for ecosystem health, biodiversity, livelihoods and food security (medium evidence, high agreement) (Smith et al. 2016; Heck et al. 2018; Hurlbert et al. 2019; Mbow et al. 2019) (Chapter 7). SCS requires the addition of nitrogen and phosphorus to maintain stoichiometry of soil organic matter, leading to a potential risk of eutrophication (Fuss et al. 2018). Apart from possible negative effects associated with biomass supply, adverse side effects from biochar are relatively low if the biomass is uncontaminated (Tisserant and Cherubini 2019). Possible climate risks relate to direct and/or indirect land carbon losses (A/R, BECCS, biochar), increased N 2O emissions (BECCS, SCS), saturation and non-permanence of carbon storage (A/R, SCS) (Jia et al. 2019; Smith et al. 2019b) (Chapter 7), and potential CO 2 leakage from deep geological reservoirs (BECCS) (Chapter 6). Land cover change associated with A/R and biomass supply for BECCS and biochar may cause albedo changes that reduce mitigation effectiveness (Fuss et al. 2018; Jia et al. 2019). Potentially unfavourable albedo change resulting from biochar use can be minimised by incorporating biochar into the soil (Fuss et al. 2018) (Chapter 7). Concerning co-benefits, A/R and biomass production for BECCS or biochar could improve soil carbon, nutrient and water cycling (robust evidence, high agreement), and contribute to market opportunities, employment and local livelihoods, economic diversification, energy security, and technology development and transfer (medium evidence, high agreement) (Fuss et al. 2018) (Chapter 7). It may contribute to reduction of other air pollutants, health benefits, and reduced dependency on imported fossil fuels. A/R can improve biodiversity if native and diverse species are used (Fuss et al. 2018). For biochar, additional co-benefits include increased crop yields, reduced drought impacts, and reduced CH 4 and N 2O emissions from soils (Joseph et al., 2021) (Section 7.4.5.2). SCS can improve soil quality and resilience and improve agricultural productivity and food security (Frank et al. 2017; Smith et al. 2019b). Role in mitigation pathways: Biomass use for BECCS in 2050 is 61 EJ yr–1 (13–208 EJ yr–1, 5–95th percentile range) in scenarios limiting warming to 1.5°C (>50%) with no or limited overshoot (C1, excluding traditional energy). This corresponds to 5.3 GtCO 2 yr–1 (1.1–18 GtCO 2 yr–1) CDR, if assuming 28 kg C GJ–1 biomass carbon content and 85% capture rate in BECCS syst",
    "new_id": 633
  },
  {
    "id": 63885,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why the distinction between PCF and ACF matters in understanding urban GHG emissions responsibility, according to the Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Working Group III Contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change?",
    "options": {
      "B": "It identifies whether final demand responsibility is attributed exclusively to city residents or extends to all consumers within the city, including government and capital formation.",
      "A": "It determines whether transboundary supply chain emissions are included or excluded in the overall GHG accounting.",
      "C": "It clarifies the geographic boundaries within which direct emissions are measured, aligning with territorial accounting principles.",
      "D": "It assesses the shared responsibility for emissions reductions between cities and their surrounding rural areas.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "885",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 WGIII.pdf",
    "source_text": "872 872 Chapter 8 Urban Systems and Other Settlements8the past 15 years are interrelated, require different methodological tools, and reflect differing perspectives on emissions responsibility and quantification effort. The second main advance lies in a series of methodological innovations facilitating practical implementation, emissions verification, and scaling-up of the different GHG accounting approaches. This section provides an overview of the most used GHG urban accounting frameworks followed by a review of the advances since AR5. Numerous studies have reviewed urban GHG accounting frameworks and methods with somewhat different nomenclatures and categorical divisions (Lin et al. 2015; Lombardi et al. 2017; Chen et al. 2019b; Arioli et al. 2020; Heinonen et al. 2020; Hachaichi and Baouni 2021; Ramaswami et al. 2021). Furthermore, accounting frameworks are reflected in multiple protocols used by urban practitioners (BSI 2013; Fong et al. 2014; ICLEI 2019b). Synthesis of these reviews and protocols, as well as the many individual methodological studies available, point to four general frameworks of urban GHG accounting: (i) territorial accounting (TA); (ii) community-wide infrastructure supply chain footprinting (CIF); and (iii and iv) consumption-based carbon footprint accounting (CBCF; Wiedmann and Minx 2008). The last, CBCF , can be further divided into accounting with a focus on household or personal consumption (iii: the personal carbon footprint, or PCF); and an approach in which one includes final consumption in an area by all consumers (iv: the areal carbon footprint, or ACF) (Heinonen et al. 2020). A number of small variations to these general categories are found in the literature (Lin et al. 2015; Chen et al. 2020a), but these four general frameworks capture the important distinctive (i.e., policy-relevant) features of urban GHG accounting. All these approaches are foundationally rooted in the concept of urban metabolism, that is, the tracking of material and energy flows into, within, and out of cities (Wolman 1965). These frameworks all aim to quantify urban GHG emissions but reflect different perspectives on where the emission responsibility is allocated in addition to how much and which components of the GHG emissions associated with the import and export of goods and services to and from a city (‘transboundary embedded/embodied GHG emissions’) are included in a given urban emissions account. The four frameworks share some common, overlapping GHG emission quantities and their interrelationships have been defined mathematically (Chavez and Ramaswami 2013). A key advance since AR5 lies in understanding the different GHG accounting frameworks in terms of what they imply for responsibility – shared or otherwise – and what they imply for the depth and breadth of GHG emission reductions. TA focuses on in-city direct emission of GHGs to the atmosphere (e.g., combustion, net ecosystem exchange, methane (CH 4) leakage) within a chosen geographic area (Sovacool and Brown 2010; Gurney et al. 2019). CIF connects essential infrastructure use and demand activities in cities with their production, by combining TA emissions with the transboundary supply chain emissions associated with imported electricity, fuels, food, water, building materials, and waste management services used in cities (Ramaswami et al. 2008; Kennedy et al. 2009; Chavez and Ramaswami 2013).CBCF considers not only the supply-chain-related GHG emissions of key infrastructure, but also emissions associated with all goods and services across a city, often removing emissions associated with goods and services exported from a city (Wiedmann et al. 2016, 2021). The distinction between the PCF and ACF variants of the CBCF is primarily associated with whether the agents responsible for the final demand are confined to only city residents (PCF) or all consumers in a city (ACF), which can include government consumers, capital formation, and other final demand categories (Heinonen et al. 2020). A recent synthesis of these frameworks in the context of a net-zero GHG emissions target suggests that the four frameworks contribute to different aspects of decarbonisation policy and can work together to inform the overall process of decarbonisation (Ramaswami et al. 2021). Furthermore, the relative magnitude of GHG emissions for a given city resulting from the different frameworks is often a reflection of the city’s economic structure as a ‘consumer’ or ‘produce",
    "new_id": 634
  },
  {
    "id": 63917,
    "question": "Which factor is most directly responsible for the limited adoption of ESCO business models despite their potential to mitigate financial risks and provide expertise in energy efficiency projects, according to the Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Working Group III Contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The lack of awareness among financial institutions about energy efficiency benefits.",
      "A": "The absence of stringent regulatory frameworks governing energy codes.",
      "B": "The insufficient involvement of the public sector in transportation infrastructure projects.",
      "D": "The prevalence of asymmetric information and split incentives within firms.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "1582",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 WGIII.pdf",
    "source_text": "1569 Investment and Finance Chapter 1515rather representing an add-on component and consequently requiring the support of decision-makers used to business-as-usual projects. Despite the benefits that improvement of energy efficiency has in contributing to curbing energy consumption, mitigating greenhouse gas emissions, and providing multiple co-benefits (IEA 2014a), investment in energy efficiency is a low priority for firms, and the financial environment is not favourable due to lack of awareness of energy efficiency by financial institutions, existing administrative barriers, lack of expertise to develop projects, asymmetric information, and split incentives (UNEP DTU 2017; Cattaneo 2019). While Energy Service Companies’ (ESCO) business models are expected to facilitate the investment in energy efficiency by sharing a portion of financial risk and providing expertise, there has been limited progress made with ESCO business models, and only slightly over 20% of projects used financing through ESCOs (UNEP DTU 2017). The investment needs and existing challenges differ by sector. Each sector has different characteristics along the arguments listed above making the supply of finance by commercial investors an enabling factor or barrier. In the transport sector, transformation towards green mobility would provide significant co-benefits for human health by reducing transport-related air pollution, so the transport sector cannot achieve such transformation in isolation from other sectors. However, a considerable involvement of the public sector in many transportation infrastructure projects is given, and the absence of a standard solution increases transaction costs (including bidding package, estimating, drawing up a contract, administering the contract, corruption, and so on). Financial constraints, including access to adequate finance, pose a significant challenge in the agriculture sector, especially for SMEs and smallholder farmers. The distortion created by government failure and a lack of effective policies create barriers to financing for agriculture. The inability to manage the impact of the agriculture- related risks, such as seasonality, increases uncertainty in financial management. Moreover, inadequate infrastructure, such as electricity and telecommunication, makes it difficult for financial institutions to reach agricultural SMEs and farmers and increases transaction costs (World Bank 2016). Low economies of scale, low bargaining power, poor connectivity to markets, and information asymmetry also lead to higher transaction costs (Pingali et al. 2019). In the industrial manufacturing and residential sector, gaining energy efficiency remains one of the critical challenges. Investment in achieving energy efficiency encounters some challenges when it may not necessarily generate direct or indirect benefits, such as increase in production capacity or productivity and improvement in product quality. Also, early-stage, high upfront cost and future, stable revenue stream structure suggest the needs for a better enabling environment, such as a robust financial market, awareness of financial institutions, and regulatory frameworks (e.g., stringent building codes, incentives for ESCOs) (IEA 2014a; Barnsley et al. 2015). 15.4.2 Quantitative Assessment of Financing Needs Multiple stakeholders prepare and present quantitative financing needs assessments with methodologies applied to vary significantly representing a major challenge for aggregation of needs (e.g., Osama et al. (2021) for African countries), most of them with a focus on scenarios likely to limit warming to 2°C or lower. The differences relate to the scope of the assessments regarding sectors, regions and periods, top-down versus bottom-up approaches, and methodological issues around boundaries of climate-related investment needs, particularly full vs incremental costs and the exclusion or inclusion of consumer-level investments. Information on investment needs and financing options in NDCs mirrors this challenge and is heavily heterogeneous (Zhang and Pan 2016). In particular, for global approaches, modelling assumptions are often heavily standardised, focusing on technology costs. Only limited global analysis is available on incremental costs and investments, reflecting the reality of developing countries, also considering the interplay with significant infrastructure finance gaps, and can hardly serve as a robust basis for negotiations about internationa",
    "new_id": 635
  },
  {
    "id": 63977,
    "question": "Which scenario best illustrates a potential trade-off between universal electricity access and climate change mitigation, as implied by the Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Working Group III Contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change?",
    "options": {
      "D": "An integrated policy package that prioritizes low-carbon energy but ignores the need for complementary measures like fuel subsidies.",
      "A": "A policy that promotes solar-powered microgrids in rural areas without considering their impact on local biodiversity.",
      "B": "A government initiative that subsidizes fossil fuel-based energy to ensure affordability while aiming to transition to renewables in the future.",
      "C": "The implementation of pro-poor tariffs alongside renewable energy projects to balance affordability and emission reductions.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "1330",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 WGIII.pdf",
    "source_text": "1317 1317 Cross-sectoral Perspectives Chapter 1212planning and cross-sectoral alignment of climate change policies are particularly evident in developing countries’ NDCs pledged under the Paris Agreement, where key priority sectors such as agriculture and energy are closely aligned between the proposed mitigation and adaptation actions in the context of sustainable development and the SDGs. An example is the integration between climate-smart agriculture and low-carbon energy (robust evidence, high agreement) (Antwi-Agyei et al. 2018; England et al. 2018). Yet, there appear to be significant challenges relating to institutional capacity and resources to coordinate and implement such cross-sectoral policy alignment, particularly in developing country contexts (Antwi-Agyei et al. 2018). Another dimension of climate change policy interactions in the literature is related to trade-offs and synergies between climate change mitigation and other societal objectives. For example, in mitigation policies related to energy, trade-offs and synergies between universal electricity access and climate change mitigation would call for complementary policies such as pro-poor tariffs, fuel subsidies, and broadly integrated policy packages (Dagnachew et al. 2018). In agriculture and forestry, research suggests that integrated policy programmes enhance mitigation potentials across the land-use-agriculture-forestry nexus and lead to synergies and positive spillovers (Galik et al. 2019). To maximise synergies and deal with trade-offs in such a cross-sectoral context, evidence- based/informed and holistic policy analysis approaches like nexus approaches and multi-target back-casting approaches that take into account unanticipated outcomes and indirect consequences would be needed (robust evidence, high agreement) (Klausbruckner et al. 2016; Hoff et al. 2019; van der Voorn et al. 2020) (Box 12.6). The consequences of large-scale land-based mitigation for food security, biodiversity (Dasgupta 2021), the state of soil, water resources, and so on can be significant, depending on many factors, such as economic development (including distributional aspects), international trade patterns, agronomic development, diets, land- use governance and policy design, and not least climate change itself (Winchester and Reilly 2015; Fujimori et al. 2018; Hasegawa et al. 2018; Van Meijl et al. 2018). Policies and regulations that address other aspects apart from climate change can indirectly influence the attractiveness of land-based mitigation options. For example, farmers may find it attractive to shift from annual food/feed crops to perennial grasses and short rotation woody crops (suitable for bioenergy) if the previous land uses become increasingly restricted due to impacts on groundwater quality and eutrophication of water bodies (robust evidence, medium agreement) (Sections 12.4 and 12.5). Finally, there are knowledge gaps in the literature particularly in relation to policy scalability and the extent and magnitude of policy interactions when scaling the policy to a level consistent with low GHG emissions pathways such as 2°C and 1.5°C. Box 12.6 | Case Study: Sahara Forest Project in Aqaba, Jordan Nexus framing Shifting to renewable (in particular solar) energy reduces dependency on fossil fuel imports and greenhouse gas emissions, which is crucial for mitigating climate change. Employing renewable energy for desalination of seawater and for cooling of greenhouses in integrated production systems can enhance water availability, increase crop productivity and generate co-products and co-benefits (e.g., algae, fish, dryland restoration, greening of the desert). Nexus opportunities The Sahara Forest project integrated production system uses amply available natural resources, namely solar energy and seawater, for improving water availability and agricultural/biomass production, while simultaneously providing new employment opportunities. Using hydroponic systems and humidity in the air, water needs for food production are 50% lower compared to other greenhouses. Technical and economic nexus solutions Several major technologies are combined in the Sahara Forest Project, namely electricity production through the use of solar power (PV or CSP), freshwater production through seawater desalination using renewable energy, seawater-cooled greenhouses for food production, and outdoor revegetation using run-off from the greenhouses. Stakeholders involved The key stak",
    "new_id": 636
  },
  {
    "id": 64043,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between capacity-building efforts and their role in climate mitigation, as discussed in the Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Working Group III Contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change?",
    "options": {
      "A": "While quantifying the impact of capacity-building on mitigation is challenging, these efforts foster critical connections that may lay groundwork for future emission reductions.",
      "B": "Capacity-building efforts are acknowledged to directly quantify reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, making them essential for achieving mitigation targets.",
      "C": "The Paris Committee on Capacity-building (PCCB) has successfully implemented mechanisms that guarantee measurable mitigation outcomes in developing countries.",
      "D": "Non-governmental organizations have replaced the PCCB as the primary drivers of capacity-building due to the committee's inability to function during global crises like COVID-19.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "1501",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 WGIII.pdf",
    "source_text": "1488 Chapter 14 International Cooperation14capacity in developing countries (Robinson 2018). In an effort to improve capacity-building efforts within the UNFCCC, in 2015, the Paris Committee on Capacity-building (PCCB) was established by the COP decision accompanying the Paris Agreement as the primary body for enhancing capacity-building efforts, including by improving coherence and coordination in capacity-building activities (UNFCCC 2016a, para. 71). The activities of the Committee include the provision of guidance and technical support on climate change training and capacity building, raising awareness and sharing climate information and knowledge. During 2020, the PCCB was able, despite the COVID-19 situation, to hold its fourth meeting, implement and assess its 2017–2020 work plan, and develop and agree on its future roadmap (2021–2024) (UNFCCC Subsidiary Body for Implementation 2020). Non-governmental organisations such as the Coalition on Paris Agreement Capacity-building provide expert input to the PCCB. Quantifying the contribution of capacity-building efforts to climate mitigation is acknowledged to be ‘difficult, if not impossible’ (Hsu et al. 2019a). Nonetheless, such activities ‘may play a valuable role in building a foundation for future reductions’ by providing ‘necessary catalytic linkages between actors’ (Hsu et al. 2019a). 14.4.4 Cooperative Mechanisms and Markets In theory, trading carbon assets can reduce the costs of global climate mitigation, by helping facilitate abatement of greenhouse gases at least-cost locations. This could help countries ratchet up their ambitions more than in a situation without such mechanisms (Mehling et al. 2018), particularly if mechanisms are scaled up from projects and programmes (Michaelowa et al. 2019b). Progress as to developing such mechanisms has however so far been moderate and uneven. Of the three international market-based mechanisms under the 1997 Kyoto Protocol discussed in Section 14.3.2.7, and in previous IPCC reports, only the CDM or a similar mechanism may have a role to play under the Paris Agreement, although the precise terms are yet to be decided. Article 6, also discussed in Section 14.3.2.7, is the main framework to foster enhanced cooperation within the Paris Agreement. Although there is an emerging global landscape of activities based on Article 6 (Greiner et al. 2020), such as the bilateral treaty signed under the framework of Article 6 in October 2020 by Switzerland and Peru, the possibilities of bilateral cooperation are yet to be fully exploited. As discussed above, adequate accounting rules are key to the success of Article 6. Sectoral agreements are also a promising cooperative mechanism, as discussed in Section 14.5.2. In fact, both bilateral and sectoral agreements have the potential to enhance the ambition of the Parties involved and can eventually serve as building blocks towards more comprehensive agreements (Section 14.2.2). A relevant and promising new development is the international linkage of existing regional or national emissions trading systems (ETS). Several ETS are now operational in different jurisdictions, including the EU, Switzerland, China, South Korea, New Zealand, Kazakhstan and several US states and Canadian provinces (Wettestad and Gulbrandsen 2018). More systems are in the pipeline, including Mexico and Thailand (ICAP 2019). The link between the EU and Switzerland entered into force in January 2020 and other linkages are being negotiated. Scholars analyse the potential benefits of these multilateral linkages and demonstrate that these can be significant (Doda et al. 2019; Doda and Taschini 2017). Over time, the linkages of national emissions trading systems can be seen as building blocks to a strategic enlargement of international cooperation (Caparrós and Péreau 2017; Mehling 2019). The World Bank has emerged as an important lynchpin and facilitator of knowledge-building and sharing of lessons about the design and linking of carbon markets, through initiatives such as the Partnership for Market Readiness, Networked Carbon Markets and the Carbon Pricing Leadership Coalition (Wettestad et al. 2021). However, it is important to distinguish between theory and practice. The practice of ETS linking so far demonstrates a few attempts that did not result in linkages due to shifts of governments and political preferences (for instance the process between the EU and Australia, and Ontario withdrawing from the Western Clima",
    "new_id": 637
  },
  {
    "id": 64044,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures a key implication regarding the interaction between digitalisation, sustainable development, and climate change mitigation, as described in the Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Working Group III Contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change?",
    "options": {
      "B": "While digitalisation offers opportunities for energy efficiency, systemic issues such as rebound effects and electronic waste may undermine its contribution to stringent mitigation targets.",
      "A": "Digitalisation inherently reduces energy demand due to its potential for increasing energy efficiency through coordination.",
      "C": "The absence of adequate governance in digitalisation can lead to increased environmental pressures but does not affect social equity or resource distribution.",
      "D": "The digital divide primarily affects developed countries, limiting their ability to leverage digitalisation for climate change mitigation.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "1658",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 WGIII.pdf",
    "source_text": "1645 Innovation, Technology Development and Transfer Chapter 1616 but that countries with limited capabilities might face greater barriers to innovation as a consequence. This enhances the continued need for capacity building. Ideas to improve the alignment of the global IPR regime and address climate change include specific arrangements for least-developed countries, case-by-case decision-making and patent- pooling institutions. {16.2.3.3, 16.5, Box 16.9} Although some initiatives have mobilised investments in developing countries, gaps in innovation cooperation remain, including in the Paris Agreement instruments. These gaps could be filled by enhancing financial support for international technology cooperation, by strengthening cooperative approaches, and by helping build suitable capacity in developing countries across all technological innovation system functions (high confidence). The implementation of current arrangements of international cooperation for technology development and transfer, as well as capacity building, are insufficient to meet climate objectives and contribute to sustainable development. For example, despite building a large market for mitigation technologies in developing countries, the lack of a systemic perspective in the implementation of the Clean Development Mechanism, operational since the mid- 2000s, has only led to some technology transfer, especially to larger developing countries, but limited capacity building and minimal technology development (medium confidence). In the current climate regime, a more systemic approach to innovation cooperation could be introduced by linking technology institutions, such as the Technology Mechanism, and financial actors, such as the financial mechanism. {16.5.3} Countries are exposed to sustainable development challenges in parallel with the challenges that relate to climate change. Addressing both sets of challenges simultaneously presents multiple and recurrent obstacles that systemic approaches to technological change could help resolve, provided they are well managed (high confidence). Obstacles include both entrenched power relations dominated by vested interests that control and benefit from existing technologies, and governance structures that continue to reproduce unsustainable patterns of production and consumption (medium confidence). Studies also highlight the potential for cultural factors to strongly influence the pace and direction of technological change. Sustainable solutions require adoption and mainstreaming of locally novel technologies that can meet local needs, and simultaneously address the SDGs. Acknowledging the systemic nature of technological innovation, which involves many levels of actors, stages of innovation and scales, can lead to new opportunities to shift development pathways towards sustainability. {16.4, 16.5, 16.6} An area where sustainable development, climate change mitigation and technological change interact is digitalisation. Digital technologies can promote large increases in energy efficiency through coordination and an economic shift to services, but they can also greatly increase energy demand because of the energy used in digital devices. System-level rebound effects may also occur (high confidence). Digital devices, including servers, increase pressure on the environment due to the demand for rare metals and end-of-life disposal. The absence of adequate governance in many countries can lead to harsh working conditions and unregulated disposal of electronic waste. Digitalisation also affects firms’ competitiveness, the demand for skills, and the distribution of, and access to, resources. The existing digital divide, especially in developing countries, and the lack of appropriate governance of the digital revolution can hamper the role that digitalisation could play in supporting the achievement of stringent mitigation targets. At present, the understanding of both the direct and indirect impacts of digitalisation on energy use, carbon emissions and potential mitigation, is limited (medium confidence). {Cross-Chapter Box 11 in this chapter, 16.2} Strategies for climate change mitigation can be most effective in accelerating transformative change when actions taken to strengthen one set of enabling conditions also reinforce and strengthen the effectiveness of other enabling conditions (medium confidence). Applying transition or system dynamics to decisions can help policymakers take advantage of such hig",
    "new_id": 638
  },
  {
    "id": 64045,
    "question": "Which statement best captures the relationship between governance, finance, and innovation as enabling conditions for shifting development pathways and accelerating mitigation, according to the Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Working Group III Contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change?",
    "options": {
      "C": "While all three are essential, governance facilitates the adoption of policies that guide finance and innovation, which in turn jointly enable shifts in development pathways and accelerated mitigation.",
      "A": "Governance is the sole critical factor, as it directly creates the policies necessary for both shifting pathways and accelerating mitigation.",
      "B": "Finance is the most immediate priority, as without scaling up financial resources, neither governance nor innovation can effectively contribute to transformation.",
      "D": "Innovation alone drives transformation, with governance and finance playing only supportive roles that have minimal impact on long-term outcomes.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "473",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 WGIII.pdf",
    "source_text": "460 Chapter 4 Mitigation and Development Pathways in the Near to Mid-term4 The literature does not provide a handbook on how to accomplish the above. However, analysis of past experience as well as understanding of how societies function yield insights that the present section aims at presenting. Human history has seen multiple transformation of economies due to path-breaking innovations (Michaelowa et al. 2018), like the transformation of the energy system from traditional biomass to fossil fuels or from steam to electricity (Fouquet 2010, 2016a; Sovacool 2016). Fouquet (2016b) and Smil (2016) argue that even the most rapid global transformations have taken several decades. Enabling transformational change implies to create now the conditions that lead to that transformation (Díaz et al. 2019). The starting point is that there is no single factor determining such a transformation. Rather a range of enabling conditions can combine in a co-evolutionary process. Amongst the conditions that have been cited in the literature are higher levels of innovation, multilevel governance, transformative policy regimes or profound behavioural transformation (Rockström et al. 2017; IPCC 2018a; Geels et al. 2018; Kriegler et al. 2018). It might be possible to put in place some of the above conditions rapidly, while others may take longer, thereby requiring an early start. The present chapter uses the set of enabling conditions identified in the IPCC SR1.5 report, namely policy, governance and institutional capacity, finance, behaviour and lifestyles and innovation and technology (de Coninck et al. 2018). As Figure 4.8 illustrates, public policies are required to foster both accelerating mitigation and shifting development pathways. They are also vital to guide and provide the other enabling conditions (compare Table 4.12). Improved governance and enhanced institutional capacity facilitate the adoption of policies that accelerate mitigation and shift development pathways, with the potential to achieve multiple mitigation and development objectives. Finance is required both to accelerate mitigation and to shift development pathways. Chapter 15 argues that near term actions to shift the financial system over the next decade (2021–2030) are critically important and feasible, and that the immediate post-COVID recovery opens up opportunities to scale up financing from billions to trillions (Mawdsley 2018) (Section 15.6.7). As discussed in Section 4.2.5, accelerated mitigation pathways encompass both rapid deployment of new technologies such as CCS or electric vehicles, as well as changes in consumption patterns: rapid deployment of mitigation technology and behaviour change are thus two enabling conditions to accelerated mitigation. Dynamics of deployment of technologies are relatively well known, pointing to specific, short-term action to accelerate innovation and deployment (Cross-Chapter Box 12 in Chapter 16), whereas dynamics of collective behaviour change is less well understood. Arguably, the latter also facilitates shifting development pathways. Individual enabling conditions are discussed at length in Chapter 5 (behaviour change), 13 (policies, governance and institutional capacity), 15 (finance) and 16 (innovation). The purpose of the discussion below is to draw operational implications from these chapters for action, taking into account the focus of the present Chapter on action at the national level in the near- and mid-term, and its special emphasis on shifting development pathways in addition to accelerated mitigation. The rest of the Section is organised as follows. Policy packages that combine climate and development policies are first discussed (Section 4.4.1.2). The next sections are dedicated to the conditions that facilitate shifts in development pathways and accelerated mitigation: governance and institutions (Section 4.4.1.3), financial resources (Section 4.4.1.4), behaviour change (Section 4.4.1.5) and innovation (Section 4.4.1.6). Four examples of how climate and development policies can be combined to shift pathways and accelerate mitigation are then presented Accelerating mitigationShifting development pathways towards sustainabilityGovernance and institutional capacity Policy packages, including climate and development policies Technology and innovationBehaviour changeFinanceFacilitates Is required for Figure 4.8 | Enabling conditions for accelerating mitigation and shifting development pathways towards sustainab",
    "new_id": 639
  },
  {
    "id": 64046,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes why fostering technological innovation is considered critical for decarbonizing high-emitting sectors, according to the relationships and conditions discussed in the Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Working Group III Contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Because innovation extends beyond technology to include policy, financing, and socio-technical changes that collectively enable shifts in system directionality.",
      "A": "Because rapid deployment of low-carbon technologies alone can fully address emissions without complementary policy or societal changes.",
      "B": "Because digitalization is identified as the sole driver of sustainability transitions, directly replacing the need for traditional climate technologies.",
      "C": "Because grassroots innovators are the primary agents driving the start-up of sustainability transitions, rendering other forms of innovation secondary.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "477",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 WGIII.pdf",
    "source_text": "464 Chapter 4 Mitigation and Development Pathways in the Near to Mid-term4 However, behavioural change not embedded in structural change will contribute little to climate change mitigation, suggesting that behavioural change is not only a function of individual agency but also depends on other enabling factors, such as the provision of infrastructure and institutions (Section 5.4). Successful shifts towards public transport, for example, involve technologies (buses, trams), infrastructure (light rail, dedicated bus lanes), regulations (operational licenses, performance contracts), institutions (new organisations, responsibilities, oversight), and high-enough density, which in turn depends on such choices as housing or planning policies (Section 4.4.1.9). 4.4.1.6 Fostering Technological Innovation As outlined in Section 4.2.5, rapid, large-scale deployment of improved low-carbon technology is a critical component of accelerated mitigation pathways. As part of its key role in technological change, R&D can make a crucial contribution to accelerated mitigation up to 2030 and beyond, among other things by focusing on closing technology gaps that stand in the way of decarbonising today’s high emitting sectors. Such sectors include shipping, trucking, aviation and heavy industries like steel, cement and chemicals. More broadly, it is increasingly clear that digital changes are becoming a key driving force in societal transformation (Tegmark 2017). Digitalisation is not only an ‘instrument’ for resolving sustainability challenges, it is also a fundamental driver of disruptive, multiscalar change (Sachs et al. 2019) that amounts to a shift in development pathway. Information and communication technologies, artificial intelligence, the internet of things, nanotechnologies, biotechnologies, robotics, are not usually categorised as climate technologies, but have a potential impact on GHG emissions (OECD 2017b) (Cross-Chapter Box 11 in Chapter 16). The direction of innovation matters (robust evidence, high agreement). The research community has called for more ‘responsible innovation’ (Pandza and Ellwood 2013), ‘open innovation’ (Rauter et al. 2019), ‘mission-oriented’ innovation (Mazzucato and Semieniuk 2017), ‘holistic innovation’ (Chen et al. 2018b), ‘next-generation innovation policy’ (Kuhlmann and Rip 2018) or ‘transformative innovation’ (Schot and Steinmueller 2018) so that innovation patterns and processes are commensurate to our growing sustainability challenges. There is a growing recognition that new forms of innovation can be harnessed and coupled to climate objectives (Fagerberg et al. 2016; Wang et al. 2018). As such, innovation and socio-technical change can be channelled to intensify mitigation via ‘deliberate acceleration’ (Roberts et al. 2018a) and ‘coalition building’ (Hess 2018). Innovation goes beyond technology. For example, decarbonisation in sectors with long lived capital stock (such as heavy industry, buildings, transport infrastructure) entail technology, policy and financing innovations (Bataille 2020). Similarly, expanding the deployment of photovoltaics can draw upon policies that support specific technical innovations (e.g., to improve photovoltaics efficiency), or innovations in regulatory and market regimes (e.g., net-metering), to innovations in social organisation (e.g., community-ownership). System innovation is a core focus of the transitions literature (Grin et al. 2010; Markard et al. 2012; Geels et al. 2017). Accelerating low-carbon transitions not only involves a shift of system elements but also underlying routines and rules, and hence transitions shift the directionality of innovation. They hence concern the development of a new paradigm or regime that is more focused on solving sustainability challenges that cannot be solved within the dominant regime they substitute (Cross-Chapter Box 12 in Chapter 16). Several studies have pointed at the important possible contributions of grassroots innovators for the start-up of sustainability transitions (Seyfang and Smith 2007; Seyfang et al. 2014; Smith et al. 2016). In particular, a range of studies have shown that users can play a variety of roles in promoting system innovation: shielding, nurturing (including learning, networking and visioning) and empowering the niches in relation to the dominant system and regime (Schot et al. 2016; Randelli and Rocchi 2017; Meelen et al. 2019). More fundamentally, innovation regimes can be led and guided by ",
    "new_id": 640
  },
  {
    "id": 64048,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the implication of reducing the discount rate from 5% to 2% on the cost-effective trajectory for climate mitigation, based on the interplay between economic modeling and equity considerations in the Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Working Group III Contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change?",
    "options": {
      "A": "It would double current efforts, minimize overshoot, decrease reliance on negative emissions, and enhance intergenerational justice.",
      "B": "It would primarily reduce the need for technological innovation by flattening the mitigation curve over time.",
      "C": "It would increase short-term economic damages while disproportionately benefiting high-income countries in the long term.",
      "D": "It would render cost-benefit analyses irrelevant by prioritizing temperature targets over welfare optimization.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "194",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 WGIII.pdf",
    "source_text": "181 Introduction and Framing Chapter 11literature suggests applying risk-free, public, and long-term interest rates when evaluating overall climate strategy (Weitzman 2001; Dasgupta 2008; Arrow et al. 2013; Groom and Hepburn 2017). Expert elicitations indicate values around 2% (majority) to 3% (Drupp et al. 2018). This is lower than in many of the studies reviewed in earlier IPCC assessments, and many IAM studies since, and by increasing the weight accorded to the future would increase current ‘optimal effort’. The US Interagency Working Group on the Social Cost of Carbon used 3% as its central value (IAWG 2016; Li and Pizer 2018; Adler et al. 2017). Individual projects may require specific risk adjustments. Distribution of impacts. The economic damages from climate change at the nationally aggregated and sub-national level are very diverse (Moore et al. 2017; Ricke et al. 2018; Carleton et al. 2020). A ‘global damage function’ necessarily implies aggregating impacts across people and countries with different levels of income, and over generations, a process which obscures the strategic considerations that drive climate policymaking (Keohane and Oppenheimer 2016). Economics acknowledges there is no single, objectively defined ‘social welfare function’ (IPCC 1995, 2014a). This applies also to the distribution of responses: both underline the relevance of equity (next section) and global negotiations to determine national and collective objectives. Obvious limitations arise from these multiple difficulties in assessing an objective, globally acceptable single estimate of climate change damages (e.g., Arrow et al. 2013; Pindyck 2013; Auffhammer 2018; Stern et al. 2021), with some arguing that agreement on a specific value can never be expected (Rosen and Guenther 2015; Pezzey 2018). A new generation of cost-benefits analysis, based on projections of actual observed damages, results in stronger mitigation efforts as optimal (Glanemann et al. 2020; Hänsel et al. 2020). Overall, the combination of improved damage functions with the wider consensus on low discount rates (as well as lower mitigation costs due to innovation) has increasingly yielded ‘optimal’ results from benefit-cost studies in line with the range established in the Paris Agreement (Cross-Working Group Box 1 in Chapter 3). Hybrid cost-benefit approaches that extend the objective of the optimisation beyond traditional welfare, adding some form of temperature targets as in Llavador et al. (2015) and Held (2019) also represent a step in bridging the gap between the two approaches and result in proposed strategies much more in line with those coming from the cost-effectiveness literature. Approaching from the opposite side, cost-effectiveness studies have looked into incorporating benefits from avoided climate damages, to improve the assessment of net costs (Drouet et al. 2021). Cost-benefit IAMs utilise damage functions to derive a social cost of CO2 emissions’ (SCC – the additional cost to society of a pulse of CO 2 emissions). One review considered that ‘the best estimate’ of the optimal (near-term) level ‘still ranges from a few tens to a few hundreds of dollars per ton of carbon’ (Tol 2018), with various recent studies in the hundreds, taking account of risks (Taconet et al. 2019), learning (Ekholm 2018) and distribution (Ricke et al. 2018). In addition to the importance of uncertainty/risk, aggregation, and realistic damage functions as noted, on which some progress has been made, some reviews additionally critique how IAMs represent abatement costs in terms of energy efficiency and innovation (e.g., Farmer et al. 2015; Rosen and Guenther 2015; Keen 2021) (Sections 1.7.3 and 1.7.4). IAMs may better reflect associated ‘rebound’ at system level (Saunders et al. 2021), and inefficient implementation would raise mitigation costs (Homma et al. 2019); conversely, co-benefits – most extensively estimated for air quality, valued at a few tens of USD per tCO 2-eq across 16 studies (Karlsson et al. 2020) – complement global with additional local benefits (Table 1.2). Whereas many of these factors affect primarily cost-benefit evaluation, discounting also determines the cost-effective trajectory: Emmerling et al. (2019) find that, for a remaining budget of 1000 GtCO 2, reducing the discount rate from 5% to 2% would more than double current efforts, limit ‘overshoot’, greatly reduce a late rush to negative emissions, and improve intergenerational justice by more evenl",
    "new_id": 641
  },
  {
    "id": 64049,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the relationship between digitalisation's appeal to consumers and its potential sustainability challenges, as outlined in the Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Working Group III Contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Digitalisation's appeal is rooted in reduced resource use, convenience and control, but its sustainability implications depend on managing long-term energy access, rebound effects and resource-intensive infrastructures.",
      "A": "The primary consumer appeal of digitalisation lies in its ability to reduce energy demands, which directly aligns with long-term sustainability goals.",
      "C": "The relational and social benefits of digital innovations are the main drivers of their adoption, ensuring minimal environmental impact due to shared resource use.",
      "D": "Digitalisation primarily targets vulnerable populations, creating a strong value proposition that inherently supports sustainable development.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "552",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 WGIII.pdf",
    "source_text": "539 Demand, Services and Social Aspects of Mitigation Chapter 555.3.4.1 Digitalisation In the context of service provision, there are numerous opportunities for consumers to buy, subscribe to, adopt, access, install or use digital goods and services (Wilson et al. 2020b). Digitalisation has opened up new possibilities across all domains of consumer activity, from travel and retail to domestic living and energy use. Digital platforms allow surplus resources to be identified, offered, shared, transacted and exchanged (Frenken 2017). Real-time information flows on consumers’ preferences and needs mean service provision can be personalised, differentiated, automated, and optimised (TWI2050 2019). Rapid innovation cycles and software upgrades drive continual improvements in performance and responsiveness to consumer behaviour. These characteristics of digitalisation enable new business models and services that affect both service demand, from shared ride-hailing (ITF 2017a) to smart heating (IEA 2017a), and how services are provisioned, from online farmers’ markets (Richards and Hamilton 2018) to peer-to-peer electricity trading to enable distributed power systems (Morstyn et al. 2018). In many cases, digitalisation provides a ‘radical functionality’ that enables users to do or accomplish something that they could not do before (Nagy et al. 2016). Indeed the consumer appeal of digital innovations varies widely, from choice, convenience, flexibility and control to relational and social benefits (Pettifor and Wilson 2020). Reviewing over 30 digital goods and services for mobility, food buying and domestic living, Wilson et al. (2020b) also found shared elements of appeal across multiple innovations including (i) making use of surplus, (ii) using not owning, (iii) being part of wider networks, and (iv) exerting greater control over service provisioning systems. Digitalisation thus creates a strong value proposition for certain consumer niches. Concurrent diffusion of many digital innovations amplifies their disruptive potential (Schuelke-Leech 2018; Wilson et al. 2019b). Besides basic mobile telephone service for communication, digital innovations have been primarily geared to population groups with high purchasing power, and too little to the needs of poor and vulnerable people. The long-term sustainability implications of digitalised services hinge on four factors: (i) the direct energy demands of connected devices and the digital infrastructures (i.e., data centres and communication networks) that provide necessary computing, storage, and communication services (Section 9.4.6); (ii) the systems-level energy and resource efficiencies that may be gained through the provision of digital services (Wilson et al. 2020b); (iii) the resource, material, and waste management requirements of the billions of ICT devices that comprise the world’s digital systems (Belkhir and Elmeligi 2018; Malmodin and Lundén 2018) and (iv) the magnitude of potential rebound effects or induced energy demands that might unleash unintended and unsustainable demand growth, such as autonomous Past Present EmergingPersonal comput ers Fixed line internet Cellular voice phones Equipment cont rols Energ y management syst emsUbiquitous devices Wireless/mobile internet Smart phones Internet o f things Telework Cryptocurrenci esIndust ry 4.0 Artificial intelligence Autonomous vehicles Distributed manuf acturing Myri ad blockchai n applica tionsInformal and co mmuni ty-based shari ng of clothing, goods, shel terSharing economyCircular economy DigitalisationSuppl y chain tracking 3D-printed structures Smart ma terials Automated disassemblyWaste scavengi ng Loca l repai r/reuse Loca l by-product re cyclin g Post-consu mer recyclin g P2P shari ng of clothing, goods, shel ter Ride-hailing/ ride shari ngRadically shared mobilit y Food shari ng Freight co-l oading Crowd-shippingDigitally enabled transformations Digital waste exchanges Addi tive manuf acturing Advanced process cont rols Failure diagnost ics Just-in-time product ion Decent job opportunities Risk of growth in electricity demand, resource demand, and e-waste Figure 5.11 | The growing nexus between digitalisation, the sharing economy, and the circular economy in service delivery systems. While these trends started mostly independently, rapid digitalisation is creating new synergistic opportunities with systemic potential to improve the quality of jobs, particularly in developing economies. Widespread digital",
    "new_id": 642
  },
  {
    "id": 64050,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why the LEILAC approach, combined with CCS, could represent a critical advancement in decarbonizing cement production, according to the Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Working Group III Contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change?",
    "options": {
      "C": "It enables the capture of process-related emissions in a pure CO2 stream while also supporting potential electrification of the calciner.",
      "A": "It eliminates the need for supplementary cementitious materials by allowing the exclusive use of limestone-based clinkers.",
      "B": "It reduces energy-related emissions by exclusively relying on bioenergy and hydrogen co-burning technologies.",
      "D": "It allows for the complete replacement of Portland cement with magnesium-oxide-based alternatives in all markets.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "1204",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 WGIII.pdf",
    "source_text": "1191 1191 Industry Chapter 1111While 95% Portland cement is common in some markets, it is typically not necessary for all end-use applications, and many markets will add blast furnace slag, coal fly ash, or natural pozzolanic materials to replace cement as supplementary cementitious materials; 71% was the global average clinker content of cement in 2019 (IEA 2020a). All these materials are limited in volume, but a combination of roughly two to three parts ground limestone and one part specially selected, calcined clays can also be used to replace clinker (Fechner and Kray 2012; Lehne and Preston 2018; Habert et al. 2020). Local building codes determine what mixes of cementitious materials are allowed for given uses and would need to be modified to allow these alternative mixtures where appropriate. Ordinary Portland cement process CO 2 emissions cannot be avoided or reduced through the use of non-fossil energy sources. For this reason, CCS technology, which could capture just the process emissions (e.g., the EU LEILAC project, which concentrates the process emissions from the limestone calciner, see following paragraph) or both the energy and process-related CO 2 emissions, is often mentioned as a potentially important element of an ambitious mitigation strategy in the cement sector. Different types of CCS processes can be deployed, including post-combustion technologies such as amine scrubbing and membrane-assisted CO 2-liquefation, oxycombustion in a low-to-zero nitrogen environment (full or partial) to produce a concentrated CO 2 stream for capture and disposal, or calcium-looping (Dean et al. 2011). The IEA puts cement CCS technologies at the technology readiness level (TRL) 6–8 (IEA 2020h). These approaches have different strengths and weaknesses concerning emission abatement potential, primary energy consumption, costs and retrofittability (Hills et al. 2016; Gardarsdottir et al. 2019; Voldsund et al. 2019). Use of biomass energy combined with CCS has the possibility of generating partial negative emissions, with the caveats introduced in Section 11.3.6 (Hepburn et al. 2019). The energy-related emissions of cement production can also be reduced by using bioenergy solids, liquids or gases (TRL 9) (IEA and WBCSD 2018), hydrogen or electricity (TRL 4 according to IEA (2020h)) for generating the high-temperature heat at the calciner – hydrogen and bioenergy co-burning could be complementary due to their respective fast-vs-slow combustion characteristics. In an approach pursued by the LEILAC research project, the calcination process step is carried out in a steel vessel that is heated indirectly using natural gas (Hills et al. 2017). The LEILAC approach makes it possible to capture the process- related emissions in a comparatively pure CO 2 stream, which reduces the energy required for CO 2 capture and purification. This technology (LEILAC in combination with CCS) could reduce total furnace emissions by up to 85% compared with an unabated, fossil fuelled cement plant, depending on the type of energy sources used for heating (Hills et al. 2017). In principle, the LEILAC approach allows the eventual potential electrification of the calciner by electrically heating the steel enclosure instead of using fossil burners. In the long run, if some combination of material efficiency, better mixing and aggregate sizing, cementitious material substitution and 90%+ capture CCS with supplemental bioenergy are not feasible in some regions or at all to achieve near-zero emissions, alternatives to limestone-based ordinary Portland cement may be needed. There are several highly regional alternative chemistries in use that provide partial reductions (Fechner and Kray 2012; Lehne and Preston 2018; Habert et al. 2020), for example, carbonatable calcium silicate clinkers, and there have been pilot projects with magnesium-oxide-based cements, which could be negative emissions. Lower carbon cement chemistries are not nearly as widely available as limestone deposits (Material Economics 2019), and would require new materials testing protocols, codes, pilots and demonstrations. Any substantial changes in cement and concrete material efficiency or production decarbonisation, however, will require comprehensive education and continuing re-education for cement producers, architects, engineers, contractors and small, non-professional users of cements. It will also require changes to building codes, standards, certification, labeling, procurement,",
    "new_id": 643
  },
  {
    "id": 64055,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the relationship between distributive justice and procedural justice in the context of transitioning to a low-carbon economy, as implied by the Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Working Group III Contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Distributive justice involves fairly allocating the costs and benefits of the transition, while procedural justice emphasizes including marginalized voices in decision-making processes to prevent their exclusion.",
      "A": "Distributive justice ensures equitable sharing of transition benefits, while procedural justice guarantees that vulnerable groups' demands are prioritized over economic considerations.",
      "B": "Procedural justice is primarily concerned with redistributing wealth from fossil fuel companies to affected communities, whereas distributive justice focuses on legal frameworks for climate action.",
      "C": "Procedural justice eliminates the influence of powerful fossil fuel companies, ensuring that distributive justice can be achieved without resistance from entrenched interests.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "1759",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 WGIII.pdf",
    "source_text": "1746 Chapter 17 Accelerating the Transition in the Context of Sustainable Development17The transition to a low-carbon development is wired in issues of justice and equity: how do you align carbon reductions to meet the needs of humanity? Distributive justice calls for a fairer sharing of the benefits and burdens of the transition process, while procedural justice is essentially about ensuring that the demands of vulnerable groups are not ignored in the pull to the transition. The impacts of climate change and the mitigation burdens are experienced differently by different social actors, with indigenous communities facing multiple threats and being subjected to unequal power dynamics (Sovacool 2021). Nonetheless, the production of fossil fuels is central to many economies with numerous development implications related to rents associated with export revenues, energy security and poverty alleviation (Lazarus and van Asselt 2018). The central question is: who decides which types of carbon should be burnable or non-burnable? Hence, social equality is at the heart of the transition process, but it falls short of a response on how to chart a new road map towards carbon neutrality, especially given that fossil fuel producers and investors tend to belong to large, powerful companies and wield a great deal of influence and power, especially when their entrenched interests are at stake (Lazarus and van Asselt 2018). The question of whether developing countries should be compensated for foregoing their resources in light of their current development needs has not yielded many results and had only limited success in mobilising international finance, as demonstrated by the case of Yasuni-ITT in Ecuador (Sovacool and Scarpaci 2016). According to (Sovacool et al. 2021), affected communities and their views may be discounted and excluded from planning, which can neglect important matters such as rights, recognition and representation (Sovacool 2021). Fossil fuel-dependent countries are doubly exposed to the vulnerability related to climate change impacts and are being targeted in the global effort to address the problem (Peszko et al. 2020). Countries that are heavily reliant on oil, coal and gas are also those most at risk from a low-carbon transition that may curtail the activities of their fossil fuel industries and render the value chains and economies associated with the exploitation of fossil fuels unviable (Peszko et al. 2020). Developing countries in Latin America and Africa that are reliant on revenue streams from fossil fuels may not see these returns converted into much-needed infrastructure and other social and economic amenities that can reduce poverty. However, given the falling prices of renewables, developing countries do not have to face the burden of retrofitting their infrastructure to align with new low- carbon industries, since they can leapfrog technologies and shape a sustainable trajectory that is more resilient and fit for the future. However, the transition towards a carbon-neutral world is complex and non-linear, and it will likely result in some disruptions, with manifest equality implications, given the scale of the transformation envisaged. There are parallel movements that can be observed. On the one hand, divestment initiatives are underway to move away from carbon-intensive investments. On the other hand, hydrocarbon- rich countries in some parts of the developing world are identifying new opportunities to reduce the fiscal loss associated with the loss of fossil fuel revenues. Indeed, with global investment in energy expected to shrink by 20% in 2021, this has created fiscal challenges for countries that are heavily reliant on fossil fuel products as their main source of revenue. Other disruptions are linked to redundant contracts and postponed or cancelled explorations, as many oil companies are diversifying their production in the wake of the pandemic and are cutting back on planned hydrocarbon investments (Denton et al. 2021). These failed concessions and disruptions have implications for the just transition, especially in developing countries without the financial ability to pull out of fossil fuels and to diversify with the same urgency as the industrialised nations (Peszko et al. 2020). For instance, in South Africa, which is seeking to divest away from coal and decarbonise its energy sector, if the transition is not properly managed, this could lead to a loss in revenue of R1.8 trillion (USD1",
    "new_id": 644
  },
  {
    "id": 64060,
    "question": "Which of the following most accurately reflects a necessary condition for hydrogen-based fuels to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions, considering their production and use as described in the Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Working Group III Contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change?",
    "options": {
      "A": "All processes involved in hydrogen production and conversion into fuels must utilize very low or zero GHG energy carriers, and the carbon source must ensure no net CO2 addition to the atmosphere.",
      "B": "The hydrogen must be sourced exclusively from electrolysis powered by renewable energy, and the carbon in synthetic fuels must come from direct air capture.",
      "C": "Hydrogen production must rely on steam methane reforming with CCS, while synthetic fuels are derived only from biocarbon.",
      "D": "The hydrogen can be produced via any method as long as the resulting fuel is combusted in systems equipped with carbon capture technology.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "1197",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 WGIII.pdf",
    "source_text": "1184 1184 Chapter 11 Industry11transport, heating, industry (e.g., hydrogen-direct reduced iron and steel production) and electricity – hydrogen can be used in its pure form, or be converted to hydrogen-based fuels, including ammonia, or synthetic net zero hydrocarbons and alcohols such as methane or methanol (IEA 2019f). The IEA states that hydrogen could be used to help integrate more renewables, including by enhancing storage options and ‘exporting sunshine and wind’ from places with abundant resources; decarbonise steel, chemicals, trucks, ships and planes; and boost energy security by diversifying the fuel mix and providing flexibility to balance grids (IEA 2019f). Around 70 Mt yr–1 of pure hydrogen is produced today: 76% from natural gas and 23% from coal, resulting in emissions of roughly 830 MtCO 2 yr–1 in 2016/17 (IEA 2019f), or 4.7% of global industrial direct and indirect emissions (waste excluded; Table 11.1). Fuels refining (about 410 MtCO 2 yr–1) and production of ammonia (420 MtCO 2 yr–1) largely dominate its uses. Another 45 Mt hydrogen is being produced along with other gases, on purpose or as by-products, and used as fuel, to make methanol or as a chemical reactant (IEA 2019f). Very low and potentially zero GHG (depending on the energy source) hydrogen can be made via: electrolysis separation of water into hydrogen and oxygen (Glenk and Reichelstein 2019), also known as ‘green H 2’; electrothermal separation of water, as done in some nuclear plants (Bicer and Dincer 2017); partial oxidation of coal or naphtha or steam/auto methane reforming (SMR/ATR) combined with CCS (Leeson et al. 2017), or ‘blue H 2’; methane pyrolysis, where the hydrogen and carbon are separated thermally and the carbon is left as a solid (Abbas and Wan Daud 2010; Ashik et al. 2015), or via biomass gasification (Ericsson 2017), which could be negative emissions if the CO 2 from the gasification process is sequestered. All these processes would in turn need to be run using very low or zero GHG energy carriers for the resulting hydrogen to also be low in GHG emissions. Ammonia production, made from hydrogen and nitrogen using the Haber-Bosch process, is the most voluminous chemical produced from fossil fuels, being used as feedstock for nitrogen fertilisers and explosives, as well as a cleanser, a refrigerant, and for other uses. Most ammonia is made today using methane as the hydrogen feedstock and heat source but has been made using electrolysis- based hydrogen in the past, and there are several announced investments to resume doing so. If ammonia is used as a combustion fuel, care must be taken to avoid N 2O as a GHG and NO x in general as a local air pollutant. Hydrogen can also be combined with low-to-zero net GHG carbon (Section 11.3.6) and oxygen and made into methane, methanol and other potential net zero synthetic hydrocarbons and alcohol energy carriers using methanation, steam reforming and Fischer- Tropsch processes, all of which can provide higher degrees of storable and shippable high-temperature energy using known industrial processes in novel combinations (Bataille et al. 2018a; Davis et al. 2018). If the hydrogen and oxygen is accessed via electrolysis, the terms ‘power-to-fuel’ or ‘e-fuels’ are often used (Ueckerdt et al. 2021). Given their carbon content, if used as fuels, their carbon will eventually be oxidised and emitted as CO 2 to the atmosphere. This makes their net-GHG intensity dependent on the carbon source (Hepburn et al. 2019), with recycled fossil fuels, biocarbon and direct air capture carbon all having very different net-CO 2 impacts – see section 11.3.6 on CCS and CCU for elaboration. Box 11.1 | Hydrogen in Industry The ‘hydrogen economy’ is a long-touted vision for the energy and transport sectors, and one that has gone through hype-cycles since the energy crises in the 1970s (Melton et al. 2016). The widely varying visions of hydrogen futures have mainly been associated with fuel cells in vehicles, small-scale decentralised cogeneration of heat and electricity, and to a certain extent energy storage for electricity (Eames et al. 2006; Syniak and Petrov 2008). However, nearly all hydrogen currently produced is used in industry, mainly for hydrotreating in oil refineries, to produce ammonia, and in other chemical processes, and it is mostly made using fossil fuels. In the context of net zero emissions, new visions are emerging in which hydrogen has a central role to play in decarbonising industry.",
    "new_id": 645
  },
  {
    "id": 64062,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the interplay between sectoral emissions and global net zero CO₂ targets, as described in the Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Working Group III Contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Negative emissions in some sectors at the time of global net zero CO2 are necessary to offset persistent positive emissions from transport, industry, buildings, and non-CO2 GHG sources.",
      "A": "The energy supply sector is projected to reach net zero CO2 emissions later than demand sectors due to slower advancements in carbon capture technologies.",
      "C": "At the point of global net zero CO2 emissions, all sectors are expected to simultaneously achieve net zero emissions without reliance on compensatory reductions elsewhere.",
      "D": "Non-CO2 greenhouse gas emissions are negligible at the time of global net zero CO2, ensuring that residual emissions can be entirely addressed through carbon dioxide removal (CDR).",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "350",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 WGIII.pdf",
    "source_text": "337 Mitigation Pathways Compatible with Long-term Goals Chapter 33 3.4.1.2 Sectoral Emissions Strategies and the Timing of Net Zero Mitigation pathways show differences in the timing of decarbonisation (Figure 3.20) and the timing of net zero (Figure 3.19) across sectors and regions (high confidence); the timing in a given sector depends on the cost of abatement in it, the availability of CDR options, the scenario design, near-term emissions levels, and the amount of non- CO2 abatement (Yeh et al. 2017; Emmerling et al. 2019; Rogelj et al. 2019a,b; Johansson et al. 2020; Azevedo et al. 2021; Ou et al. 2021; van Soest et al. 2021b) (Cross-Chapter Box 3 in this chapter). However, delaying emissions reductions, or more limited emissions reductions in one sector or region, involves compensating reductions in other sectors or regions if warming is to be limited (high confidence) (Price and Keppo 2017; Grubler et al. 2018; Rochedo et al. 2018; van Soest et al. 2021b). At the time of net zero global CO 2 emissions, emissions in some sectors are positive and some negative. In cost-effective mitigation pathways, the energy supply sector typically reaches net zero CO 2 before the economy as a whole, while the demand sectors reach net zero CO 2 later, if at all (Pietzcker et al. 2014; Price and Keppo 2017; Luderer et al. 2018; Rogelj et al. 2018a,b; Méjean et al. 2019; Azevedo 12 Unless otherwise specified, the values in parentheses in Section 3.4 from this point forward indicate the 5–95th percentile range.et al. 2021) (Section 6.7). CO 2 emissions from transport, industry, and buildings are positive, and non-CO 2 GHG emissions are also positive at the time of global net zero CO 2 emissions (Figure 3.20). So, while pathways indicate some flexibility in emissions reductions across sectors, all pathways involve substantial CO 2 emissions reductions in all sectors and regions (high confidence) (Luderer et al. 2018; Rogelj et al. 2018a,b; Méjean et al. 2019; Azevedo et al. 2021). Projected CO 2 emissions reductions between 2019 and 2050 in 1.5°C (>50%) pathways with no or limited overshoot are around 77% for energy demand, with a 5–95% range of 31–96%,12 115% for energy supply (90–167%), and 148% for AFOLU (94–387%). In pathways that limit warming to 2°C (>67%), projected CO 2 emissions are reduced between 2019 and 2050 by around 49% for energy demand, 97% for energy supply, and 136% for AFOLU (Sections 3.4.2–3.4.6). Almost 75% of GHG reductions at the time of net zero GHG are from the energy system, 13% are from AFOLU CO 2, and 13% from non-CO 2 (Figure 3.21). These reductions are achieved through a variety of sectoral strategies, illustrated in Figure 3.21 (Figure 3.21b), and described in Sections 3.4.2 to 3.4.7; the primary strategies include declines in fossil energy, increases in low-carbon energy use, and CDR to address residual emissions. 0100200300400 2025 2050 2075 2100 YearEJ yr–1Building Final Energy Energy Supply CO2 Emissions 0100200300 2025 2050 2075 2100 YearEJ yr–1Transport Final Energy 0100200300400500 2025 2050 2075 2100 YearEJ yr–1Industrial Final Energy 020,000 –20,00040,00060,000 2025 2050 2075 2100 YearMtCO2 yr–1 2025 2050 2075 2100 YearEJ yr–1Biomass Consumption Category Illustrative PathwayC1: limit warming to 1.5°C (>50%) with no or limited overshoot C2: return warming to 1.5°C (>50%) after a high overshoot C3: limit warming to 2°C (>67%) Reference IMP-Neg CurPol IMP-SPModAct 0100200300400 IMP-LD IMP-Ren IMP-GS(a) (b) (c) (d) (e) Figure 3.18 | Indicators of demand and supply-side mitigation in the Illustrative Pathways (lines) and the 5–95% range of Reference, 1.5°C and 2°C scenarios (shaded areas).",
    "new_id": 646
  },
  {
    "id": 64067,
    "question": "Which statement accurately captures the relationship between policy integration and dietary change effectiveness, as implied in the Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Working Group III Contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Integrated policy packages are essential because they address barriers to dietary change by combining multiple types of instruments, which mutually reinforce one another to increase acceptance and effectiveness.",
      "A": "Policy integration is unnecessary for dietary changes, as individual behavioral interventions alone are sufficient to achieve significant environmental and health co-benefits.",
      "B": "Although policy integration across sectors like agriculture, health, and trade is critical, it primarily serves to reduce administrative costs rather than enhance the transformative potential of dietary shifts.",
      "D": "The compartmentalization of policies has no real impact on dietary transformations since technological innovations inherently overcome governance challenges.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "1305",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 WGIII.pdf",
    "source_text": "1292 1292 Chapter 12 Cross-sectoral Perspectives12The trends in the global and national food systems towards a globalisation of food supply chains and increasing dominance of supermarkets and large corporate food processors (Dries et al. 2004; Neven and Reardon 2004; Baker and Friel 2016; Andam et al. 2018; Popkin and Reardon 2018; Reardon et al. 2019; Pereira et al. 2020) have led to environmental, food insecurity and malnutrition problems. Studies therefore call for a transformation of current global and national food systems to solve these problems (Schösler and Boer 2018; McBey et al. 2019; Kugelberg et al. 2021). This has not yet been successful, including due to insufficient coordination between relevant food system policies (Weber et al. 2020) (medium evidence, high agreement). Different elements of food systems are currently governed by separate policy areas that in most countries scarcely interact or cooperate (Termeer et al. 2018; iPES Food 2019). This compartmentalisation makes the identification of synergetic and antagonistic effects difficult and faces the possibility of failure due to unintended and unanticipated negative impacts on other policy areas and consequently lack of agreement and social acceptance (Mylona et al. 2018; Brouwer et al. 2020; Mausch et al. 2020; Hebinck et al. 2021) (Section 12.4.5). This could be overcome through cooperation across several policy areas (Sections 12.6.2 and 13.7), in particular agriculture, nutrition, health, trade, climate and environment, and an inclusive and transparent governance structure (Termeer et al. 2018; Bhunnoo 2019; Diercks et al. 2019; Herrero et al. 2021; iPES Food 2019; Mausch et al. 2020; Kugelberg et al. 2021), making use of potential spillover effects (Kanter et al. 2020; OECD 2021). Transformation of food systems may come from technological, social or institutional innovations that start as niches but can potentially lead to rapid changes, including changes in social conventions (Centola et al. 2018; Benton et al. 2019). Where calories and ruminant animal-source food are consumed in excess of health guidelines, reduction of excess meat (and dairy) consumption is among the most effective measures to mitigate GHG emissions, with a high potential for environment, health, food security, biodiversity, and animal welfare co-benefits (Hedenus et al. 2014; Springmann et al. 2018a; Chai et al. 2019; Chen et al. 2019; Kim et al. 2019; Willett et al. 2019; Semba et al. 2020; Theurl et al. 2020; Hamilton et al. 2021; Stylianou et al. 2021) (robust evidence, high agreement). Dietary changes are relevant for several SDGs, in addition to SDG 13 (climate action), including SDG 2 (zero hunger), SDG 3 (good health and well-being), SDG 6 (clean water and sanitation), SDG 12 (responsible consumption and production), SDG 14 (life below water) and SDG 15 (life on land) (Bruce M et al. 2018; Mbow et al. 2019; Vanham et al. 2019; Herrero et al. 2021) (Section 12.6.1). However, behavioural change towards diets of lower environmental impact and higher nutritional qualities faces barriers both from agricultural producers and consumers (Apostolidis and McLeay 2016; Aiking and de Boer 2018; de Boer et al. 2018; Milford et al. 2019), and requires policy packages that combine informative instruments with behavioural, administrative and/or market-based instruments, and are attentive to the needs of, and engage, all food system stakeholders including civil society networks, and change the food environment (Cornelsen et al. 2015; Kraak et al. 2017; Stoll-Kleemann and Schmidt 2017; El Bilali 2019; iPES Food 2019; Milford et al. 2019; Temme et al. 2020) (Section 12.4.1) (robust evidence, high agreement). Table 12.9 summarises the implications of a range of policy instruments discussed in more detail in the following sub-sections and highlights the benefits of integrated policy packages. Furthermore, Table 12.9 assesses transformative potential, environmental effectiveness, feasibility, distributional effect, cost, and cost-benefits and trade- offs of individual policy instruments, as well as their potential role as part of coherent policy packages. Table 12.9 shows that information and behavioural policy instruments can have significant but small effects in changing diets (robust evidence, medium agreement), but are mutually enforcing and might be essential to lower barriers and increase acceptance of market-based and administrative instruments (medium evidence, high agreement). ",
    "new_id": 647
  },
  {
    "id": 64068,
    "question": "Which statement accurately captures the relationship between delayed mitigation action and its broader implications, as discussed in the Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Working Group III Contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Delaying mitigation leads to significant carbon lock-in, disproportionately increasing stranded assets and cumulative emissions post-2030 while exacerbating societal and economic strain.",
      "A": "Delayed mitigation primarily increases transitional macro-economic costs due to higher carbon pricing but has negligible effects on asset stranding.",
      "B": "The abrupt transitions required after 2030 under delayed action pathways are less disruptive than gradual transitions because they align better with cost-effective strategies.",
      "C": "Stranded assets caused by physical impacts of climate change outweigh those from delayed mitigation policies, making early action irrelevant.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "369",
    "ref_doc": "IPCC AR6 WGIII.pdf",
    "source_text": "356 Chapter 3 Mitigation Pathways Compatible with Long-term Goals3 2019; SEI et al. 2020). Pathways following NDCs announced prior to COP26 until 2030 do not show a significant reduction of coal, oil and gas use (Figure 3.30f–h and Table 3.6) compared to immediate action pathways. Stranded coal power assets are evaluated to be higher by a factor of two to three if action is strengthened after 2030 rather than now (Iyer et al. 2015b; Cui et al. 2019). There is high agreement that the later climate policies are implemented, the higher the expected stranded assets and the societal, economic and political strain of strengthening action. Associated price increases for carbon- intensive goods and transitional macro-economic costs have been found to scale with the emissions gap in 2030 (Kriegler et al. 2013a). At the aggregate level of the whole global economy, Rozenberg et al. (2015) showed that each year of delaying the start of mitigation decreases the required CO 2 intensity of new production by 20–50 gCO 2 per USD. Carbon lock-in can have a long-lasting effect on future emissions trajectories after 2030. Luderer et al. (2018) compared cost-effective pathways with immediate action to limit warming to 1.5°C–2°C with pathways following the NDCs until 2030 and adopting the pricing policy of the cost-effective pathways thereafter, and found that the majority of additional CO 2 emissions from carbon lock-in occur after 2030, reaching a cumulative amount of 290 (160– 330) GtCO 2 by 2100 (Section 2.7.2). Early action and avoidance of investments in new carbon-intensive assets can minimise these risks. The risk of stranded assets has implications for workers depending on those assets, asset owners, assets portfolio managers, financial institutions and the stability of the financial system. Chapter 6 assesses the risks and implications of stranded assets for energy systems (Section 6.7.3 and Box 6.11) and fossil fuels (Section 6.7.4). The implications of stranded assets for inequality and Just Transition are assessed in Chapter 17 (Section 17.3.2.3). Chapter 15 assesses the literature on those implications for the financial system as well as on coping options (Sections 15.5.2 and 15.6.1). On the other hand, mitigation, by limiting climate change, reduces the risk of destroyed or stranded assets from the physical impacts of climate change on natural and human systems, from more frequent, intense or extended extreme events and from sea level rise (O’Neill et al. 2020a). The literature on mitigation pathways rarely includes an evaluation of stranded assets from climate change impacts. Unruh (2019) suggest that these are the real stranded assets of carbon lock- in and could prove much more costly. 3.5.3 Global Accelerated Action Towards Long-term Climate Goals A growing literature explores long-term mitigation pathways with accelerated near-term action going beyond the NDCs (Graichen et al. 2017; Jiang et al. 2017; Kriegler et al. 2018a; Roelfsema et al. 2018; Fekete et al. 2021; van Soest et al. 2021a). Global accelerated action pathways are designed to transition more gradually from implemented policies and planned implementation of NDCs onto a 1.5°C–2°C pathway and at the same time alleviate the abrupt transition in 2030 that would be caused by following the NDCs until 2030 and strengthening towards limiting warming to 2°C thereafter (Section 3.5.2). Therefore, they have sometimes been called bridging scenarios/pathways in the literature (IEA 2011; Spencer et al. 2015; van Soest et al. 2021a). They rely on regionally differentiated regulatory and pricing policies to gradually strengthening regional and sectoral action beyond the mitigation ambition in the NDCs. There are limitations to this approach. The tighter the warming limit, the more likely it is that disruptive action becomes inevitable to achieve the speed of transition that would be required (Kriegler et al. 2018a). Cost-effective pathways already have abrupt shifts in deployments, investments and prices at the time a stringent warming limit is imposed, reflecting the fact that the overall response to climate change has so far been misaligned with long-term climate goals (Fawcett et al. 2015; Rogelj et al. 2016; Schleussner et al. 2016b; Geiges et al. 2020). Disruptive action can help to break lock-ins and enable transformative change (Vogt-Schilb et al. 2018). The large literature on accelerating climate action was assessed in the IPCC Special Report on Global Warming o",
    "new_id": 648
  },
  {
    "id": 64592,
    "question": "Which scenario would violate the disclosure requirements for an entity with a net greenhouse gas emissions target, as outlined in IFRS S2?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The entity provides detailed information about carbon credits it has purchased and plans to use, without mentioning its gross greenhouse gas emissions target.",
      "B": "The entity discloses its gross greenhouse gas emissions target but does not specify how carbon credits contribute to achieving its net target.",
      "C": "The entity describes its planned use of carbon credits in achieving its net target while also disclosing its gross greenhouse gas emissions target.",
      "D": "The entity uses industry-based metrics to measure progress toward its net target and discloses both absolute and intensity targets.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "42-43",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2.pdf",
    "source_text": "Climate-related targets (paragraphs 33 –37) Characteristics of a climate-related target Paragraph 33 requires an entity to disclose the quantitative or qualitative climate-related targets it has set, and any it is required to meet by law or regulation, including any greenhouse gas emissions targets. In disclosing these climate-related targets, the entity is required to disclose information about the characteristics of these targets as described in paragraph 33(a) –(h). If the climate-related target is quantitative, an entity is required to describe whether the target is an absolute target or an intensity target. An absolute target is defined as a total amount of a measure or a change in the total amount of a measure, whereas an intensity target is defined as a ratio of a measure, or a change in the ratio of a measure, to a business metric. In identifying and disclosing the metric used to set a climate-related target and measure progress, an entity shall consider the cross-industry metrics and industry-based metrics. If the metric has been developed by the entity to measure progress towards a target, the entity shall disclose information about that metric in accordance with paragraph 50 of IFRS S1. Greenhouse gas emissions targets Gross and net greenhouse gas emissions targets If an entity has a greenhouse gas emissions target, the entity is required to specify whether the target is a gross greenhouse gas emissions target or a net greenhouse gas emissions target. Gross greenhouse gas emissions targets reflect the total changes in greenhouse gas emissions planned within the entity’s value chain. Net greenhouse gas emissions targets are the entity ’s targeted gross greenhouse gas emissions minus any planned offsetting efforts (for example, the entity ’s planned use of carbon credits to offset its greenhouse gas emissions). Paragraph 36(c) specifies that if an entity has a net greenhouse gas emissions target it is required to also disclose a gross greenhouse gas emissions target. For the avoidance of doubt, if the entity discloses a net greenhouse gas emissions target, this target cannot obscure information about its gross greenhouse gas emissions targets. Carbon credits Paragraph 36(e) requires an entity to describe its planned use of carbon credits —which are transferable or tradeable instruments —to offset emissions to achieve any net greenhouse gas emissions targets the entity has set, or any it is required to meet by law or regulation. Any information about the planned use of carbon credits shall clearly demonstrate the extent to which these carbon credits are relied on to achieve the net greenhouse gas emissions targets.B66 B67 B68 B69 B70IFRS SUSTAINABILITY DISCLOSURE STANDARDS © IFRS Foundation 41\n\n[Page 43]\nIn accordance with paragraph 36(e), an entity is required to disclose only its planned use of carbon credits. However, as part of this disclosure, the entity might also include information about carbon credits it has already purchased that the entity is planning to use to meet its net greenhouse gas emissions target, if the information enables users of general purpose financial reports to understand the entity ’s greenhouse gas emissions target.B71IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES —JUNE 2023 42 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 649
  },
  {
    "id": 64596,
    "question": "Which of the following best reflects the implicit relationship between the ISSB's disclaimer and its approach to regulating corporate use of IFRS S2?",
    "options": {
      "B": "The disclaimer underscores the ISSB’s non-liability for misuse while maintaining strict control over commercial applications of the standards.",
      "A": "The disclaimer ensures that companies can freely adapt the standards without legal repercussions from the ISSB.",
      "C": "The disclaimer absolves the ISSB of responsibility for advice given by third-party professionals using the standards.",
      "D": "The disclaimer indicates that companies are encouraged to independently interpret the standards without professional consultation.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "3-4",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2.pdf",
    "source_text": "IFRS S2 Climate-related Disclosures together with its accompanying documents is issued by the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB). Disclaimer: To the extent permitted by applicable law, the ISSB and the IFRS Foundation (Foundation) expressly disclaim all liability howsoever arising from this publication or any translation thereof whether in contract, tort or otherwise to any person in respect of any claims or losses of any nature including direct, indirect, incidental or consequential loss, punitive damages, penalties or costs. Information contained in this publication does not constitute advice and should not be substituted for the services of an appropriately qualified professional. © IFRS Foundation 2023 Reproduction and use rights are strictly limited to personal non-commercial use, such as corporate disclosure. Any other use, such as – but not limited to – reporting software, investment analysis, data services and product development is not permitted without written consent. Please contact the Foundation for further details at sustainability_licensing@ifrs.org. All rights reserved. The Foundation has trade marks registered around the world (Marks) including ‘IAS®’, ‘IASB®’, the IASB® logo, ‘IFRIC®’, ‘IFRS®’, the IFRS® logo, ‘IFRS for SMEs®’, the IFRS for SMEs® logo, ‘International Accounting Standards®’, ‘International Financial Reporting Standards®’, the ‘Hexagon Device ’, ‘NIIF®’, ‘SIC®’ and SASB®. Further details of the Foundation ’s Marks are available from the Foundation on request. The Foundation is a not-for-profit corporation under the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware, USA and operates in England and Wales as an overseas company (Company number: FC023235) with its principal office in the Columbus Building, 7 Westferry Circus, Canary Wharf, London, E14 4HD.\n\n[Page 4]\nCONTENTS from paragraph IFRS SUSTAINABILITY DISCLOSURE STANDARD S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES OBJECTIVE 1 SCOPE 3 CORE CONTENT 5 Governance 5 Strategy 8 Risk management 24 Metrics and targets 27 APPENDICES A Defined terms B Application guidance C Effective date and transition APPROVAL BY THE ISSB OF IFRS S2 ISSUED IN JUNE 2023 FOR THE ACCOMPANYING GUIDANCE LISTED BELOW, SEE PART B OF THIS EDITION ILLUSTRATIVE GUIDANCE ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLES INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE ON IMPLEMENTING IFRS S2 FOR THE BASIS FOR CONCLUSIONS, SEE PART C OF THIS EDITION BASIS FOR CONCLUSIONSIFRS SUSTAINABILITY DISCLOSURE STANDARDS © IFRS Foundation 3",
    "new_id": 650
  },
  {
    "id": 64608,
    "question": "Under which condition would an entity be exempt from disclosing its Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions despite jurisdictional requirements to report on specific parts of its emissions, as outlined in IFRS S2?",
    "options": {
      "C": "If the jurisdiction mandates reporting only for Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions.",
      "A": "If the entity is listed on an exchange that requires a different measurement method excluding Scope 3 emissions.",
      "B": "If the entity chooses to follow the Greenhouse Gas Protocol exclusively for all scopes of emissions.",
      "D": "If the jurisdiction explicitly exempts Scope 3 emissions from mandatory disclosure.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "31",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2.pdf",
    "source_text": "converted into CO 2 equivalent values, then the entity shall use the global warming potential values based on a 100-year time horizon from the latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change assessment available at the reporting date. Greenhouse Gas Protocol Paragraph 29(a)(ii) requires an entity to disclose its greenhouse gas emissions measured in accordance with the Greenhouse Gas Protocol: A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard (2004). For the avoidance of doubt, an entity shall apply the requirements in the Greenhouse Gas Protocol: A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard (2004) only to the extent that they do not conflict with the requirements in this Standard. For example, the Greenhouse Gas Protocol: A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard (2004) does not require an entity to disclose its Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions, however, the entity is required to disclose Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions in accordance with paragraph 29(a). An entity is required to use the Greenhouse Gas Protocol: A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard (2004) unless the entity is required by a jurisdictional authority or an exchange on which it is listed to use a different method for measuring its greenhouse gas emissions. If the entity is required by a jurisdictional authority or an exchange on which it is listed to use a different method for measuring its greenhouse gas emissions, the entity is permitted to use this method rather than using the Greenhouse Gas Protocol: A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard (2004) for as long as the jurisdictional or exchange requirement applies to the entity. In some circumstances, an entity might be subject to a requirement in the jurisdiction in which it operates to disclose its greenhouse gas emissions for a specific part of the entity or for some of its greenhouse gas emissions (for example, only for Scope 1 and Scope 2 greenhouse gas emissions). In such circumstances, the jurisdictional requirement does not exempt the entity from applying the requirements in this Standard to disclose the entity ’s Scope 1, Scope 2 and Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions for the entity as a whole. Measurement approach, inputs and assumptions Paragraph 29(a)(iii) requires an entity to disclose the measurement approach, inputs and assumptions it uses to measure its greenhouse gas emissions. As part of this requirement, the entity shall include information about: (a) the measurement approach the entity uses in accordance with the Greenhouse Gas Protocol: A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard (2004) (see paragraph B27); (b) the applicable method if the entity is not using the Greenhouse Gas Protocol: A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard (2004) and the measurement approach the entity uses (see paragraph B28); and (c) the emission factors the entity uses (see paragraph B29).B23 B24 B25 B26IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES —JUNE 2023 30 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 651
  },
  {
    "id": 64612,
    "question": "Under which circumstance would an entity be required to provide explanatory justification for omitting quantitative information about climate-related risks or opportunities, as outlined in IFRS S2?",
    "options": {
      "D": "When the entity lacks sufficient skills, capabilities, or resources to produce the quantitative information.",
      "A": "When the effects of such risks or opportunities are deemed separately identifiable but not material.",
      "B": "When measurement uncertainty is negligible but the data remains inaccessible without undue cost or effort.",
      "C": "When all reasonable and supportable information has been utilized yet fails to yield a precise estimate.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "11",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2.pdf",
    "source_text": "(c) how the entity expects its financial position to change over the short, medium and long term, given its strategy to manage climate-related risks and opportunities, taking into consideration: (i) its investment and disposal plans (for example, plans for capital expenditure, major acquisitions and divestments, joint ventures, business transformation, innovation, new business areas, and asset retirements), including plans the entity is not contractually committed to; and (ii) its planned sources of funding to implement its strategy; and (d) how the entity expects its financial performance and cash flows to change over the short, medium and long term, given its strategy to manage climate-related risks and opportunities (for example, increased revenue from products and services aligned with a lower-carbon economy; costs arising from physical damage to assets from climate events; and expenses associated with climate adaptation or mitigation). In providing quantitative information, an entity may disclose a single amount or a range. In preparing disclosures about the anticipated financial effects of a climate- related risk or opportunity, an entity shall: (a) use all reasonable and supportable information that is available to the entity at the reporting date without undue cost or effort; and (b) use an approach that is commensurate with the skills, capabilities and resources that are available to the entity for preparing those disclosures. An entity need not provide quantitative information about the current or anticipated financial effects of a climate-related risk or opportunity if the entity determines that: (a) those effects are not separately identifiable; or (b) the level of measurement uncertainty involved in estimating those effects is so high that the resulting quantitative information would not be useful. In addition, an entity need not provide quantitative information about the anticipated financial effects of a climate-related risk or opportunity if the entity does not have the skills, capabilities or resources to provide that quantitative information. If an entity determines that it need not provide quantitative information about the current or anticipated financial effects of a climate-related risk or opportunity applying the criteria set out in paragraphs 19 –20, the entity shall: (a) explain why it has not provided quantitative information;17 18 19 20 21IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES —JUNE 2023 10 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 652
  },
  {
    "id": 64614,
    "question": "When disclosing information about the planned use of carbon credits, which of the following is NOT explicitly required to be disclosed by an entity, as outlined in IFRS S2?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The exact monetary value of the carbon credits planned for use in achieving net greenhouse gas emissions targets.",
      "B": "The permanence assumptions related to the carbon offset underlying the carbon credits.",
      "C": "The specific third-party schemes that will verify or certify the carbon credits.",
      "D": "Whether the underlying offset is achieved through carbon reduction or removal.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "18-19",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2.pdf",
    "source_text": "(h) how the latest international agreement on climate change, including jurisdictional commitments that arise from that agreement, has informed the target. An entity shall disclose information about its approach to setting and reviewing each target, and how it monitors progress against each target, including: (a) whether the target and the methodology for setting the target has been validated by a third party; (b) the entity ’s processes for reviewing the target; (c) the metrics used to monitor progress towards reaching the target; and (d) any revisions to the target and an explanation for those revisions. An entity shall disclose information about its performance against each climate-related target and an analysis of trends or changes in the entity ’s performance. For each greenhouse gas emissions target disclosed in accordance with paragraphs 33 –35, an entity shall disclose: (a) which greenhouse gases are covered by the target. (b) whether Scope 1, Scope 2 or Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions are covered by the target. (c) whether the target is a gross greenhouse gas emissions target or net greenhouse gas emissions target. If the entity discloses a net greenhouse gas emissions target, the entity is also required to separately disclose its associated gross greenhouse gas emissions target (see paragraphs B68 –B69). (d) whether the target was derived using a sectoral decarbonisation approach. (e) the entity ’s planned use of carbon credits to offset greenhouse gas emissions to achieve any net greenhouse gas emissions target. In explaining its planned use of carbon credits the entity shall disclose information including, and with reference to paragraphs B70 –B71: (i) the extent to which, and how, achieving any net greenhouse gas emissions target relies on the use of carbon credits; (ii) which third-party scheme(s) will verify or certify the carbon credits; (iii) the type of carbon credit, including whether the underlying offset will be nature-based or based on technological carbon removals, and whether the underlying offset is achieved through carbon reduction or removal; and34 35 36IFRS SUSTAINABILITY DISCLOSURE STANDARDS © IFRS Foundation 17\n\n[Page 19]\n(iv) any other factors necessary for users of general purpose financial reports to understand the credibility and integrity of the carbon credits the entity plans to use (for example, assumptions regarding the permanence of the carbon offset). In identifying and disclosing the metrics used to set and monitor progress towards reaching a target described in paragraphs 33 –34, an entity shall refer to and consider the applicability of cross-industry metrics (see paragraph 29 ) and industry-based metrics (see paragraph 32 ), including those described in an applicable IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standard, or metrics that otherwise satisfy the requirements in IFRS S1.37IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES —JUNE 2023 18 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 653
  },
  {
    "id": 64615,
    "question": "Which scenario best illustrates a situation where an entity's disclosures would fail to meet the requirements outlined for climate-related financial reporting, as described in IFRS S2?",
    "options": {
      "B": "The entity avoids duplication by combining sustainability-related risk disclosures, even though oversight of these risks is managed separately from other risks.",
      "A": "The entity provides integrated risk management disclosures but neglects to specify whether climate-related scenario analysis was used in identifying risks.",
      "C": "The entity discloses detailed processes for monitoring climate-related risks but does not clarify how these processes are integrated into its overall risk management strategy.",
      "D": "The entity describes the inputs and parameters used in assessing risks but omits information about changes made to these processes compared with the previous reporting period.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "14",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2.pdf",
    "source_text": "Risk management The objective of climate-related financial disclosures on risk management is to enable users of general purpose financial reports to understand an entity’s processes to identify, assess, prioritise and monitor climate-related risks and opportunities, including whether and how those processes are integrated into and inform the entity ’s overall risk management process. To achieve this objective, an entity shall disclose information about: (a) the processes and related policies the entity uses to identify, assess, prioritise and monitor climate-related risks, including information about: (i) the inputs and parameters the entity uses (for example, information about data sources and the scope of operations covered in the processes); (ii) whether and how the entity uses climate-related scenario analysis to inform its identification of climate-related risks; (iii) how the entity assesses the nature, likelihood and magnitude of the effects of those risks (for example, whether the entity considers qualitative factors, quantitative thresholds or other criteria); (iv) whether and how the entity prioritises climate-related risks relative to other types of risk; (v) how the entity monitors climate-related risks; and (vi) whether and how the entity has changed the processes it uses compared with the previous reporting period; (b) the processes the entity uses to identify, assess, prioritise and monitor climate-related opportunities, including information about whether and how the entity uses climate-related scenario analysis to inform its identification of climate-related opportunities; and (c) the extent to which, and how, the processes for identifying, assessing, prioritising and monitoring climate-related risks and opportunities are integrated into and inform the entity ’s overall risk management process. In preparing disclosures to fulfil the requirements in paragraph 25, an entity shall avoid unnecessary duplication in accordance with IFRS S1 (see paragraph B42(b) of IFRS S1). For example, although an entity shall provide the information required by paragraph 25, if oversight of sustainability- related risks and opportunities is managed on an integrated basis, the entity would avoid duplication by providing integrated risk management disclosures instead of separate disclosures for each sustainability-related risk and opportunity.24 25 26IFRS SUSTAINABILITY DISCLOSURE STANDARDS © IFRS Foundation 13",
    "new_id": 654
  },
  {
    "id": 64616,
    "question": "When prioritizing inputs for measuring Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions, which combination of factors would most likely result in a faithful representation as described in IFRS S2?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Verified data from specific activities within the value chain that is timely and reflects both jurisdiction and technology used.",
      "A": "Directly measured data that is verified but excludes consideration of jurisdiction-specific or technology-related factors.",
      "B": "Timely data based exclusively on assumptions derived from industry benchmarks rather than specific value chain activities.",
      "D": "Data prioritized by ease of access and cost-effectiveness, provided it aligns with general Greenhouse Gas Protocol guidelines.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "34",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2.pdf",
    "source_text": "An entity is permitted, but not required, to reassess the scope of any climate- related risk or opportunity throughout its value chain more frequently than required by paragraph B11 in IFRS S1. In accordance with paragraph B6(b) in IFRS S1, to determine the scope of the value chain, which includes its breadth and composition, an entity shall use all reasonable and supportable information that is available to the entity at the reporting date without undue cost or effort. An entity that participates in one or more financial activities associated with asset management, commercial banking and insurance shall disclose additional information about the financed emissions associated with those activities as part of the entity ’s disclosure of its Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions (see paragraphs B58 –B63). Scope 3 measurement framework An entity ’s measurement of Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions is likely to include the use of estimation rather than solely comprising direct measurement. In measuring Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions an entity shall use a measurement approach, inputs and assumptions that result in a faithful representation of this measurement. The measurement framework described in paragraphs B40 –B54 provides guidance for an entity to use in preparing its Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions disclosures. An entity is required to use all reasonable and supportable information that is available to the entity at the reporting date without undue cost or effort when the entity selects the measurement approach, inputs and assumptions it uses in measuring Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions. An entity ’s measurement of Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions relies upon a range of inputs. This Standard does not specify the inputs the entity is required to use to measure its Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions, but does require the entity to prioritise inputs and assumptions using these identifying characteristics (which are listed in no particular order): (a) data based on direct measurement (paragraphs B43 –B45); (b) data from specific activities within the entity ’s value chain ( paragraphs B46–B49); (c) timely data that faithfully represents the jurisdiction of, and the technology used for, the value chain activity and its greenhouse gas emissions (paragraphs B50 –B52); and (d) data that has been verified (paragraphs B53 –B54). An entity is required to apply the Scope 3 measurement framework to prioritise inputs and assumptions even when the entity is required by a jurisdictional authority or an exchange on which the entity is listed to use a method other than the Greenhouse Gas Protocol: A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard (2004) for measuring its greenhouse gas emissions (see paragraphs B24 –B25), or whether the entity uses the transition relief described in paragraph C4(a).B35 B36 B37 B38 B39 B40 B41IFRS SUSTAINABILITY DISCLOSURE STANDARDS © IFRS Foundation 33",
    "new_id": 655
  },
  {
    "id": 64617,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes a necessary condition for an entity to appropriately address climate-related risks and opportunities in its disclosures, as described in IFRS S2?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The entity must consider all reasonable and supportable information available at the reporting date, including forecasts and industry-based guidance, to identify risks and opportunities.",
      "A": "The entity must rely solely on historical data about past events without considering forecasts of future conditions.",
      "B": "The entity is required to disclose only the geographical areas where climate-related risks are currently concentrated, ignoring other parts of the value chain.",
      "C": "The entity should focus exclusively on achieving voluntary climate-related targets while disregarding any legally mandated targets.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "9",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2.pdf",
    "source_text": "In identifying the climate-related risks and opportunities that could reasonably be expected to affect an entity ’s prospects, the entity shall use all reasonable and supportable information that is available to the entity at the reporting date without undue cost or effort, including information about past events, current conditions and forecasts of future conditions. In identifying the climate-related risks and opportunities that could reasonably be expected to affect an entity ’s prospects, the entity shall refer to and consider the applicability of the industry-based disclosure topics defined in the Industry-based Guidance on Implementing IFRS S2 . Business model and value chain An entity shall disclose information that enables users of general purpose financial reports to understand the current and anticipated effects of climate- related risks and opportunities on the entity ’s business model and value chain. Specifically, the entity shall disclose: (a) a description of the current and anticipated effects of climate-related risks and opportunities on the entity ’s business model and value chain; and (b) a description of where in the entity ’s business model and value chain climate-related risks and opportunities are concentrated (for example, geographical areas, facilities and types of assets). Strategy and decision-making An entity shall disclose information that enables users of general purpose financial reports to understand the effects of climate-related risks and opportunities on its strategy and decision-making. Specifically, the entity shall disclose: (a) information about how the entity has responded to, and plans to respond to, climate-related risks and opportunities in its strategy and decision-making, including how the entity plans to achieve any climate-related targets it has set and any targets it is required to meet by law or regulation. Specifically, the entity shall disclose information about: (i) current and anticipated changes to the entity ’s business model, including its resource allocation, to address climate-related risks and opportunities (for example, these changes could include plans to manage or decommission carbon-, energy- or water-intensive operations; resource allocations resulting from demand or supply-chain changes; resource allocations arising from business development through capital expenditure or additional expenditure on research and development; and acquisitions or divestments);11 12 13 14IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES —JUNE 2023 8 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 656
  },
  {
    "id": 65729,
    "question": "Which scenario would most likely require an entity to disclose reserves located in a protected conservation status area despite the absence of direct overlap with officially designated sites, as outlined in the Coal Operations – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Reserves positioned 4 km from a Natura 2000 site that hosts a migratory endangered species during its non-breeding season.",
      "B": "Reserves located 3 km from an IUCN Protected Area but within a region classified as having high biodiversity value by UNEP-WCMC.",
      "C": "Reserves situated exactly at the boundary of a Ramsar Wetland, where no critically endangered species are present.",
      "D": "Reserves found 6 km away from a UNESCO Biosphere Reserve but near a water passage used by an IUCN Red List species.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "21-22",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Coal Operations.pdf",
    "source_text": "EM-CO-160a.3. Percentage of (1) proved and (2) probable reserves in or near sites with protected conservation status or endangered species habitat 1The entity shall disclose (1) the percentage of its proved reserves, by weight, in sites with protected conservation status or in endangered species habitat. 1.1 The percentage of proved reserves shall be calculated as the quantity (tonnage) of proved reserves located in areas with protected conservation status or endangered species habitat, divided by the total quantity of proved reserves. 2The entity shall disclose (2) the percentage of its probable reserves, by weight, in sites with protected conservation status or endangered species habitat. 2.1 The percentage of probable reserves shall be calculated as the quantity (tonnage) of probable reserves located in areas with protected conservation status or endangered species habitat, divided by the total quantity of probable reserves. 3 Reserves are considered to be in areas of protected conservation status if they are located within: 3.1 International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Protected Areas (categories I –VI); 3.2 Ramsar Wetlands of International Importance; 3.3 United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) World Heritage Sites; 3.4 Biosphere Reserves recognised within the framework of UNESCO ’s Man and the Biosphere (MAB) Programme; 3.5 Natura 2000 sites; or 3.6 sites that meet the IUCN ’s definition of a protected area: ‘A protected area is a clearly defined geographical space, recognised, dedicated and managed, through legal or other effective means, to achieve the long- term conservation of nature with associated ecosystem services and cultural values. ’ 3.6.1 These sites may be listed in the World Database of Protected Areas (WDPA) and mapped on Protected Planet. 4Reserves are considered to be in endangered species habitat if they are in or near areas where species on the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species that are classified Critically Endangered (CR) or Endangered (EN) are extant. 4.1 A species is considered extant in an area if it is a resident, present during breeding or non-breeding season, or if it makes use of the area for passage. 4.1.1 For the purposes of disclosure, ‘passage ’ is defined as all areas of land or water that a migratory species inhabits, stays in temporarily, crosses or overflies at any time on its normal migration route. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |COAL OPERATIONS |21\n\n[Page 22]\n5For the purposes of this disclosure, ‘near’ is defined as within five kilometres (km) of the boundary of an area of protected conservation status or an endangered species habitat and the location of the entity ’s proved and probable reserves. 6Reserves are defined as the weight of a mineral deposit that could be economically and legally extracted or produced at the time of the reserves determination. 6.1 Proved reserves are reserves for which (i) the quantity of the mineral deposit is computed from dimensions revealed in outcrops, trenches, workings or drill holes; grade or quality are computed from the results of detailed sampling; and (ii) the sites for inspection, sampling and measurement are spaced so closely, and the geographical character is so well-defined, that size, shape, depth and mineral content of reserves are well-established. 6.2 Probable reserves are reserves for which quantity and grade (quality) are computed from information similar to that used for proved reserves, but the sites for inspection, sampling and measurement are farther apart or are otherwise less adequately spaced. The degree of assurance for probable reserves, although lower than that for proved reserves, is high enough to assume continuity between points of observation. 7The entity may separately identify reserves in areas with additional ecological, biodiversity or conservation designations such as those listed by the Biodiversity A –Z resource prepared by the United Nations Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC). 8The entity may discuss reserves located in protected areas or endangered species habitats, but that present low risks to biodiversity or ecosystem services. The entity may provide similar discussion for reserves located in areas with no official designation of high biodiversity value, but that present high risks to biodiversity or ecosystem services. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |COAL OPERATIONS |22",
    "new_id": 657
  },
  {
    "id": 65748,
    "question": "Under what condition can an entity state 'N/A' regarding the most recent independent technical review of a facility, and how does this relate to the disclosure of material findings, as outlined in the Coal Operations – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "An entity can state 'N/A' if no independent technical review was conducted, and it is not required to disclose material findings for that facility.",
      "A": "An entity can state 'N/A' if no independent technical review was conducted, but it must still disclose whether material findings exist based on internal assessments.",
      "C": "An entity can state 'N/A' only if the facility is inactive or under maintenance, regardless of whether material findings were identified in prior reviews.",
      "D": "An entity can state 'N/A' if the review was conducted by parties directly involved with the facility's design or operation, provided material findings are disclosed separately.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "38",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Coal Operations.pdf",
    "source_text": "2.3.1 The definition of an operator shall be consistent with that provided in the GISTM Glossary. 2.4 The entity shall disclose the operational status of its facilities (for example, active, inactive —under maintenance, closed). 2.5 The entity shall disclose the facility construction method. 2.5.1 The entity shall disclose the construction method as ‘downstream ’, ‘upstream ’ or ‘centreline ’, consistent with the definitions provided by the International Council on Mining and Metals (ICMM). 2.5.2 If the construction method does not match any of these definitions, the entity shall disclose the construction method as ‘other’ and provide a brief description of it. 2.6 The entity shall disclose the maximum permitted facility storage capacity, in metric tonnes. 2.7 The entity shall disclose the quantity of tailings stored in the facility as of the end of the reporting period, in metric tonnes. 2.8 The entity shall disclose the consequence classification of the facility in accordance with Requirement 4.1 of the GISTM. 2.9 The entity shall disclose the date of the most recent independent technical review of the facility, conducted in accordance with Requirement 10.6 of the GISTM. 2.9.1 A review is considered independent if it is conducted by third parties who are not and have not been directly involved with the design or operation of the facility. 2.10 The entity shall disclose whether the most recent independent technical review resulted in material findings related to the safety of the facility. 2.10.1 The scope of material findings shall be consistent with the definition of ‘material’ that provided in the GISTM, in which the criteria for what is material is to be defined by the entity, subject to the provisions of local regulations, and evaluated as part of any audit or external assessment that may be conducted on implementation. 2.10.2 The entity shall state either ‘Yes’ or ‘No’. 2.10.3 If the entity has responded ‘Yes’ for a facility, the entity may provide a summary of the material findings in addition to the inventory table. 2.10.4 For facilities of which an independent technical review was not conducted, the entity shall state ‘N/A’. 2.11 If the entity has disclosed ‘Yes’ regarding material findings, the entity shall disclose whether mitigation measures have been implemented to reduce risk to a level as low as reasonably practicable (ALARP). 2.11.1 The definition of ALARP shall be consistent with that provided in the GISTM Glossary. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |COAL OPERATIONS |38",
    "new_id": 658
  },
  {
    "id": 65750,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between the entity's due diligence practices, the management of indigenous rights, and their applicability to business partners, as described in the Coal Operations – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "While the entity is required to describe its engagement processes for indigenous rights, it may exclude subcontractors from these practices if organizational constraints prevent full adherence.",
      "A": "The entity’s due diligence practices related to indigenous rights focus exclusively on proved reserves within five kilometers of indigenous land, ensuring all contractors adhere uniformly.",
      "B": "Free, prior, and informed consent processes are optional under ILO Convention 169, but probable reserve estimations must include detailed sampling regardless of proximity to indigenous areas.",
      "D": "Due diligence practices apply equally at all stages of project development, requiring consistent governance mechanisms across suppliers, contractors, and joint arrangement partners without exception.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "24",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Coal Operations.pdf",
    "source_text": "3.6 resolve to maintain and reproduce ancestral environments and systems as distinct peoples and communities. 4For the purposes of this disclosure, ‘near’ is defined as within five kilometres of the recognised boundary of an area considered to be indigenous land and the location of the entity ’s proved and probable reserves. 5Reserves are defined as the weight of a mineral deposit that could be economically and legally extracted or produced at the time of the reserves determination. 5.1 Proved reserves are reserves for which (i) the quantity of the mineral deposit is computed from dimensions revealed in outcrops, trenches, workings or drill holes; grade or quality are computed from the results of detailed sampling and (ii) the sites for inspection, sampling and measurement are spaced so closely and the geographical character is so well-defined that size, shape, depth and mineral content of reserves are well-established. 5.2 Probable reserves are reserves for which quantity and grade (quality) are computed from information similar to that used for proved reserves, but the sites for inspection, sampling and measurement are farther apart or are otherwise less adequately spaced. The degree of assurance for probable reserves, although lower than that for proved reserves, is high enough to assume continuity between points of observation. EM-CO-210a.2. Discussion of engagement processes and due diligence practices with respect to the management of indigenous rights 1The entity shall describe its due diligence practices and procedures with respect to indigenous rights of communities in which it operates or intends to operate, which may include: 1.1 upholding International Labour Organization (ILO) Convention 169; 1.2 use of free, prior and informed consent (or consultation) processes; 1.3 the establishment of project grievance mechanisms; and 1.4 the establishment of formal community agreements. 2The discussion shall include due diligence processes employed during all stages of project development (prior, during and post). 3The discussion may include governance mechanisms the entity puts in place to ensure all levels of the organisation adhere to its policies and practices. 4The discussion shall include how practices apply to business partners, such as contractors, subcontractors, suppliers and joint arrangement partners. 4.1 If practices do not apply to business partners, the entity may discuss factors that prevent the application of such practices. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |COAL OPERATIONS |24",
    "new_id": 659
  },
  {
    "id": 65751,
    "question": "Which scenario, as described, would most likely result in the largest reduction in coal reserves classified as proven or probable under the entity's sensitivity analysis, according to the Coal Operations – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "A scenario consistent with limiting global temperature increases to 1.5°C by significantly reducing greenhouse gas concentrations.",
      "A": "A scenario assuming no changes in policies from the mid-point of the year of publication of the World Energy Outlook.",
      "B": "A scenario where broad policy commitments and plans to reduce greenhouse gas emissions are implemented without specific measures announced.",
      "C": "A scenario where coal demand is primarily affected by regulations on harmful air emissions unrelated to greenhouse gases.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "32-33",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Coal Operations.pdf",
    "source_text": "2The entity shall discuss how it manages long-term health and safety risks associated with coal mining (for example, chronic lung disease) such as through training, use of personal protective equipment, use of technology, rules and guidelines, and the enforcement of rules and guidelines. 3The entity may discuss implementation of relevant management systems including progress towards tracking safety and health metrics, employing management system metrics and obtaining third-party verification. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |COAL OPERATIONS |32\n\n[Page 33]\nReserves Valuation & Capital Expenditures Topic Summary Coal entities may be unable to extract a significant proportion of their coal reserves if greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are controlled to limit global temperature increases. Stewardship of capital resources while considering medium- to long-term trends, particularly related to climate change mitigation actions, is critical to prevent asset impairment and maintain profitability and creditworthiness. Globally, regulations and policies are and may continue to be put into place to limit GHG emissions from coal-fired power plants —the customers of coal entities —thus reducing demand for and the price of coal. Coal demand also is being affected by regulations governing other harmful air emissions that apply to coal-fired power plants. An expansion of GHG-mitigation regulations may increase the magnitude of potential financial impacts in the medium to long term. Along with improved competitiveness of alternative energy technologies, these jurisdictional regulations and policies pose long-term risks for the reserves and capital investments of coal operations entities. Metrics EM-CO-420a.1. Sensitivity of coal reserve levels to future price projection scenarios that account for a price on carbon emissions 1The entity shall perform a sensitivity analysis of its reserves to determine how several future scenarios may affect the determination of whether the reserves are proven or probable. 2The entity shall analyse the sensitivity of its current proven and probable reserves using the price trajectories published by the International Energy Agency (IEA) in its World Energy Outlook (WEO) publication, including: 2.1 Current Policies Scenario, which assumes no changes in policies from the mid-point of the year of publication of the WEO. 2.2 New Policies Scenario, which assumes that broad policy commitments and plans that have been announced by countries —including national pledges to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and plans to phase out fossil-energy subsidies —occur, even if the measures to implement these commitments have yet to be identified or announced. This broadly serves as the IEA baseline scenario. 2.3 Sustainable Development Scenario, which assumes an energy pathway occurs that is consistent with the goal of limiting the global increase in temperature to 1.5°C by limiting concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. 2.4 The entity shall consider the WEO scenarios as a normative reference, thus any updates to the WEO made year-on-year shall be considered updates to this guidance. 2.5 Reserves are defined as mineral deposits that could be economically and legally extracted or produced at the time of the reserve determination. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |COAL OPERATIONS |33",
    "new_id": 660
  },
  {
    "id": 65752,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between the methods for estimating proven and probable reserves and their implications for disclosure requirements, as outlined in the Coal Operations – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Proven reserves require less spacing between sampling sites than probable reserves, but both are subject to identical price scenario disclosures.",
      "B": "Probable reserves allow for greater spacing between sampling sites, yet their disclosed values must align with more stringent cost assumptions than those of proven reserves.",
      "C": "The continuity assumed in probable reserves implies that entities must disclose these reserves under stricter price sensitivity analyses compared to proven reserves.",
      "D": "Entities are required to disclose probable reserves only when they exceed proven reserves in tonnage, regardless of the degree of assurance.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "34",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Coal Operations.pdf",
    "source_text": "2.6 Proven reserves are reserves for which (a) quantity is computed from dimensions revealed in outcrops, trenches, workings or drill holes; grade or quality are computed from the results of detailed sampling and (b) the sites for inspection, sampling and measurement are spaced so closely and the geographical character is so well defined that size, shape, depth and mineral content of reserves are well established. 2.7 Probable reserves are reserves for which quantity and grade or quality are computed from information like that used for proven (measured) reserves, but the sites for inspection, sampling and measurement are farther apart or are otherwise less adequately spaced. The degree of assurance, although lower than that for proven (measured) reserves, is high enough to assume continuity between points of observation. 3The entity shall conduct a reserves sensitivity analysis and disclose, in the aggregate, an estimate of reserves estimated for each product type based on different price and cost criteria, such as a range of prices and costs that may reasonably be achieved, including standardised futures prices or management ’s own forecasts. 4 The entity shall also disclose the price and cost schedules and assumptions on which disclosed values are based. 5 The entity may summarise its findings in the following table format: Table 3. Sensitivity of Reserves to Prices By Principal Product Type and Price Scenario PRICE CASE PROVEN RESERVES PROBABLE RESERVES (Scenario)Coal Product A Coal Product A (tonnes) (measure) (tonnes) (measure) Current Policies Scenario (base) New Policies Scenario Sustainable Development Scenario 6The entity may disclose the sensitivity of its reserve levels in other price and demand scenarios in addition to those described above, particularly if these scenarios differ depending on the type of coal reserves, regulatory environment in the countries or regions where mining occurs, end-use of the entity ’s products, or other factors. 7For additional sensitivity analyses, the entity should consider disclosing the following, per the Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) Recommendations Report Figure 8 as well as the Implementing the Recommendations of the TCFD Report, Section E: 7.1 The alternative scenarios used, including other 2ºC or lower scenarios 7.2 Critical input parameters, assumptions, and analytical choices for the climate-related scenarios used, particularly as they relate to key areas such as policy assumptions, energy deployment pathways, technology pathways, and related timing assumptions 7.3 Time frames used for scenarios, including short-, medium-, and long-term milestones (e.g., how organisations consider timing of potential future implications under the scenarios used) SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |COAL OPERATIONS |34",
    "new_id": 661
  },
  {
    "id": 65753,
    "question": "Which scenario best reflects a situation where an entity would be required to disclose an incident as significant, based on the interplay of regulatory compliance, financial implications, and operator judgment, as described in the Coal Operations – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "An incident that does not exceed local regulatory or industry-accepted codes but is disclosed because the operator determines it to have notable environmental impacts.",
      "A": "An incident involving a small release of hazardous waste that meets local regulatory limits but is recorded in financial statements due to potential future liabilities.",
      "C": "An incident where hazardous waste exceeds local regulatory thresholds but is not reported because the operator deems it insignificant.",
      "D": "An incident where hazardous waste is below all jurisdictional thresholds, not financially material, and aligns with standard industry practices.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "17-18",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Coal Operations.pdf",
    "source_text": "1.1.1 Impacts on the environment, employees or surrounding communities may include contamination of surface water, ground water and land that required response and remediation, reduced biodiversity, or caused injuries or deaths among employees or community members. 1.2 A significant incident is defined as a release of hazardous waste to the environment that: exceeds the volume and concentration limits of local regulatory requirements or industry-accepted codes; is included in the entity ’s financial statements (for example, because of resulting liabilities); is recorded by the entity as an incident required to be reported to applicable local jurisdictions; or does not meet any of these criteria but is judged as significant by the operator. 1.2.1 The entity may disclose its own criteria for establishing the threshold in volume and concentration in excess of which it considers an incident significant. 1.3 Hazardous wastes are defined in accordance with the applicable jurisdictional legal or regulatory frameworks where the waste was generated. 1.3.1 The entity may use definitions from the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal . 2The entity shall disclose the frameworks used to define hazardous waste and the number of incidents defined in accordance with each applicable framework. EM-CO-150a.8. Description of waste management policies and procedures for active and inactive operations 1The entity shall describe the policies and procedures used in its waste management strategy. 1.1 The scope of the disclosure shall include policies and procedures for the entity ’s active and inactive operations. 1.2 The scope of waste includes mineral and non-mineral waste. 1.2.1 Mineral waste is defined as material generated during the extraction and beneficiation of ores and minerals. 1.2.2 Non-mineral waste is defined as all material other than mineral waste for which the entity has no further use and that is discarded, intended to be discarded or released into the environment. 2The entity shall describe how its policies and procedures compare with those required under applicable jurisdictional laws or regulations. 2.1 The entity shall discuss whether and how its policies and procedures exceed the requirements of local jurisdictions. 2.2 The entity shall discuss how its policies and procedures vary by region. 3 The entity shall describe its approach to waste management throughout the project lifecycle. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |COAL OPERATIONS |17\n\n[Page 18]\n3.1 The scope of the disclosure shall include a discussion of the entity ’s: 3.1.1 approach to assessment of potential environmental impacts associated with waste streams; 3.1.2 policies and procedures related to waste avoidance; 3.1.3 approach to identification, assessment and application of recycling, reuse and repurposing as waste management strategies; 3.1.4 policies and procedures related to waste disposal or incineration; 3.1.5 policies and procedures related to the remediation of environmental or social impacts of incidents associated with the mishandling of hazardous waste; and 3.1.6 approach to decommissioning waste facilities. 4The entity shall include a description of how waste management efforts are coordinated among business partners (for example, contractors and subcontractors). 5The entity shall describe how it ensures compliance and conformance with its waste management policies and procedures. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |COAL OPERATIONS |18",
    "new_id": 662
  },
  {
    "id": 65754,
    "question": "Which of the following statements is NOT supported by the information provided regarding greenhouse gas emissions and their calculation in coal operations, as described in the Coal Operations – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The use of offsets, credits, or other similar mechanisms is factored into the calculation of gross emissions before reporting them in metric tonnes of CO2-e.",
      "A": "Gross global Scope 1 emissions include direct emissions from equipment at mine sites, transportation activities, and methane emissions from coal seams during mining.",
      "B": "Emissions calculations must adhere to methodologies outlined in The Greenhouse Gas Protocol but may also incorporate industry-specific guidance if it aligns with the base reference.",
      "D": "The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Fifth Assessment Report provides the preferred source for global warming potential values used in converting emissions to CO2 equivalents.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "9",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Coal Operations.pdf",
    "source_text": "Greenhouse Gas Emissions Topic Summary Coal operations are energy intensive and generate significant direct greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, including carbon dioxide from fuel use and methane released from coal beds during mining and post-mining activities. Regulatory efforts to reduce GHG emissions in response to the risks posed by climate change may result in higher operating and capital expenditures based on the magnitude of their direct emissions. Operational efficiencies can be achieved through the cost-effective reduction of GHG emissions. Such efficiencies can mitigate the potential financial impact of increased fuel costs from regulations that limit —or put a price on —GHG emissions. Metrics EM-CO-110a.1. Gross global Scope 1 emissions, percentage covered under emissions-limiting regulations 1The entity shall disclose its gross global Scope 1 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to the atmosphere of the seven GHGs covered under the Kyoto Protocol —carbon dioxide (CO 2), methane (CH 4), nitrous oxide (N 2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), sulphur hexafluoride (SF 6) and nitrogen trifluoride (NF 3). 1.1 Emissions of all GHGs shall be consolidated and disclosed in metric tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO 2-e), and calculated in accordance with published 100-year time horizon global warming potential (GWP) values. To date, the preferred source for GWP values is theIntergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fifth Assessment Report (2014). 1.2 Gross emissions are GHGs emitted into the atmosphere before accounting for offsets, credits or other similar mechanisms that have reduced or compensated for emissions. 2Scope 1 emissions are defined and shall be calculated according to the methodology contained in The Greenhouse Gas Protocol: A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard (GHG protocol), Revised Edition, March 2004, published by the World Resources Institute and the World Business Council on Sustainable Development (WRI/WBCSD). 2.1 These emissions include direct emissions of GHGs from stationary or mobile sources; these sources include equipment at mine sites, mine mouth electric generating facilities, coal seam methane emissions, production and processing facilities, storage facilities, office buildings, and transportation (marine, road, and rail). 2.2 Acceptable calculation methodologies include those that conform to the GHG Protocol as the base reference, but provide additional guidance, such as industry- or region-specific guidance. Examples include: 2.2.1 GHG Reporting Guidance for the Aerospace Industry provided by the International Aerospace Environmental Group (IAEG) SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |COAL OPERATIONS |9",
    "new_id": 663
  },
  {
    "id": 65755,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why entities in the Coal Operations industry might face increased operational and regulatory challenges despite adhering to rigorous hazardous waste disposal practices, as described in the Coal Operations – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Because improper storage of waste containing heavy metals can lead to groundwater contamination, even if hazardous waste disposal practices are followed.",
      "A": "Because the disclosure of non-mineral waste excludes overburden and tailings, which may still pose contamination risks.",
      "B": "Because metrics like EM-CO-150a.2 and EM-CO-150a.4 require reporting on waste rock and tailings, which are not classified as hazardous materials.",
      "C": "Because the definition of non-mineral waste includes scrap metal and used oil, which are exempt from regulatory oversight.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "15",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Coal Operations.pdf",
    "source_text": "Waste Management Topic Summary The Coal Operations industry generates large volumes of mineral and non-mineral waste, including process refuse, liquid coal waste, and solid rock and clay waste, which may contain toxic elements such as mercury, arsenic or cadmium. Waste produced during coal mining and processing operations can, depending on its type, be treated, discarded, or stored off- or on-site, in impoundments or disused mine pits. Improper disposal or storage of hazardous materials or mining waste can present significant long-term threats to human health and ecosystems through potential contamination of groundwater or surface water used for drinking or agriculture, posing operational and regulatory challenges for entities. Entities that reduce waste streams, effectively manage risks related to waste containing heavy metals and maintain rigorous hazardous waste disposal practices may reduce regulatory and litigation risks, remediation liabilities and operating costs. Metrics EM-CO-150a.2. Total weight of non-mineral waste generated 1The entity shall disclose the total weight, in metric tonnes, of non-mineral waste generated. 1.1 Non-mineral waste is defined as material for which the entity has no further use and that is discarded, intended to be discarded or released into the environment. 1.2 The scope of the disclosure includes non-mineral waste generated from all activities. 1.2.1 The scope of non-mineral waste includes scrap metal, reject coal, used oil, tyres, batteries and other solid wastes. 1.3 The scope of non-mineral waste excludes overburden, waste rock, tailings and gaseous wastes. EM-CO-150a.3. Total weight of tailings produced 1The entity shall disclose the total weight, in metric tonnes, of tailings produced. 1.1 The definition of tailings shall be consistent with that provided in the Global Tailings Review Global Industry Standard on Tailings Management (GISTM). EM-CO-150a.4. Total weight of waste rock generated 1 The entity shall disclose the total weight, in metric tonnes, of waste rock generated. 1.1 Waste rock is defined as mineral material and low-grade ore with target minerals in concentrations too low for economic recovery at the time of mining. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |COAL OPERATIONS |15",
    "new_id": 664
  },
  {
    "id": 68534,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes the relationship between mandatory stress test results and their integration into both capital adequacy planning and ESG strategy, based on the entity's obligations in the Commercial Banks – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Mandatory stress test results must inform both capital adequacy planning and ESG strategy, with voluntary disclosures being an optional supplement.",
      "B": "The entity is required to use mandatory stress test results exclusively for capital adequacy planning but may voluntarily apply them to its ESG strategy.",
      "C": "The entity has discretion over whether mandatory stress test results are integrated into either capital adequacy planning or ESG strategy, provided they report the data voluntarily.",
      "D": "Voluntary stress test results are sufficient for informing capital adequacy planning, while mandatory results are reserved solely for ESG strategy adjustments.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "22-23",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Commercial Banks.pdf",
    "source_text": "4The entity shall consider the above references used to determine the G-SIB score to be normative references, meaning that any future updates made to them shall be considered updates to this guidance. Note to FN-CB-550a.1 1The entity shall describe whether it obtains the score from the relevant supervisory authority after reporting the indicators used to calculate the G-SIB score, or whether it calculates the score internally using the BCBS assessment methodology. 2The entity shall describe whether its applicable jurisdictional legal or regulatory authority requires the entity to report the data required for the G-SIB calculation, or whether the entity chooses to report the data voluntarily. FN-CB-550a.2. Description of approach to integrate results of mandatory and voluntary stress tests into capital adequacy planning, long-term corporate strategy, and other business activities 1The entity shall discuss how results of mandatory and voluntary stress tests and capital planning reports for prudential regulatory purposes inform the entity ’s decisions and are integrated into capital planning, long-term corporate strategy and other business activities. 2The entity shall discuss how the stress test results inform its approach with respect to its environmental, social and governance (ESG) strategy. 3The entity may disclose the results of its stress tests along with this discussion. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |COMMERCIAL BANKS |22\n\n[Page 23]\n| |23 sasb.org/contact",
    "new_id": 665
  },
  {
    "id": 68556,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the implicit relationship between the SASB Standards Application Guidance and the technical protocols, as described in the Commercial Banks – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "The SASB Standards Application Guidance applies to the definitions and implementation of metrics unless otherwise specified in the technical protocols.",
      "A": "The SASB Standards Application Guidance overrides all technical protocols, ensuring uniformity across industries.",
      "C": "Technical protocols exclusively define the scope and implementation of metrics, rendering the SASB Standards Application Guidance redundant.",
      "D": "Technical protocols are optional supplements to the SASB Standards Application Guidance, which serves as the primary source of metric definitions.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "4",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Commercial Banks.pdf",
    "source_text": "INTRODUCTION Overview of SASB Standards The SASB Standards are a set of 77 industry-specific sustainability accounting standards ( “SASB Standards ” or “Industry Standards ”), categorised pursuant to the Sustainable Industry Classification System® (SICS®). SASB Standards include: 1. Industry descriptions – which are intended to help entities identify applicable industry guidance by describing the business models, associated activities and other common features that characterise participation in the industry. 2. Disclosure topics – which describe specific sustainability-related risks or opportunities associated with the activities conducted by entities within a particular industry. 3. Metrics – which accompany disclosure topics and are designed to, either individually or as part of a set, provide useful information regarding an entity ’s performance for a specific disclosure topic. 4. Technical protocols – which provide guidance on definitions, scope, implementation and presentation of associated metrics. 5. Activity metrics – which quantify the scale of specific activities or operations by an entity and are intended for use in conjunction with the metrics referred to in point 3 to normalise data and facilitate comparison. Entities using the SASB Standards as part of their implementation of ISSB Standards should consider the relevant ISSB application guidance. For entities using the SASB Standards independently from ISSB Standards, the SASB Standards Application Guidance establishes guidance applicable to the use of all Industry Standards and is considered part of the Standards. Unless otherwise specified in the technical protocols contained in the Industry Standards, the guidance in the SASB Standards Application Guidance applies to the definitions, scope, implementation, compilation and presentation of the metrics in the Industry Standards. Historically, the SASB Conceptual Framework set out the basic concepts, principles, definitions and objectives that guided the SASB Standards Board in its approach to setting standards for sustainability accounting. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |COMMERCIAL BANKS |4",
    "new_id": 666
  },
  {
    "id": 68557,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes why an entity's disclosure of its G-SIB score calculation method and data sources is critical to addressing systemic risk, as outlined in the Commercial Banks – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "It provides clarity on whether the entity relies on supervisory authorities or internal calculations, directly influencing investor confidence in the bank’s risk management.",
      "A": "It ensures that regulators can impose penalties on banks failing to meet liquidity requirements.",
      "B": "It guarantees that all global banks will adopt uniform stress test methodologies, reducing cross-jurisdictional risks.",
      "D": "It allows entities to avoid mandatory stress tests by demonstrating voluntary compliance with international standards.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "21-22",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Commercial Banks.pdf",
    "source_text": "Systemic Risk Management Topic Summary Commercial Bank entities that fail to manage risks to capital effectively may suffer significant losses while increasing their liabilities. Because of the interconnectedness of the global financial system, these failures can contribute to significant market disruption and financial crises. The systemic interconnectedness of financial institutions has become a central concern for regulators. As a result, many jurisdictions require that banks undergo supervised stress tests to evaluate whether the entity has sufficient capital reserves and liquidity to absorb losses, continue operations and meet obligations during adverse economic and financial conditions. Failure to meet regulatory requirements may lead to penalties and substantially increased future compliance costs. Commercial banks should improve their disclosures by measuring how well they can absorb shocks arising from systemic stresses to demonstrate how risks associated with their size, complexity, interconnectedness, substitutability and cross-jurisdictional activity are being managed. Entities that commit to enhanced disclosures may experience improved investor and shareholder confidence, potentially leading to increased revenues. Metrics FN-CB-550a.1. Global Systemically Important Bank (G-SIB) score, by category 1The entity shall disclose its Globally Systematically Important Bank (G-SIB) score for these categories: (1) size, (2) cross-jurisdictional activity, (3) interconnectedness, (4) substitutability, (5) complexity and (6) overall score. 2The G-SIB scores are defined by, and shall be calculated according to, the methodology established by the latest version of the Bank of International Settlements ’ (BIS) Basel Committee on Banking Supervision ’s Global systematically important banks: updated assessment methodology and the higher loss absorbency requirement (BCBS assessment methodology). 2.1 The set of indicators used in the calculation of the G-SIB score is outlined by the BCBS assessment methodology in the reporting instructions and the reporting template. 2.1.1 The entity shall refer to the reporting instructions and the reporting template for the relevant reporting period. 2.2 The G-SIB score calculation is provided by the technical summary of the BCBS assessment methodology. The BCBS assessment methodology further provides: 2.2.1 denominators used for score calculation for the relevant reporting period; and 2.2.2 the cut-off score used to identify G-SIBs, and bucket thresholds used to allocate G-SIBs to buckets for the purposes of calculating the specific higher loss absorbency (HLA) requirements for each institution. 3 The entity shall disclose the latest available G-SIB score at the time of reporting. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |COMMERCIAL BANKS |21\n\n[Page 22]\n4The entity shall consider the above references used to determine the G-SIB score to be normative references, meaning that any future updates made to them shall be considered updates to this guidance. Note to FN-CB-550a.1 1The entity shall describe whether it obtains the score from the relevant supervisory authority after reporting the indicators used to calculate the G-SIB score, or whether it calculates the score internally using the BCBS assessment methodology. 2The entity shall describe whether its applicable jurisdictional legal or regulatory authority requires the entity to report the data required for the G-SIB calculation, or whether the entity chooses to report the data voluntarily. FN-CB-550a.2. Description of approach to integrate results of mandatory and voluntary stress tests into capital adequacy planning, long-term corporate strategy, and other business activities 1The entity shall discuss how results of mandatory and voluntary stress tests and capital planning reports for prudential regulatory purposes inform the entity ’s decisions and are integrated into capital planning, long-term corporate strategy and other business activities. 2The entity shall discuss how the stress test results inform its approach with respect to its environmental, social and governance (ESG) strategy. 3The entity may disclose the results of its stress tests along with this discussion. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |COMMERCIAL BANKS |22",
    "new_id": 667
  },
  {
    "id": 68569,
    "question": "Which condition is essential for a supplier's non-conformance to be classified as a 'priority non-conformance' requiring escalation, as defined in the Apparel, Accessories & Footwear – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The non-conformance must involve a violation corroborated by at least two distinct sources unless the single source is incriminating.",
      "A": "The non-conformance must result from minor violations that have been inadequately addressed in prior audits.",
      "B": "The non-conformance must pose a significant risk exclusively to environmental safety, regardless of labor conditions.",
      "C": "The non-conformance must arise from a supplier’s failure to implement any corrective action plans within six months.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "19",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Apparel, Accessories & Footwear.pdf",
    "source_text": "6The entity may describe how it assesses and prioritises its supply chain partners (including subcontractors) to determine the level of labour conditions risk associated with each, including: 6.1 if the entity maintains a list of the Tier 1 suppliers and suppliers beyond Tier 1 involved with the production of its goods; and 6.2 if the entity records information about risk factors that affect performance on labour standards for manufacturers that have been mapped to determine proper levels of oversight and monitoring. 7 Disclosures generally correspond to the Sustainable Apparel Coalition ’s Higg Brand & Retail Module. CG-AA-430b.2. (1) Priority non-conformance rate and (2) associated corrective action rate for suppliers ’ labour code of conduct audits 1The entity shall disclose (1) the rate of its suppliers ’ non-conformance with external labour code of conduct audit standards or internally developed supplier codes of conduct and the rate at which those instances of non- conformance have been subject to corrective action. 1.1 A non-conformance is defined as a violation of an applicable jurisdictional law or regulation or one or more aspects of a code of conduct corroborated by more than one source (for example, management interview, worker interview, payroll review or on-site observation) unless that single source is incriminating. 1.2 Priority non-conformances are defined as the highest severity of non-conformance and require escalation by auditors or the entity. Priority non-conformances may arise from: a significant risk to labour conditions, safety or the environment; non-compliance with relevant regulatory requirements; or failure to adequately correct prior minor non-conformances. These also may be referenced as ‘high-risk violations ’, ‘severe violations ’, or ‘major deficiencies ’. 1.3 The entity shall calculate the priority non-conformance rate as the number of priority non-conformances identified in the supply chain divided by the total number of facilities audited. 1.4 The scope of the disclosure includes facilities audited by the entity, by other brands or by external third parties commissioned by the entity in lieu of having an audit conducted solely for the entity ’s purpose. 2The entity shall disclose (2) its corrective action rate for priority non-conformances with external labour code of conduct audit standards or internally developed supplier codes of conduct. 2.1 A corrective action is defined as the timely completion of a corrective action plan designed to eliminate the cause of a detected non-conformance, including the implementation of practices or systems to eliminate any non-conformance and prevent non-conformance reoccurrence, as well as verification the supplier has taken corrective action. 2.2 The entity shall calculate the corrective action rate as the number of corrective actions that address non- conformances divided by the total number of non-conformances identified. 3If relevant, the entity may disclose the number of contracts with suppliers terminated because of non- conformances. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |APPAREL, ACCESSORIES & FOOTWEAR |19",
    "new_id": 668
  },
  {
    "id": 68573,
    "question": "Which scenario demonstrates the most comprehensive approach an entity might take to address business risks associated with priority raw materials, based on the interplay of strategies outlined in the Apparel, Accessories & Footwear – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "An entity adopts certification standards for transparency while simultaneously engaging suppliers and exploring circular economy practices to address both environmental and social risks.",
      "B": "An entity focuses exclusively on replacing scarce natural fibers with innovative synthetic alternatives to mitigate supply disruptions.",
      "C": "An entity relies solely on vertically integrated operations to control sourcing, assuming this eliminates all risks related to price volatility and reputational harm.",
      "D": "An entity shifts entirely to locally sourced materials, disregarding the need for supplier engagement or alternative material innovation.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "22",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Apparel, Accessories & Footwear.pdf",
    "source_text": "Raw Materials Sourcing Topic Summary The Apparel, Accessories & Footwear industry relies on many raw materials including cotton, leather, wool, rubber, and precious minerals and metals, as inputs for finished products. Sustainability impacts related to climate change, land use, resource scarcity and conflict in regions where the industry ’s supply chain operates affect the industry ’s ability to reliably source materials. The ability of entities to manage potential material shortages, supply disruptions, price volatility and reputational risks can be more difficult when supply chains lack transparency. Failure to effectively manage this issue can delay shipments and depress earnings, reduce margins, constrain revenue growth or increase costs of capital. The types of risk associated with sourcing different materials can require different solutions, including engaging with suppliers, enhancing transparency by using certification standards, using innovative alternative materials, or introducing circular economy practices. Entities that are proactive may reduce their exposure to price volatility and potential supply disruptions, while improving their brand reputation and developing new market opportunities. Metrics CG-AA-440a.3. (1) List of priority raw materials; for each priority raw material: (2) environmental or social factor(s) most likely to threaten sourcing, (3) discussion on business risks or opportunities associated with environmental or social factors and (4) management strategy for addressing business risks and opportunities 1The entity shall disclose its priority raw materials purchased for finished goods. 1.1 The entity shall identify priority raw materials using the definition of ‘priority materials ’ outlined in the Priority Material section of the Textile Exchange ’s Materials Terminology Guide . 1.2 Priority raw materials may include synthetic fibres, natural fibres, manufactured cellulosic materials, materials derived from animals and any other materials used directly to make apparel, accessories or footwear products, which may include cotton, rayon, viscose, polyester, acrylic, spandex, nylon, rubber, foam, leather, wool, cashmere, mohair, flax, silk, hemp and down. 1.3 The entity shall identify priority raw materials using the categorisation scheme presented in the Materials Portfolio section of the Textile Exchange ’s Materials Terminology Guide . 1.4 The scope of disclosure shall include priority raw materials present in finished goods and shall exclude raw materials used in packaging and manufacturing. 1.5 Priority raw materials include materials purchased by the entity or its suppliers for the purposes of producing the entity ’s finished goods. 1.6 If the entity is vertically integrated across the value chain and does not purchase its priority raw materials from a third-party supplier, it shall identify the priority raw materials sourced from its owned operations and used in the production of its finished goods. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |APPAREL, ACCESSORIES & FOOTWEAR |22",
    "new_id": 669
  },
  {
    "id": 68574,
    "question": "Which condition, if altered, would most directly undermine the validity of an entity's reported compliance percentages for supplier facilities, as defined in the Apparel, Accessories & Footwear – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "A change in the definition of 'compliance' to exclude limits established by jurisdictional legal requirements.",
      "A": "An increase in the number of unregulated chemicals discharged by Tier 1 suppliers.",
      "C": "The exclusion of wastewater discharge violation notices issued to suppliers beyond Tier 1 from compliance calculations.",
      "D": "The inclusion of energy consumption metrics alongside wastewater discharge data in compliance assessments.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "12-13",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Apparel, Accessories & Footwear.pdf",
    "source_text": "10.2 pending or anticipated regulations that may limit or restrict the use of the chemical in the future; 10.3 potential for environmental harm, but not harm to human health, the entity wishes to limit; and 10.4 being ‘of concern ’ to consumers, customers, regulators or others (for example, non-governmental organisations or scientific researchers) even if the specific chemical or class of chemicals is unregulated. 10.4.1 Specific chemicals to discuss may include those found on the Chemical Footprint Project ’s Chemicals of High Concern List. 11If the entity has identified specific chemicals for elimination or substitution, it may discuss the time line to achieve those goals, identify which products or product lines will be affected by the elimination or substitution, and provide an analysis of progress towards achieving its goals. 12 Disclosures generally correspond to the Sustainable Apparel Coalition ’s Higg Brand & Retail Module. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |APPAREL, ACCESSORIES & FOOTWEAR |12\n\n[Page 13]\nEnvironmental Impacts in the Supply Chain Topic Summary The Apparel, Accessories & Footwear industry ’s global supply chain contributes significantly to adverse environmental externalities through water consumption and various forms of pollution. Water pollution results from the discharge of chemicals during water-intensive dyeing and tanning processes. Air pollution stems from the industry ’s energy use and some manufacturing processes. These impacts have the potential to damage an entity ’s reputation and to affect cost structures over time. The scale of this issue has been intensified historically by the industry relying on manufacturing partners in emerging markets with limited environmental regulations and oversight. However, enhanced stakeholder and consumer scrutiny, coupled with increasingly stringent regulation in some regions, has encouraged entities throughout the industry to work with suppliers to reduce their environmental impact. Apparel, Accessories & Footwear entities that leverage their market power to influence suppliers to improve operational efficiencies and resource consumption and limit pollution can mitigate the costs associated with increased resource scarcity and regulation. Further, those that engage with suppliers through monitoring, auditing and strict standards may better preserve shareholder value over the long term. Metrics CG-AA-430a.1. Percentage of (1) Tier 1 supplier facilities and (2) supplier facilities beyond Tier 1 in compliance with wastewater discharge permits or contractual agreements 1The entity shall disclose the percentage of (1) its Tier 1 supplier facilities and (2) its supplier facilities beyond Tier 1 that comply with wastewater discharge permits or contractual agreements. 1.1 Tier 1 suppliers are defined as suppliers that transact directly with the entity, such as finished goods manufacturers (for example, cut and sew facilities). 1.2 Suppliers beyond Tier 1 are the essential suppliers to the entity ’s Tier 1 suppliers and can include manufacturers, processing plants, and providers of raw materials extraction (for example, mills, dye houses and washing facilities, sundry manufacturers, tanneries, embroiderers, screen printers, farms or slaughterhouses). 1.3 A supplier facility shall be considered to be in compliance with applicable permits or contractual agreements if it meets the limits established by applicable jurisdictional legal or regulatory requirements for each chemical during testing conducted by local officials and by the entity, and if the facility has received no wastewater discharge violation notices during the reporting period. 1.3.1 The determination of facility compliance with permits or contractual agreements is aligned with the Sustainable Apparel Coalition ’s (SAC) Higg Facility Environment Module (FEM), Section 4 — Wastewater/Effluent, Level 1, Question 2. 1.4 The entity shall calculate the percentages by dividing the number of supplier facilities (in each respective category) in compliance with wastewater discharge permits or contractual agreements by the total number of supplier facilities (in each respective category). SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |APPAREL, ACCESSORIES & FOOTWEAR |13",
    "new_id": 670
  },
  {
    "id": 68575,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between supplier auditing processes and the metrics provided for labor conditions in the supply chain, as described in the Apparel, Accessories & Footwear – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Entities are expected to disclose both the priority non-conformance rate and the associated corrective action rate, along with an explanation of audit methodologies and supply chain transparency.",
      "A": "The percentage of Tier 1 supplier facilities audited to a labor code of conduct excludes audits conducted by third-party auditors as they are considered less reliable.",
      "B": "Priority non-conformance rates must be disclosed alongside corrective action rates, but no additional context regarding audit methodologies is required.",
      "D": "Supplier facilities beyond Tier 1 are exempt from labor code of conduct audits unless they directly interact with the entity’s finished goods manufacturers.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "6-7",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Apparel, Accessories & Footwear.pdf",
    "source_text": "SUSTAINABILITY DISCLOSURE TOPICS & METRICS Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORYUNIT OF MEASURECODE Management of Chemicals in ProductsDiscussion of processes to maintain compliance with restricted substances regulationsDiscussion and Analysisn/a CG-AA-250a.1 Discussion of processes to assess and manage risks or hazards associated with chemicals in productsDiscussion and Analysisn/a CG-AA-250a.2 Environmental Impacts in the Supply ChainPercentage of (1) Tier 1 supplier facilities and (2) supplier facilities beyond Tier 1 in compliance with wastewater discharge permits or contractual agreements 1QuantitativePercentage (%)CG-AA-430a.1 Percentage of (1) Tier 1 supplier facilities and (2) supplier facilities beyond Tier 1 that have completed the Sustainable Apparel Coalition ’s Higg Facility Environmental Module (Higg FEM) assessment or an equivalent environmental data assessmentQuantitativePercentage (%)CG-AA-430a.2 Labour Conditions in the Supply ChainPercentage of (1) Tier 1 supplier facilities and (2) supplier facilities beyond Tier 1 that have been audited to a labour code of conduct, (3) percentage of total audits conducted by a third-party auditorQuantitativePercentage (%)CG-AA-430b.1 (1) Priority non-conformance rate and (2) associated corrective action rate for suppliers ’ labour code of conduct audits 2Quantitative Rate CG-AA-430b.2 Description of the greatest (1) labour and (2) environmental, health and safety risks in the supply chainDiscussion and Analysisn/a CG-AA-430b.3 Raw Materials Sourcing(1) List of priority raw materials; for each priority raw material: (2) environmental or social factor(s) most likely to threaten sourcing, (3) discussion on business risks or opportunities associated with environmental or social factors and (4) management strategy for addressing business risks and opportunitiesDiscussion and Analysisn/a CG-AA-440a.3 (1) Amount of priority raw materials purchased, by material, and (2) amount of each priority raw material that is certified to a third-party environmental or social standard, by standardQuantitativeMetric tonnes (t)CG-AA-440a.4 1Note to CG-AA-430a.1 – The entity shall discuss its supply chain risks associated with discharge of water from supplier facilities and describe how it manages these risks. 2Note to CG-AA-430b.2 – The disclosure shall include a discussion of additional context around supply chain auditing, such as audit methodologies and supply chain transparency. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |APPAREL, ACCESSORIES & FOOTWEAR |6\n\n[Page 7]\nTable 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORYUNIT OF MEASURECODE Number of (1) Tier 1 suppliers and (2) suppliers beyond Tier 13 Quantitative Number CG-AA-000.A 3Note to CG-AA-000.A – Tier 1 suppliers are defined as suppliers that transact directly with the entity, such as finished goods manufacturers (for example, cut and sew facilities). Suppliers beyond Tier 1 are the key suppliers to the entity ’s Tier 1 suppliers and can include manufacturers, processing plants and providers of raw materials extraction (for example, mills, dye houses and washing facilities, sundry manufacturers, tanneries, embroiderers, screen printers, farms, or slaughterhouses) The entity shall disclose whether any supplier data beyond Tier 1 is based on assumptions, estimates or otherwise includes any uncertainty. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |APPAREL, ACCESSORIES & FOOTWEAR |7",
    "new_id": 671
  },
  {
    "id": 68817,
    "question": "Which inference can be drawn regarding the relationship between the metrics HC-DI-250a.1 and HC-DI-510a.2, based on their descriptions and the notes provided in the Health Care Distributors – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "HC-DI-250a.1 exclusively addresses product safety legal proceedings, while HC-DI-510a.2 expands to include unethical practices unrelated to product safety.",
      "A": "Both metrics require qualitative descriptions of corrective actions but differ in their quantitative focus on monetary losses.",
      "B": "Monetary losses are reported identically for both metrics, but only HC-DI-510a.2 mandates a description of the context and corrective actions taken.",
      "C": "The two metrics overlap entirely in their treatment of monetary losses and corrective actions, with no distinguishing factors.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "6-7",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Health Care Distributors.pdf",
    "source_text": "SUSTAINABILITY DISCLOSURE TOPICS & METRICS Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORYUNIT OF MEASURECODE Fleet Fuel ManagementPayload fuel economy Quantitative Litres/RTK HC-DI-110a.1 Description of efforts to reduce the environmental impact of logisticsDiscussion and Analysisn/a HC-DI-110a.2 Product SafetyTotal amount of monetary losses as a result of legal proceedings associated with product safety 1QuantitativePresentation currencyHC-DI-250a.1 Description of efforts to minimise health and safety risks of products sold associated with toxicity/chemical safety, high abuse potential, or deliveryDiscussion and Analysisn/a HC-DI-250a.2 Counterfeit DrugsDescription of methods and technologies used to maintain traceability of products throughout the distribution chain and prevent counterfeitingDiscussion and Analysisn/a HC-DI-260a.1 Discussion of due diligence process to qualify suppliers of drug products and medical equipment and devicesDiscussion and Analysisn/a HC-DI-260a.2 Discussion of process for alerting customers and business partners to potential or known risks associated with counterfeit productsDiscussion and Analysisn/a HC-DI-260a.3 Product Lifecycle ManagementDiscussion of strategies to reduce the environmental impact of packaging throughout its lifecycleDiscussion and Analysisn/a HC-DI-410a.1 Amount (by weight) of products accepted for take-back and reused, recycled, or donatedQuantitativeMetric tonnes (t)HC-DI-410a.2 Business EthicsDescription of efforts to minimise conflicts of interest and unethical business practicesDiscussion and Analysisn/a HC-DI-510a.1 Total amount of monetary losses as a result of legal proceedings associated with bribery, corruption, or other unethical business practices 2QuantitativePresentation currencyHC-DI-510a.2 1Note to HC-DI-250a.1 – The entity shall briefly describe the nature, context and any corrective actions taken because of monetary losses. 2Note to HC-DI-510a.2 – The entity shall briefly describe the nature, context and any corrective actions taken because of monetary losses. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |HEALTH CARE DISTRIBUTORS |6\n\n[Page 7]\nTable 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORYUNIT OF MEASURECODE Number of pharmaceutical units sold by product category Quantitative Number HC-DI-000.A Number of medical devices sold by product category Quantitative Number HC-DI-000.B SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |HEALTH CARE DISTRIBUTORS |7",
    "new_id": 672
  },
  {
    "id": 68851,
    "question": "Which of the following best reflects an accurate synthesis of how strategies or plans are addressed across multiple sustainability topics in the disclosure metrics, as outlined in the Oil & Gas – Services – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Discussion of strategies is required for water, chemicals, ecological impacts, and business ethics, but not for emissions reduction services or workforce health and safety.",
      "B": "Strategies for emissions reduction and ecological impact management are quantitatively measured, whereas water and chemical management require only qualitative discussions.",
      "C": "All sustainability topics mandate both quantitative metrics and detailed discussion or analysis of strategies to address related risks and opportunities.",
      "D": "Only emissions reduction and business ethics necessitate a qualitative discussion of strategies, while other topics rely solely on quantitative data.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "6-7",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Oil & Gas – Services.pdf",
    "source_text": "SUSTAINABILITY DISCLOSURE TOPICS & METRICS Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORYUNIT OF MEASURECODE Emissions Reduction Services & Fuels ManagementTotal fuel consumed, percentage renewable, percentage used in: (1) on- road equipment and vehicles and (2) off- road equipmentQuantitativeGigajoules (GJ), Percentage (%)EM-SV-110a.1 Discussion of strategy or plans to address air emissions-related risks, opportunities and impactsDiscussion and Analysisn/a EM-SV-110a.2 Percentage of engines in service that comply with the highest level of emissions standards for non-road diesel engine emissionsQuantitativePercentage (%)EM-SV-110a.3 Water Management Services(1) Total volume of water handled in operations, (2) percentage recycledQuantitativeThousand cubic metres (m³), Percentage (%)EM-SV-140a.1 Discussion of strategy or plans to address water consumption and disposal-related risks, opportunities and impactsDiscussion and Analysisn/a EM-SV-140a.2 Chemicals Management(1) Volume of hydraulic fracturing fluid used, (2) percentage hazardousQuantitativeThousand cubic metres (m³), Percentage (%)EM-SV-150a.1 Discussion of strategy or plans to address chemical-related risks, opportunities, and impactsDiscussion and Analysisn/a EM-SV-150a.2 Ecological Impact ManagementAverage disturbed land area per (1) oil and (2) gas well siteQuantitative Hectares (ha) EM-SV-160a.1 Discussion of strategy or plan to address risks and opportunities related to ecological impacts from core activitiesDiscussion and Analysisn/a EM-SV-160a.2 Workforce Health & Safety(1) Total recordable incident rate (TRIR), (2) fatality rate, (3) near miss frequency rate (NMFR), and (4) average hours of health, safety, and emergency response training for (a) direct employees, and (b) contract employeesQuantitative Rate EM-SV-320a.1 Description of management systems used to integrate a culture of safety throughout the value chain and project lifecycleDiscussion and Analysisn/a EM-SV-320a.2 Number of road accidents and incidents Quantitative Number EM-SV-320a.3 continued... SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |OIL & GAS – SERVICES |6\n\n[Page 7]\n...continued TOPIC METRIC CATEGORYUNIT OF MEASURECODE Business Ethics & Payments TransparencyAmount of net revenue in countries that have the 20 lowest rankings in Transparency International ’s Corruption Perception IndexQuantitativePresentation currencyEM-SV-510a.1 Description of the management system for prevention of corruption and bribery throughout the value chainDiscussion and Analysisn/a EM-SV-510a.2 Management of the Legal & Regulatory EnvironmentDiscussion of corporate positions related to government regulations or policy proposals that address environmental and social factors affecting the industryDiscussion and Analysisn/a EM-SV-530a.1 Critical Incident Risk ManagementDescription of management systems used to identify and mitigate catastrophic and tail-end risksDiscussion and Analysisn/a EM-SV-540a.1 Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORYUNIT OF MEASURECODE Number of active rig sites1Quantitative Number EM-SV-000.A Number of active well sites2Quantitative Number EM-SV-000.B Total amount of drilling performed Quantitative Metres (m) EM-SV-000.C Total number of hours worked by all employees Quantitative Hours EM-SV-000.D 1Note to EM-SV-000.A – Rigs that are on location and involved in drilling, completions, cementing, fracturing, workovers and decommissioning are considered active. Rigs in transit from one location to another, or are otherwise idled, are inactive. 2Note to EM-SV-000.B – The number of well sites for which the entity has provided or is providing (on an ongoing basis) drilling, completion, fracturing, workover or decommissioning services. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |OIL & GAS – SERVICES |7",
    "new_id": 673
  },
  {
    "id": 68858,
    "question": "Which scenario would most directly challenge an Oil & Gas – Services entity's ability to gain a competitive advantage through emissions reduction services, as described in the Oil & Gas – Services – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "An E&P entity exclusively seeks emissions reduction solutions that rely on design parameters rather than actual fuel consumption data.",
      "A": "A customer prioritizes services that reduce fuel consumption but shows no interest in lowering GHG or fugitive emissions.",
      "C": "Regulatory standards for defining renewable fuels shift to exclude fuels derived from renewable biomass.",
      "D": "Renewable fuels achieve lifecycle GHG reductions but fail to replace or reduce fossil fuels in transportation or heating applications.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "8",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Oil & Gas – Services.pdf",
    "source_text": "Emissions Reduction Services & Fuels Management Topic Summary Although direct greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and associated regulatory risks are relatively low for Oil & Gas - Services providers relative to other industries, emissions from the operations of their customers —the Exploration & Production (E&P) entities —can be significant. Emissions include GHGs that can contribute to climate change as well as other air pollutants that can have significant localised human health and environmental impacts. Increasing regulation and high costs of fuels associated with these emissions present substantial risk to E&P entities. Entities are seeking ways to lower their emissions, including converting pumps and engines to run on natural gas and electricity instead of diesel fuel. Oil & Gas - Services entities compete for contracts partly based on providing innovative, efficient technologies that can help E&P entities reduce operating costs and improve process efficiencies. Services entities can gain a competitive advantage, grow revenue and secure market share by providing customers with services and equipment to reduce GHG, fugitive and flared emissions and fuel consumption. Metrics EM-SV-110a.1. Total fuel consumed, percentage renewable, percentage used in: (1) on-road equipment and vehicles and (2) off-road equipment 1The entity shall disclose total fuel consumed from all sources as an aggregate figure, in gigajoules (GJ). 1.1 The calculation methodology for fuel consumed shall be based on actual fuel consumed as opposed to design parameters. 1.2 Acceptable calculation methodologies for fuel consumed may include methodologies based on: 1.2.1 Adding fuel purchases made during the reporting period to beginning inventory at the start of the reporting period, less any fuel inventory at the end of the reporting period 1.2.2 Tracking fuel consumed by vehicles 1.2.3 Tracking fuel expenses 2The entity shall disclose the percentage of the total amount of fuel consumed from all sources that is renewable. 2.1 Renewable fuel generally is defined as fuel that meets all these requirements: 2.1.1 Produced from renewable biomass 2.1.2 Used to replace or reduce the quantity of fossil fuel present in a transportation fuel, heating oil or jet fuel 2.1.3 Achieved net greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction on a lifecycle basis 2.2 The entity shall disclose the standard or regulation used to determine if a fuel is renewable. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |OIL & GAS – SERVICES |8",
    "new_id": 674
  },
  {
    "id": 68880,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between the entity's strategies for addressing air-emissions-related risks and the scope of emissions sources that must be disclosed, as outlined in the Oil & Gas – Services – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "While the entity’s strategies may include fuel substitution or process redesigns, the disclosed emissions scope explicitly requires combustion emissions from sources like fuel use in gas compression and power generation to be addressed.",
      "A": "The entity's short-term strategies, such as engine maintenance, are sufficient to address all emissions sources within the disclosure scope, including non-combustion sources.",
      "B": "Long-term strategies, such as carbon capture and storage, are only applicable to off-road equipment and stationary rigs, excluding on-road vehicles from the disclosure scope.",
      "D": "The entity is required to disclose emissions exclusively from purchased electricity and steam as part of its air quality management plans.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "9",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Oil & Gas – Services.pdf",
    "source_text": "2.3 The percentage shall be calculated as the amount of renewable fuel consumed by the entity ’s fleet vehicles (in GJ) divided by the total amount of fuel consumed by the entity ’s fleet vehicles (in GJ). 3The entity shall disclose the percentage of total fuel consumed by (1) on-road, mobile equipment and vehicles and (2) off-road equipment, including stationary rigs, generators and mounted equipment. 4 The scope of disclosure includes only fuel consumed by entities owned or controlled by the entity. 4.1 The scope excludes non-fuel energy sources such as purchased electricity and purchased steam. 4.2 The scope of disclosure includes combustion sources owned or operated by the entity, regardless of which entity bears the cost of fuel or considers greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from these sources to be part of its Scope 1 inventory. 5In calculating energy consumption from fuels and biofuels, the entity shall use higher heating values (HHV), also known as gross calorific values (GCV), which are directly measured or taken from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 6The entity shall apply conversion factors consistently for all data reported under this disclosure, such as the use of HHVs for fuel usage (including biofuels). EM-SV-110a.2. Discussion of strategy or plans to address air emissions-related risks, opportunities and impacts 1The entity shall discuss its strategies or plans to address air-emissions-related risks, opportunities and impacts. 1.1 The scope of disclosure includes the entity ’s strategies, plans or emissions-reduction activities, such as how they relate to various business units, geographies or emissions sources. 1.2 The scope of disclosure includes activities and investments required to achieve the plans, and any risks or limiting factors that might affect achievement of the plans or targets. 1.3 The scope of disclosure includes the discussion of the demand for specific products, services and technologies that reduce well and field operators ’ fuel consumption, emissions, or create other efficiencies, and its ability to meet this demand. 2The entity shall discuss its short- and long-term plans related to air quality management, where: 2.1 Short-term strategies may include fuel substitution (for example, drop-in biodiesel), use of dual fuel equipment or engine maintenance. 2.2 Long-term strategies may include alternative fuel equipment, process or equipment redesigns and innovations, and carbon capture and storage. 3 The scope of disclosure shall include, at a minimum, emissions from these specific sources: 3.1 Combustion emissions (for example, fuel use in gas compression, power generation) SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |OIL & GAS – SERVICES |9",
    "new_id": 675
  },
  {
    "id": 68881,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes why an entity might need to discuss variations in the total number of employees during the reporting period when calculating average training hours, as described in the Oil & Gas – Services – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "To provide context for significant changes in workforce size that could affect the interpretation of the average.",
      "A": "To ensure that the calculation reflects only full-time employees for consistency.",
      "B": "To adjust the total qualifying training hours provided based on fluctuations in workforce size.",
      "C": "To exclude contract employees from the calculation if their numbers varied significantly.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "20",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Oil & Gas – Services.pdf",
    "source_text": "4.1 The ‘200,000’ in the rate calculation represents the total number of hours 100 full-time workers working 40 hours per week for 50 weeks per year can provide annually. 5The entity shall disclose (4) the average number of training hours it provided to its workforce for health, safety and emergency management training. 5.1 Training shall relate to topics such as the health, safety, or emergency preparedness of employees with respect to occupational risks or hazards to which employees are reasonably likely to be exposed and specific occupational risks or hazards. 5.2 The average number of hours of health, safety and emergency response training shall be calculated as: (total qualifying training hours provided by the entity) / (total number of employees). 5.2.1 The total number of employees is number of the entity ’s direct and contract employees at the end of the reporting period. If the total number of employees varied widely during the reporting period, the entity should discuss those variations to provide context. 6 The scope of the disclosure includes work-related incidents only. 6.1 Work-related incidents are injuries and illnesses resulting from events or exposures in the work environment. 6.2 The work environment is the establishment and other locations where one or more employees are working or are present as a condition of their employment. 6.3 The work environment includes not only physical locations, but also the equipment or materials used by the employee during the course of work. 6.4 Incidents that occur while an employee is travelling are work-related if, at the time of the injury or illness, the employee was engaged in work activities in the interest of the employer. 6.5 A work-related incident must be a new case, not a previously recorded injury or illness being updated. 7The entity shall disclose the rates and average hours of training for each of these employee categories: 7.1 direct employees, defined as individuals on the entity ’s payroll, whether they are full-time, short service, part-time, executive, labour, salary, seasonal, migrant or hourly employees; and 7.2 contract employees, defined as individuals who are not on the entity ’s payroll, but whom the entity supervises or manages, including independent contractors and those employed by third parties (for example, temp agencies and labour brokers). 8 The scope includes all employees regardless of employee location or type of employment. EM-SV-320a.2. Description of management systems used to integrate a culture of safety throughout the value chain and project lifecycle 1 The entity shall describe how it integrates a culture of safety throughout the value chain and project lifecycle. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |OIL & GAS – SERVICES |20",
    "new_id": 676
  },
  {
    "id": 69676,
    "question": "Which statement best captures the implicit relationship between corporate accountability, sustainability reporting, and stakeholder trust, as described in The GRI Standards: A Guide for Policy Makers?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The integration of sustainability information into reporting cycles fosters trust by enabling stakeholders to assess both business impacts and decision-making responsibility.",
      "B": "Corporate accountability is primarily driven by the need to comply with financial reporting standards established during the Great Depression.",
      "C": "Sustainability reporting ensures market efficiency by directly replacing the need for financial performance disclosures.",
      "D": "Transparency in sustainability reporting is a voluntary practice that has little influence on institutional legitimacy or stakeholder relationships.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "2-3",
    "ref_doc": "GRI Policymaker.pdf",
    "source_text": "The importance of transparency and accountability The global sustainability reporting landscape The reliability of sustainability reports Public sector reporting and accountability How does GRI support policy makers?Promoting transparency through public policyThe GRI S tandardsThe Global Reporting Initiative (GRI)Table of contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 2\n\n[Page 3]\nThe importance of transparency and accountability Transparency on the sustainability impacts of a business is essential for continuous improvement as well as for stakeholder relationships. Without transparency, there is no trust – and without trust it is very complex to do business, markets do not function efficiently, and institutions lose their legitimacy. Corporate accountability is such an important factor in the efforts to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) that it has been included as one of the 169 goals. Goal 12.6 states that the United Nations member states should “encourage businesses, especially large corporations, to adopt sustainable practices and integrate sustainability information into their reporting cycle.” This target aims for the private sector’s contribution to sustainable development to be accounted for with the same frequency, thoroughness, and importance as an organization’s financial performance. Sustainability reporting began in the 1990s and is relatively recent compared to the mandatory financial reporting that has been in place since the Great Depression. However, reporting on sustainability information is increasingly becoming a legal requirement and less of a voluntary practice. Governments, stock exchanges, market regulators, investors, civil society and other stakeholders are demanding more and better information on organizations’ sustainability impacts. In a rapidly changing environment, corporate accountability becomes imperative. That is why it is important that measuring and reporting are done according to internationally recognized standards such as the GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards (GRI Standards). This ensures data quality and comparability, and contributes to better decision making by allowing access to information that promotes better decisions. Companies are increasingly being called on to show that they operate and make decisions in a responsible way.12.6GOAL SDG s1 3",
    "new_id": 677
  },
  {
    "id": 69677,
    "question": "Which statement best captures the relationship between the GSSB's funding mechanisms and its role in ensuring the independence and public accessibility of the GRI Standards, as described in The GRI Standards: A Guide for Policy Makers?",
    "options": {
      "B": "The GSSB’s diverse funding sources, including the Global Standards Fund, support its independence and facilitate the provision of the GRI Standards as a free public good.",
      "A": "The GSSB’s reliance on GRI’s independent funding ensures that all organizations, regardless of size, must pay to access the GRI Standards.",
      "C": "The Global Standards Fund (GSF) directly subsidizes corporate programs, enabling private sector organizations to dominate the development of the GRI Standards.",
      "D": "The GSSB’s exclusive use of grants from governments and foundations guarantees that no private sector influence affects the development of the GRI Standards.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "8",
    "ref_doc": "GRI Policymaker.pdf",
    "source_text": "The GRI Standards development process The GRI Standards are issued by the Global Sustainability Standards Board (GSSB), an independent operating entity of GRI. They are developed according to a formally defined due process overseen by the Due Process Oversight Committee (DPOC). Experts from different stakeholder groups across the world are involved in developing the GRI Standards using a consensus- seeking approach that builds on their diverse backgrounds and expertise. The GSSB also routinely conducts public comment periods to gather stakeholder feedback on draft Standards. Transparency lies at the heart of the GSSB’s work. All meetings of the GSSB and the documents discussed at these meetings, including drafts of Standards, are publicly accessible via the GRI website. The GSSB receives independent funding from GRI, sourced from grants, corporate programs, and revenues from GRI’s support services. Additionally, launched in 2020, the Global Standards Fund (GSF) provides for the independent, multi-stakeholder development of the GRI Standards as a free public good available to all organizations and is an opportunity for foundations, governments, private sector organizations and individuals to participate in a coalition of likeminded funders who want to see companies integrate transparency and sustainability at the core of their operations. All of this helps ensure that the GRI Standards serve the public interest and can be applied by any organization worldwide.Alignment of the GRI Standards with intergovernmental instruments The GRI Standards are aligned with widely recognized international instruments for responsible business behavior. These include instruments such as the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, the ILO conventions, and the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises. Using the GRI Standards, organizations can be transparent about how they apply these instruments. Organizations can also use the Standards to report on their impacts and progress on the SDGs. Since the adoption of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, GRI has developed guidance for companies to integrate these Goals into reporting practice, with the GRI Standards at the core. 1. Analysis of the goals and targets – a handbook of indicators and business actions to make reporting on the SDGs straightforward and simple to execute. 2. Integrating the SDGs in corporate reporting: A practical guide – a three-step guide to embed the SDGs in existing business and reporting processes. 3. Mapping the SDGs against the GRI Standards – a linkage document to show which GRI Standards can be used to report on specific SDGs.For more information on the GSF: globalreporting.org/ about-gri/how-we- are-funded/global- standards-fund/ All SDG tools are available on the GRI website: globalreporting. org/public-policy- partnerships/sustainable- development/ integrating-sdgs-into- sustainability-reporting/ 8",
    "new_id": 678
  },
  {
    "id": 74038,
    "question": "When evaluating the confidentiality of climate-related targets, which factor is explicitly emphasized as critical for determining whether disclosure could harm an organization's competitive position, as outlined in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Guidance on Metrics, Targets, and Transition Plans?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The degree to which the information provides a measurable economic benefit by remaining unknown to competitors.",
      "A": "The potential for public disclosure to cause a significant economic loss due to competitors gaining insights into proprietary strategies.",
      "B": "The likelihood that disclosing such targets would lead to immediate financial impacts on the organization’s operations.",
      "D": "The possibility that transition plans might be misinterpreted by stakeholders without broader contextual details.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "39-40",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Guidence.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures A. Overview and Background B. Scope and Approach C. Climate-Related Metrics D. Climate-Related Targets E. Transition Plans F. Financial Impacts Appendices• whether making such information public may cause a considerable economic loss for the organization.75 If an organization determines that a particular climate-related target is confidential, the organization should provide relevant information in broader terms to support users’ decision-making.76Finally, the Task Force encourages organizations not to assume their climate-related targets contain confidential business information that would harm the organization if publicly disclosed. When evaluating whether certain climate- related targets contain confidential business information, the organization should consider the following: • whether the information provides the organization with an economic benefit that translates into a competitive advantage because the information is unknown to its competitors and 75 European Innovation Council and SMEs Executive Agency (European Commission), Trade Secrets: Managing Confidential Business Information , July 2021, pp. 2–4. 76 Based on footnote 10 from the European Commission Guidelines on non-financial reporting: Supplement on reporting climate-related information . 37\n\n[Page 40]\nE. Transition Plans",
    "new_id": 679
  },
  {
    "id": 74081,
    "question": "Which conclusion can be drawn regarding Enel's approach to emission reductions and their financial strategy for low-carbon initiatives based on the interplay between operational metrics and capital allocation, as outlined in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Guidance on Metrics, Targets, and Transition Plans?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Enel prioritized Capex allocation for low-carbon technologies over reducing Scope 1 emissions, as evidenced by the increase in Capex despite a decline in EBITDA.",
      "A": "The reduction in Scope 1 emissions was achieved independently of Capex allocation, suggesting alternative operational efficiencies were responsible for emission declines.",
      "B": "Enel’s decrease in Scope 1 emissions directly correlates with a proportional increase in Capex for low-carbon products, indicating a strategic alignment between emission targets and investment priorities.",
      "C": "The rise in Capex for low-carbon products was offset by an overall decline in efficiency metrics, implying that investments did not contribute to measurable emission improvements.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "52",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Guidence.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures A. Overview and Background B. Scope and Approach C. Climate-Related Metrics D. Climate-Related Targets E. Transition Plans F. Financial Impacts AppendicesFigure F3 Example Disclosure: Enel 113 Integrated Annual Report 2020214 20.4 €15,616 63.4% €9,575 SPECIFIC DIRECT GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS - SCOPE 1TOTAL WATER CONSUMPTION ORDINARY EBITDA FOR LOW-CARBON PRODUCTS, SERVICES AND TECHNOLOGIES ZERO-EMISSION GENERATION CAPEX FOR LOW-CARBON PRODUCTS, SERVICES AND TECHNOLOGIES (gCO2eq/kWh) millions of m3 million million-28.2% on 2019-64.9% on 2019 (% of total)Fighting climate change and ensuring environmental sustainability Main climate change indicators 2020 2019 2020-2019 Direct greenhouse gas emissions - Scope 1 (1) (million/teq) 45.26 69.98 (24.72) -35.3% Indirect greenhouse gas emissions - Scope 2 - Purchase of electricity from the grid (location based) (million/teq) 1.43 1.55 (0.12) -7.7 % Indirect greenhouse gas emissions - Scope 2 - Purchase of electricity from the grid (market based) (million/teq) 2.28 2.30 (0.02) -0.9% Indirect greenhouse gas emissions - Scope 2 - Distribution grid losses (location based) (million/teq) 3.56 3.82 (0.26) -6.8% Indirect greenhouse gas emissions - Scope 2 - Distribution grid losses (market based) (million/teq) 5.57 6.00 (0.43) -7. 2 % Indirect greenhouse gas emissions - Scope 3 (million/teq) 47.70 56.92 (9.22) -16.2% - of which emissions connected with gas sales (million/teq) 21.48 23.92 (2.44) -10.2% Specific direct greenhouse gas emissions - Scope 1 (gCO2eq/kWh) 214 298 (84) -28.2% Specific emissions of SO2 (g/kWh) 0.10 0.59 (0.49) -83.1% Specific emissions of NOx(g/kWh) 0.36 0.60 (0.24) -40.0% Specific emissions of particulates (g/kWh) 0.01 0.12 (0.11) -91.7% Zero-emission generation (% of total) 63.4 54.9 8.5 15.5% Total direct fuel consumption (Mtoe) 23.9 30.1 (6.2) -20.6% Average efficiency of thermal plants (2) (%) 44.2 42.0 2.2 5.2% Water withdrawals in water-stressed areas (3) (%) 22.9 25.4 (2.5) -9.8% Specific water withdrawals for total generation (4) (l/kWh) 0.20 0.33 (0.13) -39.4% Reference price of CO2 (€) 24.72 24.8 (0.1) -0.3% Ordinary EBITDA for low-carbon products, services and technologies (5) (millions of €) 15,616 16,241 (625.0) -3.8% Capex for low-carbon products, services and technologies (millions of €) 9,575 9,131 444.0 4.9% Ratio of capex for low-carbon products, services and technologies to total (%) 94.0 92.0 2.0 2.2% (1) Specific emissions are calculated considering total emissions from thermal generation as a ratio of total renewable, nuclear and thermal generation (including the contribution of heat). (2) The calculation does not consider Italian O&G plants being decommissioned or of marginal impact. In addition, the figures do not take account of consumption and generation for cogeneration relating to Russian thermal generation plants. Average efficiency is calculated on the basis of the plant fleet and is weighted by generation. (3) The figure for 2019 has been recalculated on the basis of the change in scope of plants in water-stressed areas. (4) Specific withdrawals consist of all water withdrawals from sources on the surface (including recovered rainwater), underground, third-party, the sea and wastewater (supplies from third parties) used for generation processes and for closed-cycle cooling, excluding sea water returned to the sea after the desalination process (brine). (5) The comparative figure for 2019 has been adjusted to take account of the fact that in South America and Mexico the values relating to large customers managed by the generation companies have been reallocated to the End-user Markets Business Line. Source: Enel, Integrated Annual Report 2020 , p. 113 50",
    "new_id": 680
  },
  {
    "id": 74214,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the nuanced relationship between climate-related risks and financial valuation, as implied by the examples provided in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Guidance on Metrics, Targets, and Transition Plans?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Invesco’s carbon-managed portfolio illustrates that reducing exposure to climate risks can mitigate valuation impacts without altering the portfolio’s overall risk characteristics.",
      "B": "Aberdeen Standard's MultiAsset Climate Solutions fund demonstrates that all companies deriving over 50% of revenues from climate solutions will experience significant valuation increases under Paris-aligned scenarios.",
      "C": "BP's impairments and write-offs indicate that lower long-term price assumptions are inconsistent with transition paths aligned with the Paris climate goals.",
      "D": "Eni’s stress test results confirm that contractual and fiscal recoverability of CO2 emissions costs eliminates any reduction in asset fair value under the IEA SDS scenario.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "66",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Guidence.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures A. Overview and Background B. Scope and Approach C. Climate-Related Metrics D. Climate-Related Targets E. Transition Plans F. Financial Impacts AppendicesInformation Alignment (Non-Exhaustive) Example Metrics Financial Organization Examples Non-Financial Organization Examples Position Impact of climate- related risks or opportunities on financial positionCDP: C2.4a, C2.3a, C3.4, C2.2a; CDSB: REQ-03, REQ-06; SASB: EM-EP-420a.1, FN-CB-410a.1; CDP: C2.2a; CDSB: REQ-03; CDP: 2.3a, C3.4; CDP: C2.2a; CDSB: REQ-03; SASB: EM-EP-420a.1 (Oil and Gas Exploration Standard) European Commission Guidelines: Annex 1; ECB Supervisory Expectation: 7.5, 8.3, 8.6, 10, 12; ECB ILAAP Principle: IV• Changes to the carrying amount of assets due to exposure to physical and transition risks • Changes to the expected portfolio given climate-related risks and opportunities • Changes in liability and equity due to increases or decreases in assets (e.g., due to low-carbon capital investments or to sale or write-offs of stranded assets) Aberdeen Standard:149 “Our MultiAsset Climate Solutions fund, for example, comprises of companies that derive over 50% of their revenues from climate solutions. For this fund we saw that for most scenarios and in our scenario mean, the valuation implication was strongly positive under our mean scenario as well as the tailends of Paris- alignment and a continuation of current policy, at least 64% of equity portfolios show an uplift in value in comparison to the baseline.” Invesco:150 “The carbon-managed portfolio significantly reduces the negative impact of the 1.5°C scenario compared to the former strategy, while keeping the risk characteristics of the UK benchmark.” Figure shows a –5% change in valuation under a 1.5°C scenario in the baseline strategy relative to a roughly –3.4% change in the carbon-managed strategy.BP:151 “These lower long-term price assumptions are broadly in line with a range of transition paths consistent with the Paris climate goals. The aggregate second-quarter 2020 non- cash, post-tax PP&E impairment charges and exploration intangible write-offs will be in the range of $13B to $17.5B.” Eni:152 “The stress test, performed under the IEA SDS scenario, showed that the overall book values of the assets were stable with a reduction in fair value of around 11%, or around 5% in the event of contractual and fiscal recoverability of the costs of direct CO2 emissions. Analyses carried out on the 3P reserves of the current upstream portfolio confirmed their resilience and flexibility.” 149 Aberdeen Standard, TCFD and Environment Report , June 3, 2021, p. 23. 150 Invesco, 2019 Invesco Climate Change Report , July 27, 2020, p. 31. 151 BP, “Progressing strategy development, bp revises long-term price assumptions, reviews intangible assets, and, as a result, expects non-cash impairments and write-offs ,” June 15, 2020. 152 Eni, Eni for 2020: Carbon Neutrality by 2050 , May 12, 2021, p. 20. 64",
    "new_id": 681
  },
  {
    "id": 74222,
    "question": "Which of the following statements best captures the implicit relationship between GHG emissions disclosure and its implications for an organization’s strategic planning, as inferred from the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Guidance on Metrics, Targets, and Transition Plans?",
    "options": {
      "B": "The disclosure of absolute GHG emissions across an organization's value chain provides critical insight into potential constraints that could shape both policy responses and internal financial planning.",
      "A": "Disclosure of GHG emissions is primarily intended to satisfy regulatory requirements rather than inform strategic decisions about climate risks.",
      "C": "Organizations with lower GHG emissions are less likely to face financial impacts due to transition risks, making their disclosures irrelevant for strategy formulation.",
      "D": "GHG emissions intensity is more important than absolute emissions in assessing an organization’s exposure to physical risks associated with climate change.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "20",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Guidence.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures A. Overview and Background B. Scope and Approach C. Climate-Related Metrics D. Climate-Related Targets E. Transition Plans F. Financial Impacts AppendicesBox C4 Survey Results from the Consultation on Metrics, Targets, and Transition Plans The results showed that many preparers are currently disclosing or planning to disclose the metric categories, particularly GHG emissions, and that users would find such disclosures useful. Source: TCFD, Proposed Guidance on Metrics, Targets, and Transition Plans Consultation: Summary of Responses , October 14, 2021 (1) GHG Emissions: Absolute Scope 1, Scope 2, and Scope 3; emissions intensity Disclosure of GHG emissions is crucial for users to understand an organization’s exposure to climate-related risks and opportunities and is also foundational information from which other climate-related information is estimated. Disclosure of absolute GHG emissions across an organization’s value chain provides insight into how a given organization may be affected by policy, regulatory, market, and technology responses to limit climate change, while associated GHG emissions intensity information can provide a useful comparison across organizations. Organizations with higher GHG emissions or with fewer options with which to reduce GHG emissions may be more impacted by transition risk. In addition, current or future constraints on GHG emissions, either set by policymakers or by the organizations themselves, may impact an organization’s strategy or financial planning. GHG emissions are also key inputs to estimating other metrics, determining financial impact, and performing scenario analysis. 18Scope 1 and 2 Scope 3 Carbon PricePhysical RisksTransition RisksClimate-Related OpportunitiesRemuneration Capital Deployment Scope 1 and 2 Scope 3 Carbon PricePhysical RisksTransition RisksClimate-Related OpportunitiesRemuneration Capital DeploymentCurrently disclose Planning to estimate, but not necessarily disclose Very usefulCurrently estimate, but do not disclose No plans to estimate or disclose Somewhat usefulPlanning to disclose I’m not sure Not at all or not very useful81% 91%54% 54%12% 42%20% 71%25% 71%25% 72%21% 42%23% 73%5% 8%8% 18%22%17%14% 6%10%5% 15% 6%21% 17% 23% 7%14%5%4% 5%4% 8%5% 8%7% 7%16% 18%8% 6%9%13%14% 13% 43%30% 41%10% 15%10% 11%13% 46%20% 21%22% 22%18% 22%7% 41%15% 22%3%1% 2%",
    "new_id": 682
  },
  {
    "id": 74223,
    "question": "Which of the following best reflects a necessary action for organizations to ensure their climate-related targets remain effective and aligned with strategic planning, while avoiding outdated or irrelevant goals, as described in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Guidance on Metrics, Targets, and Transition Plans?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Organizations should periodically review and update their targets at least every five years, considering changes in strategy or progress against goals.",
      "A": "Organizations must exclusively use standardized templates like the one developed by FTSE Russell for all disclosures.",
      "B": "Organizations are required to set interim targets only for short-term periods, disregarding medium- or long-term objectives.",
      "D": "Organizations need to report annually on qualitative information alone, without including quantitative metrics or progress updates.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "37",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Guidence.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures A. Overview and Background B. Scope and Approach C. Climate-Related Metrics D. Climate-Related Targets E. Transition Plans F. Financial Impacts Appendices2. DISCLOSING CLIMATE-RELATED TARGETS Similar to the disclosure of climate-related metrics, effective disclosure of climate-related targets includes grounding disclosures in narrative or qualitative information to help users understand their context. Organizations should describe the qualitative information that encompasses climate-related targets and reflects longer-term changes to an organization’s business or expected strategic direction. Such qualitative information may include describing what the management of climate-related risks and pursuit of climate- related opportunities might mean for the business and provide important context for specific targets. In addition to providing contextual information about their climate-related targets, organizations should also consider disclosing in formats that would lead to better standardization and comparability. As more countries, non-financial companies, and financial organizations set GHG emissions reduction targets, including those aligned with net-zero, it is particularly important for disclosures of GHG emissions targets to be comparable across organizations and over time to allow users to assess the achievability and credibility of organizations’ goals. Respondents to the consultation on metrics, targets, and transition plans emphasized that standardization is key to driving effective, decision-useful disclosure of climate-related targets. Several recommended that preparers use the template developed by FTSE Russell to make such disclosures, which is included here as an example of a type of template that may be useful ( Box D2 , p. 36).assesses its progress and makes any adjustments to its plans and targets. Any medium- and long-term targets should have interim targets set at appropriate intervals (e.g., 5–10 years) covering the full medium- or long-term target time horizon. Organizations may find it useful to disclose medium-term or long-term targets for 2030 and 2050, which have become key target dates following the publication of the IPCC’s Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°C . This report noted that in order to limit global warming to 1.5°C “global net human-caused emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) would need to fall by about 45 percent from 2010 levels by 2030, reaching ‘net zero’ around 2050.”73 Understandable and Contextualized. Climate- related targets should be presented in a manner that aids understanding (e.g., clear language, labeling) and includes descriptions of any limitations and cautions. Disclosures of targets should be supported by contextual, narrative information on items such as organizational boundaries, methodologies, and underlying data and assumptions, including those around the use of offsets. Periodically Reviewed and Updated. Organizations should have a clear process for reviewing climate-related targets, at least every five years, and updating if necessary. Because targets can become outdated, a process to periodically refresh and update them is necessary to ensure continued relevancy and efficacy to a company’s overall strategy planning process. Considerations when determining whether or not to adjust targets may include changes to an organization’s climate strategy or goals as well as any developments related to progress against targets (e.g., either outpacing previously set targets or providing transparency on underperformance). Reported Annually. Organizations should report on climate-related targets on at least an annual basis, including any new targets as well as progress against existing targets. 73 IPCC, “ Summary for Policymakers of IPCC Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°C approved by governments ,” October 8, 2018. 35",
    "new_id": 683
  },
  {
    "id": 74225,
    "question": "When disclosing climate-related metrics, which approach would most effectively address the potential trade-off between comparability across organizations and the ability to assess unique organizational risks, as outlined in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Guidance on Metrics, Targets, and Transition Plans?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Adopting a standardized set of scenarios while supplementing them with organization-specific adjustments clearly explained in the disclosure.",
      "A": "Using only organization-specific scenarios to ensure unique risks are fully captured without concern for cross-organizational comparability.",
      "B": "Relying exclusively on financial accounting standards to reconcile all climate-related metrics, avoiding the need for scenario analysis altogether.",
      "C": "Providing trend data without contextual narrative, ensuring comparability by focusing solely on quantifiable metrics across organizations.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "15",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Guidence.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures A. Overview and Background B. Scope and Approach C. Climate-Related Metrics D. Climate-Related Targets E. Transition Plans F. Financial Impacts Appendices2. DISCLOSING CLIMATE-RELATED METRICS Effective disclosure of climate-related metrics generally involves providing metrics along with contextual and supporting narrative to help users understand the meaning and use of climate-related metrics and the basis on which they have been prepared. Climate- related metrics, and associated narrative, should be integrated with an organization’s other disclosures to provide a coherent set of information on the organization’s climate-related risks and opportunities and actual and potential financial impacts.22 Organizations should also consider which metrics to present as point estimates and which to present as ranges or qualitative categories, and whether to include the level of confidence associated with the value of the metric. In presenting climate-related metrics and associated contextual information in their disclosures, an organization should consider providing the following, where relevant:23 • Types of measurements used , including whether information comes from direct measurements, estimates, proxy indicators, or financial and management accounting processes. • Methodologies and definitions used , including the scope of application, data sources, critical factors or parameters, assumptions, and limitations of the methodology. For example, the GHG Protocol suggests that organizations discuss GHG emissions factors, scope, and boundaries. For metrics informed by scenario analysis, organizations should include information on which climate scenarios were used and their assumptions and limitations ( Box C2). Organizations should also provide context if they adjust the methodology or definition of particular metrics. • Trend data to allow for consideration of how metrics have changed in absolute and relative amounts over time, including whether acquisitions, divestments, or policies have affected results.• How results are connected with business units, company strategy, and financial performance and position. Where it aids understanding, organizations should consider disaggregating information by categories such as geographic area, business unit, asset, type, upstream and downstream activities, source, and vulnerability of area. • How value chains will be affected over time by climate-related transition and physical risks , including life cycle GHG emissions reporting. • Reconciliation with financial accounting standards , if needed. If climate-related metrics are presented in financial terms, disclosures should clarify how such metrics reconcile with financial accounting standards and explain any differences. 22 For more information see, for example, Section 3.5 Key Performance Indicators (pp. 12–20) within the European Commission, Guidelines on non-financial reporting: Supplement on reporting climate-related information , June 20, 2019. 23 TCFD, 2021 annex , pp. 7–8, provides more detail on location of disclosure.Box C2 Importance of Disclosing Details on Climate-Related Scenario Analysis As noted in the 2020 TCFD Guidance on Scenario Analysis for Non-Financial Companies , users desire greater transparency into the types of scenarios preparers are using and their impact on the organization’s strategy. In particular, preparers should “describe processes used for scenario analysis; the range and assumptions of scenarios used; key findings; whether it is a standalone analysis or integrated with company’s risk management and strategy processes,” TCFD, Guidance on Scenario Analysis for Non-Financial Companies , October 29, 2020, p. 45. Using a common set of scenarios and inputs (e.g., parameters, timelines, industry-specific metrics, methodologies) increases comparability across companies, provides greater reliability and relevance, and can help reduce the resources required by preparers to develop scenarios in- house. On the other hand, using a common set of scenarios across organizations may reduce their ability to assess their individual situations and how climate-related risks may uniquely affect them, and thus could increase concentration of risk. 13",
    "new_id": 684
  },
  {
    "id": 74227,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why Scope 3 GHG emissions have become a critical focus for financial organizations and investors, as described in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Guidance on Metrics, Targets, and Transition Plans?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Scope 3 GHG emissions often account for the majority of an organization’s carbon footprint and are essential for assessing climate-related risks across the value chain.",
      "B": "Scope 3 GHG emissions are easier to measure than Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions, making them more appealing for regulatory compliance.",
      "C": "Scope 3 GHG emissions represent a small but growing percentage of total emissions, allowing companies to make significant reductions with minimal effort.",
      "D": "Scope 3 GHG emissions are mandated by all jurisdictions transitioning to net-zero targets, leaving no choice for financial organizations but to prioritize them.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "57",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Guidence.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures A. Overview and Background B. Scope and Approach C. Climate-Related Metrics D. Climate-Related Targets E. Transition Plans F. Financial Impacts AppendicesComponents, Consumer Durables and Apparel, and Technology — downstream Scope 3 GHG emissions were predominant. For 13 industries, upstream GHG emissions were predominant. Only three of the 24 industry groups had indirect emissions less than 50%: Utilities, Transportation, and Materials. In addition, CDP’s 2020 Supply Chain Report, evaluating the state of environmental risks in supply chains for 8,098 suppliers, found that upstream Scope 3 GHG emissions are on average 11.4 times higher than operational emissions across sectors ( Figure A1-2 , p. 56). An increasing number of companies are reporting Scope 3 GHG emissions . Task Force analysis of 2,500 organizations within the MSCI All Country World Index (ACWI Index) found that from 2017–2019, organizations disclosing Scope 3 GHG emissions grew from 28% to 34%.100 Industry and investor initiatives are calling for the disclosure of Scope 3 GHG emissions . For example, Climate Action 100+ (CA100+), an investor initiative of 615 investors representing $55 trillion in assets under management, engages with companies to “reduce greenhouse gas emissions across the value chain” in line with the Paris Agreement.101 Necessarily, this engagement includes Scope 3 GHG emissions within its focus. CA100+ also asks companies to enhance their climate-related disclosures in line with the TCFD recommendations. There is increasing urgency on reducing GHG emissions — both direct and indirect — to zero , which stems from a shift in international dialogue from a focus on carbon budgets consistent with the Paris Agreement to a focus on achieving net-zero GHG emissions by 2050, with governments and investors increasingly focusing on the full value chain of emissions. As an increasing number of jurisdictions formally move to net-zero targets, they may require more comprehensive GHG reporting from companies within their borders. Financial organizations require effective disclosure of GHG emissions data, including Scope 3 GHG emissions, to track their GHG emissions reduction commitments and meet their disclosure obligations . Banks, insurance companies, asset managers, and asset owners will need better disclosure of GHG emissions Since 2017, Scope 3 GHG emissions, including the Scope 3 investment category, have received increasing attention in both the public and private sectors. Scope 3 GHG emissions are becoming an essential component of climate-related risk analysis in commercial and financial markets. As companies’ and jurisdictions’ commitments to reduce GHG emissions — both direct and indirect — to net-zero continue to grow, investors, lenders, and insurance underwriters want insight into value chain GHG emissions and how they could be affected by such commitments. In response to widespread interest, an increasing number of companies are reporting GHG emissions, including Scope 3 GHG emissions. A. Importance of Disclosure of Scope 3 GHG Emissions Scope 3 GHG emissions are an important component of overall GHG emissions for several reasons. Scope 3 GHG emissions are increasingly understood as an important indicator of risk, as risk is embedded in buying inputs or selling products that are carbon intensive. A 2017 study by CDP found that of the three GHG emissions scopes, “approximately 40% of global GHG emissions are driven or influenced by organizations through their purchases (i.e., purchased goods and services) and through the products they sell” (in other words, through their Scope 3 GHG emissions).98 Scope 3 GHG emissions are a critical component of overall GHG emissions . A growing body of research shows that in certain sectors, Scope 3 GHG emissions can account for several times the impact of a company’s Scope 1 and Scope 2 GHG emissions. For example, a 2015 report by the sell-side investment research house Kepler-Cheuvreux analyzed the GHG emissions for 24 industry groups under the Global Industry Classification Standard (GICS) ( Figure A1-1 , p. 56). It found that 21 industry groups had indirect GHG emissions (Scope 3 GHG emissions upstream and downstream and Scope 2 upstream GHG emissions) greater than 50% of their overall carbon emissions.99 For eight of these 21 industries — Banks, Insurance, Real Estate, Energy, Capital Goods, Automobiles and 98 SBTi, Gold Standard, and Nav",
    "new_id": 685
  },
  {
    "id": 74229,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the rationale behind why the Task Force refrains from defining specific time frames for short-, medium-, and long-term climate-related targets, as outlined in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Guidance on Metrics, Targets, and Transition Plans?",
    "options": {
      "B": "To enable organizations to tailor time horizons based on asset life, risk profiles, and operational contexts.",
      "A": "To allow organizations flexibility in aligning their targets with international regulatory deadlines.",
      "C": "Because the Task Force prioritizes financial implications over temporal considerations in strategic planning.",
      "D": "Due to the inability of current models to project climate impacts beyond a ten-year horizon.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "36",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Guidence.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures A. Overview and Background B. Scope and Approach C. Climate-Related Metrics D. Climate-Related Targets E. Transition Plans F. Financial Impacts AppendicesShort-, medium-, and long-term time horizons should be consistent across an organization’s targets and, if feasible, consistent with key dates tracked by key international organizations, such as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), or regulators (Figure D2 ); and • Interim targets: An interim target is a checkpoint between the current period and the target end date in which an organization Clearly Specified over Time.70 Climate-related targets should be defined clearly over time and specify the following: • Baseline: Clear definition of baseline time period against which progress will be tracked, with a consistent base year across GHG emissions targets;71 • Time horizon: Defined time horizon by which targets are intended to be achieved. 70 This information is adapted from SBTi’s Criteria and Recommendations for Financial Institutions and SBTi’s Science-Based Target Setting Manual , Version 4.1. In its target-setting manual, SBTi recommends that “[c]ompanies should set a target that covers a minimum of 5 years and a maximum of 15 years from the date the target is submitted for approval. It is also recommended to set long-term targets beyond this interval and set interim milestones at five-year intervals” (p. 30). 71 The 2020 Science-Based Target Setting Manual recommends that for GHG emissions targets, organizations “use the same base year and target year for all targets within the mid-term timeframe and all targets within the long-term timeframe,” maintaining that “a common target period will simplify data tracking and communication around the target. Where value chain data are difficult to obtain, however, it is acceptable if scope 1 and 2 targets use a different base year from scope 3 targets” (p.30). 72 TCFD, 2017 report , p. 38.Figure D2 Disclosing Business-Relevant Time Horizons PresentFinancial Implications Broad conceptualization of possible financial pathwaysStrategic Thinking Informed by Scenarios Strategic Planning Informed by Scenarios Capital Planning Project Planning, Financial Analyses of Strategic Projects & Initiatives Formulating Financial Strategy Formulating Operating Plans & BudgetsFinancial Implications Broad estimates of relative shifts in capital expenditures due to climate change Financial Implications Projections/estimates of potential returns on specific planned responses to climate-related risks and opportunities Financial Implications Estimates/actual climate change impacts on current revenues and costs, budgets & value of assets and liabilities>10 Years 5–10 Years 2–5 Years 0–2 Years Source: TCFD, 2020 TCFD Guidance on Scenario Analysis for Non-Financial Companies , Figure E2, p. 49As stated in the 2017 report, “[B]ecause the timing of climate-related impacts on organizations will vary, the Task Force believes specifying time frames across sectors for short, medium, and long term could hinder organizations’ consideration of climate-related risks and opportunities specific to their businesses. The Task Force is, therefore, not defining time frames and encourages preparers to decide how to define their own time frames according to the life of their assets, the profile of the climate-related risks they face, and the sectors and geographies in which they operate.”72 The TCFD 2020 Scenario Guidance provides the following diagram for the types of financial implications across various time horizons to assist organizations in thinking about time horizons. Organizations should think about their climate-related targets in the same manner. 34",
    "new_id": 686
  },
  {
    "id": 74230,
    "question": "Which of the following best reflects the Task Force's reasoning for updating its guidance to reference Article Two of the Paris Agreement instead of a general 2°C pathway, as described in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Guidance on Metrics, Targets, and Transition Plans?",
    "options": {
      "C": "To align with newer scientific consensus that prioritizes limiting temperature increases to 1.5°C as an aspirational target.",
      "A": "Because the original 2°C pathway was deemed insufficiently challenging for organizations transitioning to a low-carbon economy.",
      "B": "To simplify the disclosure process by focusing exclusively on global average temperature metrics without sector-specific considerations.",
      "D": "In response to public consultations suggesting that portfolio alignment should be based solely on pre-industrial emissions data.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "10",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Guidence.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures A. Overview and Background B. Scope and Approach C. Climate-Related Metrics D. Climate-Related Targets E. Transition Plans F. Financial Impacts Appendicestopics covered in this guidance. Nevertheless, the Task Force believes it is critical to emphasize the importance of disclosing certain climate- related metrics and targets and to explicitly address the types of information organizations should disclose as it relates to their plans for transitioning to a low-carbon economy, where such disclosures are appropriate. 3. KEY CONSIDERATIONS The Task Force encourages preparers to read the guidance in the context of the following considerations. Principles for Effective Disclosures. To underpin its recommendations and help guide developments in climate-related financial reporting, the Task Force developed a set of fundamental principles for effective disclosure (Figure B1 ). These principles can help achieve high-quality and decision-useful disclosures that enable users to understand the impact of climate change on organizations. The Task Force encourages organizations adopting its recommendations to consider these principles as they develop climate-related financial disclosures. metrics, targets, and transition plan elements, as well as the challenges of disclosure, and for users to assess the usefulness of such disclosures. The consultation also asked about proposed updates to the supplemental guidance for financial sectors, including on disclosure of Scope 3 GHG emissions and alignment of financial sector business activities with a 2°C or lower GHG emissions pathway (“portfolio alignment”).15 In addition, respondents provided input on developments and changes in user expectations since the original guidance was released in 2017. Responses to these public consultations allowed the Task Force to better assess the burden of disclosure on preparers as well as the need for consistent and decision-useful information for users, a balance that is foundational to the Task Force’s work. Based on the over 400 responses received through both consultations, the Task Force has clarified and simplified the proposed guidance and updated specific sections of its Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (2021 annex).16 The Task Force’s guidance for all sectors released in 2017 explicitly or implicitly addresses the 15 Though the language released for consultation referenced a 2°C or lower temperature pathway, the Task Force recommendation on portfolio alignment has been updated to reference article two of the 2015 Paris Agreement , which commits parties to “holding the increasing in the global average temperature to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels and pursuing efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels” (emphasis added). 16 TCFD, Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (2021 annex), October 14, 2021. Figure B1 Principles for Effective Disclosures 1 Disclosures should represent relevant information2 Disclosures should be specific and complete3 Disclosures should be clear, balanced, and understandable4 Disclosures should be consistent over time 5 Disclosures should be comparable among companies within a sector, industry, or portfolio6 Disclosures should be reliable, verifiable, and objective7 Disclosures should be provided on a timely basis 8",
    "new_id": 687
  },
  {
    "id": 74231,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between capital deployment and organizational resilience, as implied in the discussion of climate-related disclosures in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Guidance on Metrics, Targets, and Transition Plans?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Investing in climate-related infrastructure upgrades, even at the cost of short-term debt increases, can indicate preparation for long-term value preservation.",
      "A": "Organizations that prioritize short-term debt reduction are signaling their commitment to long-term climate resilience.",
      "B": "Capital expenditures on low-carbon technologies primarily serve to reduce immediate financial risks rather than enhance long-term opportunities.",
      "C": "Financial organizations are less focused on deploying capital toward climate-related opportunities compared to non-financial organizations.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "26",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Guidence.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures A. Overview and Background B. Scope and Approach C. Climate-Related Metrics D. Climate-Related Targets E. Transition Plans F. Financial Impacts Appendicesrisk or to capture climate-related opportunities. For example, organizations that are hardening infrastructure in response to increased incidence of physical risks can signal that short-term debt might increase as the organizations upgrade their assets but long-term costs may be lower. Capital expenditures, capital investments, or the amount of financing for new technologies, infrastructure, or products can be reported in line with financial reporting standards and commonly used taxonomies for delineating climate-related risks and opportunities. It can be helpful for organizations to present traditional disclosures alongside climate-related disclosures to allow users to understand the scale of investment in different types of activities, such as the example provided by one insurance company in Figure C7 .(5) Capital Deployment: Amount of Capital Expenditure, Financing, or Investment Deployed toward Climate-Related Risks and Opportunities In addition to having different climate-related risks and opportunities, organizations differ in the extent to which they are deploying capital to manage their risks and increase their opportunities. Capital investment disclosure by non-financial organizations and financing by financial organizations gives an indication of the extent to which long-term enterprise value might be affected. Deployment of capital in low-carbon technologies, business lines, or products may demonstrate that an organization is investing to make their businesses resilient to transition Figure C7 Example Disclosure: Liberty Mutual Source: Liberty Mutual, 2020 Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures Report , p. 14 24",
    "new_id": 688
  },
  {
    "id": 74233,
    "question": "Which implication most accurately reflects the role of sector-specific guidance in shaping climate-related disclosures, based on the interplay between frameworks and organizational reporting practices, as outlined in the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures Guidance on Metrics, Targets, and Transition Plans?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Sector-specific guidance provides a foundation for organizations to develop nuanced disclosures that reflect industry-specific climate-related opportunities and challenges.",
      "B": "Sector-specific guidance primarily serves to standardize financial reporting across all industries, minimizing the need for tailored metrics.",
      "C": "The use of sector-specific guidance eliminates the necessity for organizations to independently assess their alignment with climate-related opportunities.",
      "D": "Frameworks like SASB and ICMA are designed to replace internal decision-making processes within organizations when disclosing sustainability indicators.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "25",
    "ref_doc": "TCFD Guidence.pdf",
    "source_text": "The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures A. Overview and Background B. Scope and Approach C. Climate-Related Metrics D. Climate-Related Targets E. Transition Plans F. Financial Impacts Appendicesreport renewable generation as a fraction of their total electricity generation. An agricultural company might report revenues received from the sale of drought-resilient seeds, while an asset manager could disclose the percent of resilient infrastructure in its portfolio. The example disclosure provided in Figure C6 shows how one chemicals company characterizes its sales by sustainability indicator. Existing frameworks already provide some sector-specific guidance to help preparers disclose information on climate-related opportunities. For example, SASB’s Construction Materials Standard (SASB EM-CM-410a.1) asks companies to report the percentage of products that qualify for credits in sustainable building design and construction certifications; its Iron and Steel Producers Standard (SASB EM-IS-000.A) refers to percent raw steel production from basic oxygen furnace processes and electric arc furnace processes. In addition, the EU Technical Expert Group’s recommendations for the EU Taxonomy proposes technical screening criteria for economic activities that contributed substantially to climate change mitigation, while the International Capital Market Association (ICMA) provides voluntary guidance for issuers of green bonds.53(4) Climate-Related Opportunities: Proportion of Revenue, Assets, or Other Business Activities Aligned with Climate-Related Opportunities The 2017 report also describes several categories of climate-related opportunities that organizations can capture. Examples include a) improved resource efficiency from reducing energy, water, and waste; b) use of energy sources that emit low or no GHG emissions; c) development of new products and services; d) access to new markets; and e) improved adaptive capacity and resilience. Disclosure of the proportion of revenue, assets, or business activities aligned with climate- related opportunities provides insight into the position of organizations relative to their peers and allows users to understand likely transition pathways and potential changes in revenue and profitability over time. The operationalization of this metric category will be specific to each industry’s or organization’s climate-related opportunities, as well as to the opportunities within specific business lines or asset classes. For example, auto manufacturers might report sales of electric vehicles relative to total vehicle sales, while utilities companies could 53 EU Technical Expert Group on Sustainable Finance, Technical Report , March 9, 2020; EU Technical Expert Group on Sustainable Finance, Taxonomy Report: Technical Annex , March 9, 2020; ICMA, Green Bond Principles: Voluntary Process Guidelines for Issuing Green Bonds , June 2021.Figure C6 Example Disclosure: BASF Source: BASF, BASF 2020 Report , p. 45 23",
    "new_id": 689
  },
  {
    "id": 74501,
    "question": "Which of the following represents the most accurate synthesis of the relationship between global health progress and current systemic challenges as described in SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENTAL GOALS Briefing Book 2023 UN Office for Partnerships?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Despite earlier rapid progress in population health, recent stagnation since 2015 highlights the need for increased investment in resilience against future health threats and improved public health funding.",
      "A": "The decline in childhood vaccinations is primarily attributed to a lack of vaccine availability, which directly correlates with rising maternal mortality rates.",
      "C": "The reduction in new HIV infections has been offset by an increase in deaths from non-communicable diseases, making universal health coverage less achievable.",
      "D": "Progress on reducing adolescent birth rates and neglected tropical diseases indicates that current health policies are sufficient to meet SDG targets without additional measures.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "9",
    "ref_doc": "SDG 2023.pdf",
    "source_text": "14 15 GOAL 3 | GOOD HEALTH AND WELL-BEING Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages 3.1 Reduce the global maternal mortality ratio to less than 70/100,000 live births.3.2 End preventable deaths of newborns and children under 5 years of age, with all countries aiming to reduce neonatal mortality to at least as low as 12/ 1,000 live births and under-5 mortality to at least as low as 25/1,000 live births.3.3 End the epidemics of AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria and neglected tropical diseases and combat hepatitis, water- borne diseases and other communicable diseases. 3.4 Reduce by one third premature mortality from non-communicable diseases through prevention and treatment and promote mental health and well-being.3.5 Strengthen the prevention and treatment of substance abuse, including narcotic drug abuse and harmful use of alcohol.3.6 By 2020, halve the number of global deaths and injuries from road traffic accidents. 3.7 Ensure universal access to sexual and reproductive health-care services and the integration of reproductive health into national strategies and programmes. 3.A Strengthen the implementation of WHO’s Framework Convention on Tobacco Control in all countries3.8 Achieve universal health coverage and affordable essential medicines and vaccines for all. 3.B Support the research and development of vaccines and medicines for the communicable and noncommunicable diseases that primarily affect developing countries and provide access to affordable essential medicines and vaccines.3.C Increase health financing and the recruitment, development, training and retention of the health workforce in developing countries. 3.D Strengthen the capacity of all countries, in particular developing countries, for early warning, risk reduction and management of national and global health risks.3.9 Reduce the number of deaths and illnesses from hazardous chemicals and air, water and soil pollution and contamination.Goal 3 Targets Key Messages • In the early 2000s, rapid progress has been observed in population health – however, this progress has markedly stalled since 2015, challenging the timely attainment of the SDGs • Increased investment to build resilience against future health threats is crucial. • Proactive policies are needed to increase public health funding, extend coverage for medicines and make healthcare services more affordable • Regions with the highest disease burden continue to have the lowest proportion of health workers to deliver health services Key Data • 99% of the entire global population breathes unhealthy levels of fine particulate matter as caused by both ambient and household air pollution • In 2019, an estimated 6.7 million deaths globally were attributed to the joint effects of ambient and household air pollution • The largest sustained decline in childhood vaccinations in approximately 30 years has occurred over the past couple years, due systemic immunization challenges exacerbated by the pandemic• Maternal mortality is increasing. One woman dies every two minutes during pregnancy or childbirth • Between 2015 and 2021, the global under-5 mortality rate fell by 12 % • The global adolescent birth rate for girls aged 15–19 was 41.3 births per 1,000 girls in 2023, down from 47.2 in 2015 • At the end of 2022, 47 countries had eliminated at least one Neglected Tropical Disease (NTD), which include diseases such as blinding trachoma, lymphastic filariasis and soil- transmitted helminths • In 2021, there were 1.5 million new HIV infections globally. This represents a decline of 32% in new HIV infections compared to 2010 • 146 out of 200 countries or areas have already met or are on track to meet the SDG target on under-5 mortality",
    "new_id": 690
  },
  {
    "id": 74502,
    "question": "Which of the following conclusions can be drawn about the relationship between urban population growth, housing, and environmental impact based on the targets and data provided in SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENTAL GOALS Briefing Book 2023 UN Office for Partnerships?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Current trends suggest that without substantial policy changes, rising urban populations could exacerbate both housing shortages and environmental degradation.",
      "A": "The increase in urban populations will likely reduce per capita emissions due to improved infrastructure efficiency.",
      "B": "Achieving affordable housing for all is unlikely to affect disaster-related economic losses or deaths significantly.",
      "D": "Efforts to expand public spaces in cities will necessarily lead to a reduction in global emissions by 2050.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "21",
    "ref_doc": "SDG 2023.pdf",
    "source_text": "38 39 GOAL 11 | SUSTAINABLE CITIES AND COMMUNITIES Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable 11.1 Ensure access for all to adequate, safe and affordable housing and basic services and upgrade slums 11.2 Provide access to safe, affordable, accessible and sustainable transport systems for all11.3 Enhance inclusive and sustainable urbanization and capacity for participatory, integrated and sustainable human settlement planning and management in all countries 11.4 Strengthen efforts to protect and safeguard the world’s cultural and natural heritage 11.6 Reduce the adverse per capita environmental impact of cities 11.B By 2020, substantially increase the number of cities and human settlements adopting and implementing integrated policies and plans towards inclusion, resource efficiency, mitigation and adaptation to climate change, resilience to disasters, and develop and implement11.C Support least developed countries, in building sustainable and resilient buildings utilizing local materials 11.A Support positive economic, social and environmental links between urban, peri-urban and rural areas by strengthening national and regional development planning11.5 Significantly reduce the number of deaths and the number of people affected and substantially decrease the direct economic losses relative to global gross domestic product caused by disasters11.7 Provide universal access to safe, inclusive and accessible, green and public spacesGoal 11 TargetsKey Messages • Cities are critical battlegrounds for the advancement of the SDGs due to their high emission rates and population density • There is a pressing need for cities worldwide to have efficient and environmentally friendly transportation systems and infrastructure alongside policy implementation • Adequate housing is an essential right and the prerequisite for social and economic development, health and equal opportunities • Organizations across sectors must support cities to take action on climate, advance access to affordable housing, and deliver the local initiatives needed to make the SDGs a realityKey Data • Over half of the global population currently resides in urban areas, a rate projected to reach 70 % by 2050 • Cities generate 70% of global emissions • Approximately 1.1 billion people currently live in slums or slum-like conditions in cities, with 2 billion more expected in the next 30 years (The world’s population was 8 billion in 2022) • In 2022, only 51.6% of the world’s urban population has convenient access to public transport, with considerable variations across regions • By the end of 2022, a total of 102 countries reported having local governments with disaster risk reduction strategies, a substantial increase from 51 in 2015 • At least 170 countries and many cities around the world have included adaptation in their climate policies and planning processes • 3 in 4 cities globally have less than 20% of their area dedicated to public spaces and streets • Only 13% of the world’s cities have affordable housing",
    "new_id": 691
  },
  {
    "id": 74503,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why truck drivers in Malawi, despite understanding the severe legal and personal risks, might still initially consider engaging in human trafficking as outlined in SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENTAL GOALS Briefing Book 2023 UN Office for Partnerships?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The financial incentive offered for smuggling far exceeds their legitimate earnings, and the drivers are frequently manipulated into accepting these offers through tactics of intimidation.",
      "A": "They are coerced by local authorities into participating in illicit activities as a form of punishment for minor infractions.",
      "B": "Their decision stems primarily from peer pressure within the Professional Drivers Association, which inadvertently promotes such actions.",
      "C": "They lack awareness of the connection between human trafficking and other criminal activities like drug smuggling, leading to underestimation of consequences.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "32-33",
    "ref_doc": "SDG 2023.pdf",
    "source_text": "61 Malawi is located at the crossroads of several significant conflicts, instability, and poverty across both Central Africa and the Horn of Africa. The result? Continuous flows of fleeing people becoming prime targets for smugglers and traffickers. In order to transport these migrants and trafficking victims, smugglers will partner with truck drivers, who are frequently manipulated into accepting these offers through tactics of intimidation. Drivers often accept the offer too, out of necessity: the payment for illegally transporting people is much larger than the average truck driver’s salary. As a response, truck drivers based in Malawi are now learning about the risks of transporting migrants and trafficking victims through a collaboration between the Professional Drivers Association of Malawi and the UN Office on Drugs and Crime, with cooperation of Malawi’s Ministry of Homeland Security and financial support from the Government of Sweden. IMPLEMENTATION SDG 16-17 TRUCK DRIVERS BECOME ANTI-TRAFFICKING ALLIES United Nations News. (2023, August 27). Malawi: Truck drivers learn about risk of human trafficking. UN News. UNODC Maxwell Matewere, addresses a local community in Malawi about the threat of human trafficking.\n\n[Page 33]\n62 63 A total of four courses for around 400 drivers have been conducted so far, with further sessions on the schedule. The participants are informed about the penalties they face if caught, including the loss of both their truck and employment, a criminal record, and potential imprisonment of up to 14 years in a foreign country. Furthermore, the drivers are told that these crimes are linked to exploitation, abuse, violence, illicit activities such as drugs and firearms smuggling, and can even result in death. Since the start of the UNODC courses, the Professional Drivers Association has reported a reduction in the number of arrests of Malawian drivers on charges of migrant smuggling and human trafficking and explain the drivers who compete the training are proving to be “very useful allies” in the prevention and detection of cases. © ILO/Marcel Crozet A truck travels up to East Africa. ©WPDI Website Peacemaker Rajab Emad (red) leading a group of adolescents at the Kiryandongo Refugee Settlement during a football game, organized by the Peace Through Sports programIOM/Alexander Bee Migrants travel by foot and by vehicle across Africa in order to reach Europe and other destinations.FROM CHILD SOLDIER TO AGENT OF CHANGE “From Child Soldier to Youth Leader and Peacemaker. ” (2021 Jun 11) Children and Armed Conflict. United Nations. The Youth Peacemaker Network under the Whitaker Peace and Development Initiative (WPDI) mentors and supports youth to create coalitions of peacebuilders and entrepreneurs from around the world. One such mentee is Rajab Emad, who spent three years in the Sudan People’s Liberation Army. Since leaving SPLA, Rajab has been living in the Kiryandongo Refugee Settlement Uganda where he received reintegration support. The WPDI provided Rajab with rigorous trainings in Conflict Resolution Education, mental health healing support, Information Communication Technology and Business and Entrepreneurship. They further assisted him in attending classes at Uganda Cooperative College, where he received a certificate in Business Administration. Rajab successfully graduated as a Trainer of Trainees (ToT) and is promoting peace at the grassroots level within the Kiryandongo settlement, primarily focused on children and adolescents. His training in mediation skills has additionally helped him reduce incidents of gender-based violence in his community. He continues to expand his reach of conflict resolution training to neighboring communities, primarily through radio talk shows.",
    "new_id": 692
  },
  {
    "id": 74504,
    "question": "Which statement accurately captures the relationship between Lewis Pugh's swim and the broader environmental goals implied in SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENTAL GOALS Briefing Book 2023 UN Office for Partnerships?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Pugh’s swim aims to highlight the Hudson River as a model for global river restoration, emphasizing community-driven efforts and natural recovery despite historical pollution.",
      "B": "The swim is primarily intended to protest against the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s insufficient response to PCB contamination in the Hudson River.",
      "C": "Pugh chose the Hudson River because it remains one of the most polluted rivers globally, serving as a cautionary example for ecosystems worldwide.",
      "D": "The event seeks to promote burn agriculture practices as a sustainable alternative aligned with SDG 12 and 13 directives.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "27",
    "ref_doc": "SDG 2023.pdf",
    "source_text": "50 51 UN Indonesia/Kiky Wuysang Eggplants are a delicacy and a cash crop for peatland farmers in Jongkat, West Kalimantan. UN Indonesia/Kiky Wuysang Cucumbers are harvested in Limbung on the island of Borneo in Indonesia. THE HUDSON RIVER: CLEANER THAN YOU THINK citation needs to be changed: United Nations. (2023, Aug. 28) “UN chief calls for urgent action to address climate change. ” UN News. | “Hudson River PCBs. ” (n.d). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The first appointed UNEP Patron of the Oceans, Lewis Pugh, an English-South African long-distance swimmer, will swim the length of the iconic Hudson River in New York state to draw attention to the critical importance of healthy river ecosystems. After three decades of massive toxic substances dumping and an estimated cost of harm of $22 billion dollars, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) mandated the Hudson River cleanup in 2002 and has since monitored its natural recovery. Pugh’s swim down the river started August 13, 2023, and he plans to arrive at New York City during the United Nations 78th General Assembly. When speaking on his journey, Pugh expressed “I specifically chose the Hudson for this swim because of the environmental progress that’s been made on the iconic waterway...setting an example for restoring rivers around the world.” The Lewis Pugh Foundation, UNEP Patron of the Oceans Lewis Pugh swims in front of the Statue of Liberty in New York harbour (file). The key is community involvement, and demonstrating to them that they have a stake in non-burn agriculture, and that it can improve livelihoods. This project represents commitments to SDG 12 and 13, by promoting sustainable patterns of consumption and production that coincides with climate change-related planning through the directives of local governments.",
    "new_id": 693
  },
  {
    "id": 74505,
    "question": "Which of the following represents the most comprehensive and accurate synthesis of the relationship between human-induced pressures on marine ecosystems and the proposed solutions within the context of Goal 14 as described in SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENTAL GOALS Briefing Book 2023 UN Office for Partnerships?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Addressing ocean acidification, overfishing, and plastic pollution requires a combination of science-based management, conservation efforts, and capacity-building measures, including increased funding for ocean science and enforcement of international law.",
      "A": "The primary solution to combat overfishing is the implementation of international legally binding instruments, as this directly addresses the root cause of carbon dioxide emissions.",
      "C": "Efforts to regulate harvesting and eliminate harmful subsidies are sufficient on their own to restore marine ecosystems without the need for additional scientific research or technology transfer.",
      "D": "Plastic pollution has been effectively mitigated through existing recycling efforts, rendering further interventions unnecessary in the pursuit of marine ecosystem restoration.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "24",
    "ref_doc": "SDG 2023.pdf",
    "source_text": "44 45 GOAL 14 | LIFE BELOW WATER 14.1 By 2025, prevent and significantly reduce marine pollution of all kinds14.2 By 2020, sustainably manage and protect marine and coastal ecosystems to avoid significant adverse impacts and take action for their restoration 14.3 Minimize and address the impacts of ocean acidification 14.4 By 2020, effectively regulate harvesting and end overfishing, illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing and destructive fishing practices and implement science-based management plans14.6 By 2020, prohibit certain forms of fisheries subsidies which contribute to overcapacity and overfishing, eliminate subsidies that contribute to illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing 14.7 Increase the economic benefits to Small Island developing States and least developed countries from the sustainable use of marine resources14.A Increase scientific knowledge, develop research capacity and transfer marine technology in order to improve ocean health and to enhance the contribution of marine biodiversity to the development of developing countries14.B Provide access for small-scale artisanal fishers to marine resources and markets14.5 By 2020, conserve at least 10 % of coastal and marine areas 14.C Enhance the conservation and sustainable use of oceans and their resources by implementing international law as reflected in UNCLOSGoal 14 TargetsKey Messages • The oceans are absorbing a quarter of annual carbon dioxide emissions. While this mitigates the impact of climate change on the planet, it comes at a great cost to the careful balance in ocean acidity, damaging organisms and ecosystems • The ocean is in a state of emergency as increasing eutrophication, acidification, ocean warming, and plastic pollution worsen its health • Overfishing trends have led to the depletion of over one third of global fish stocks, which leads to an imbalance in oceanic ecosystems, in addition to the loss of jobs and coastal economies for people who depend on the fishing industry for their livelihoods • To counter overfishing, it is vital to increase funding for ocean science, intensify conservation efforts, advance nature- and ecosystem- based solutions and address the impacts of human-induced pressures • In March 2022, at the resumed fifth session of the UN Environment Assembly, a historic resolution was adopted to develop an international legally binding instrument on addressing the problem of plastic pollutionKey Data • There is 17 million metric tons of plastic clogging the ocean in 2021, a figure set to double or triple by 2040 • Plastic production has skyrocketed fourfold in the last 40 years, while recycling rates remain below 10 % • Currently, the ocean’s average pH is 8.1, about 30 % more acidic than in pre-industrial times and changing rapidly • Annual losses as a result of illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing are estimated at 11 to 26 million tons of fish, with an economic value of up to $23 billion • Only 7.5% of the world’s oceans are protected by law10%",
    "new_id": 694
  },
  {
    "id": 74506,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why training family members and health workers in identifying child wasting is considered a critical step toward ending malnutrition, according to the methods described in SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENTAL GOALS Briefing Book 2023 UN Office for Partnerships?",
    "options": {
      "C": "It enables early detection and prompt referrals using simple tools, reducing the risk of severe illness.",
      "A": "It ensures that all children receive nutritional food pouches as part of localized care initiatives.",
      "B": "It relies solely on advanced medical facilities to provide accurate diagnoses and treatments.",
      "D": "It eliminates the need for community-level engagement by centralizing care in urban health centers.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "12-13",
    "ref_doc": "SDG 2023.pdf",
    "source_text": "21 One of the key targets from Goal 2 is to end all forms of malnutrition, including achieving, by 2025, the internationally agreed targets on stunting and wasting in children under 5 years of age. Wasting results from the failure to prevent malnutrition, and can occur in times of crises, but also in everyday life. Nine countries in the East Asia and Pacific region have introduced services and strategies for the early identification of child wasting and have begun incorporating treatment into primary health care services. Care can be provided to children at health facilities close to their home, making access easier for busy caregivers who often work long hours to provide for their families. IMPLEMENTATION SDG1-5 THE EASIEST WAY TO MONITER WASTING? TRAIN THE PARENTS UNICEF East Asia & Pacific. (2022, August 23). Wasting in the East Asia and Pacific region. UNICEF . A parent measures their child’s arm to monitor for wasting. © UNICEF/2020/Le Vu\n\n[Page 13]\n22 23 Additionally training family members and health workers to identify children with wasting – for example, by measuring their arms using a simple measuring tape and testing the feet for swelling – has led to much prompter referrals before children become very sick. These methods are simple and effective and can be widespread to help end malnutrition for good. A child snacks on a nutritional food pouch. ©UNICEF/2021/Padj A mother learns how to monitor wasting alongside her children. © UNICEF/2021/Raab LOCAL INITIATIVES HAVE WIDESPREAD IMPACTS UN Women Feature. (2023, August 17). Tackling Discriminatory Gender Norms in Cameroon. UN Women. Eliminating all forms of violence against women and girls in the public and the private spheres is one of the targets of Goal 5. While this task can seem daunting on a large scale, the key is local-level initiatives. One such example is the work being done in Cameroon. In 2022, 979,000 people were in need of gender-based violence (GBV) services in in the country—94% of whom were women and girls. According to Loveline Musah, CEO of United Youths Organization (UYO), harmful social norms in Cameroon have “resulted in men asserting dominance over women.” To address this, UYO has organized grassroots discussions on GBV prevention, positive social norms, and gender equality, convening men, women, and religious and traditional rulers. Melvin Songwe, UYO’s Chief of Administration, describes one such session targeted at male members of the community: “We did one training with 60 men, the majority of whom were ignorant about the issues of GBV... by the end of the session, 90% of them were emotional about the fact that they had been causing harm to women and girls.” These efforts, in combination with those being done by UN Women and partners, have reached 42,547 people, including men and boys, through sensitizations, workshops, dialogues, and other community engagements. Furthermore, 20 community HeForShe groups of 599 men and boys have been created and trained on positive masculinities, to advance the prevention of GBV. UN Women | A facilitator from Cameroon’s United Youths Organization leads a HeForShe dialogue with men in the municipality of Batibo. Participants wear shirts with the hashtag #TogetherAgainstGBV. Photo: United Youths Organization.",
    "new_id": 695
  },
  {
    "id": 74507,
    "question": "Which of the following represents a logical consequence implied by the combination of learning disruptions due to the pandemic, the persistent gender disparities in education, and the financing gap mentioned in SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENTAL GOALS Briefing Book 2023 UN Office for Partnerships?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Without significant financial investment and targeted interventions, pre-existing inequalities in education access and outcomes are likely to worsen by 2030.",
      "A": "The global focus on digital transformation will fully compensate for learning losses among vulnerable populations within the next five years.",
      "B": "Increasing scholarships for higher education alone will eliminate gender disparities at all levels of education across low-income countries.",
      "C": "Legislation ensuring diversity in curricula will independently resolve the challenges posed by inadequate school infrastructure in low- and middle-income regions.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "10",
    "ref_doc": "SDG 2023.pdf",
    "source_text": "16 17 GOAL 4 | QUALITY EDUCATION Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and pro - mote lifelong learning opportunities for all 4.1 Ensure that all girls and boys complete free, equitable and quality primary and secondary education 4.2 Ensure that all girls and boys have access to quality early childhood development, care and preprimary education 4.3 Ensure equal access for all women and men to affordable and quality technical, vocational and tertiary education, including university4.4 Increase the number of youth and adults who have relevant skills employment, decent jobs and entrepreneurship 4.5 Eliminate gender disparities in education and ensure equal access to all levels of education and vocational training for the vulnerable 4.6 Ensure that all youth and a substantial proportion of adults achieve literacy and numeracy4.7 Ensure that all learners acquire the knowledge and skills needed to promote sustainable development 4.C Increase the supply of qualified teachers 4.A Build and upgrade education facilities that provide safe, nonviolent, inclusive and effective learning environments for all4.B By 2020, expand globally the number of scholarships available to developing countries for enrolment in higher educationGoal 4 TargetsKey Messages • We must reimagine education systems to prioritize effective instruction for all through quality educators, who have been historically undervalued • Universal access to early childhood education offers governments and families a critical tool to prevent and reverse inter-generational inequalities • Legislation must protect respect for diversity in curricula, learning materials and in the composition of teachers • Improving basic school infrastructure and embracing digital transformation are essential for providing universal education • To deliver on Goal 4, education financing must become a national investment priority as opposed to a consumption expenditure Key Data • Without additional measures, only one in six countries will achieve the universal secondary school completion target by 2030 • More than 616 million students faced learning disruption due to school closures during the pandemic • In low- and middle-income countries, learning losses to school closures left up to 70% of 10-year-olds unable to read or understand a simple text, up from 53% pre-pandemic • On current trends, an estimated 84 million children and young people will still be out of school, and approximately 300 million students will lack the basic numeracy and literacy skills necessary for success in life in 2030 • Low- and lower- middle-income countries face a nearly $100 billion annual financing gap to reach their education targets • COVID-19 has had devastating impacts on education, causing learning losses in four out of five of the 104 countries studied • 11% of children globally were not enrolled in primary school in 2022 • Of students enrolled globally, only 45% completed upper secondary in 2022 • There are 700 million illiterate adults around the world, the majority of whom are women",
    "new_id": 696
  },
  {
    "id": 75149,
    "question": "Which of the following statements accurately reflects an implied relationship between sustainability disclosures and operational strategies for entities in the Pulp & Paper Products industry, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 43: Pulp & Paper Products?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Strategies to manage water risks are directly tied to regions with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress, indicating a geographically focused approach to sustainability.",
      "B": "Entities must prioritize Scope 1 emissions reduction over water management due to higher regulatory scrutiny.",
      "C": "The incorporation of environmental lifecycle analyses into fibre sourcing decisions is optional unless mandated by local regulations.",
      "D": "Third-party certification of forestlands is the sole determinant of compliance with sustainability standards, rendering other metrics irrelevant.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "4",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol43.pdf",
    "source_text": "Volume 43 —Pulp & Paper Products Industry Description Pulp & Paper Products industry entities manufacture a range of wood pulp and paper products, including pulp fibre, paper packaging and sanitary paper, office paper, newsprint, and paper for industrial applications. Entities in the industry typically function as business-to-business entities and may have operations in multiple countries. Although some integrated entities own or manage timber tracts and are engaged in forest management, sustainability issues arising from these activities are addressed in the Forestry Management (RR-FM) industry. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Greenhouse Gas EmissionsGross global Scope 1 emissions Quantitative Metric tons (t) CO₂-eRR-PP-110a.1 Discussion of long- and short-term strategy or plan to manage Scope 1 emissions, emissions reduction targets, and an analysis of performance against those targetsDiscussion and Analysisn/a RR-PP-110a.2 Energy Management(1) Total energy consumed, (2) percentage grid electricity, (3) percentage from biomass, (4) percentage from other renewable energy and (5) total self-generated energy 70Quantitative Gigajoules (GJ), Percentage (%)RR-PP-130a.1 Water Management(1) Total water withdrawn, (2) total water consumed; percentage of each in regions with High or Extremely High Baseline Water StressQuantitative Thousand cubic metres (m³), Percentage (%)RR-PP-140a.1 Description of water management risks and discussion of strategies and practices to mitigate those risksDiscussion and Analysisn/a RR-PP-140a.2 Supply Chain ManagementPercentage of wood fibre sourced from (1) third-party certified forestlands and percentage to each standard and (2) meeting other fibre sourcing standards and percentage to each standard 71Quantitative Percentage (%) by weightRR-PP-430a.1 Amount of recycled and recovered fibre procured 72Quantitative Metric tons (t) RR-PP-430a.2 70Note to RR-PP-130a.1 – The entity shall discuss risks and uncertainties associated with the use of biomass for energy. 71Note to RR-PP-430a.1 – The entity shall discuss due diligence practices for fibre that is not from certified forestlands or certified to other fibre sourcing standards. 72Note to RR-PP-430a.2 – The entity shall discuss its strategy to incorporate environmental lifecycle analyses into decisions to source recycled and recovered fibre versus virgin fibre.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 3",
    "new_id": 697
  },
  {
    "id": 75181,
    "question": "When reporting in accordance with the GRI Standards, under which circumstance is an organization required to explicitly state that a specific item does not exist, rather than omitting the information entirely, according to GRI 201: Economic Performance 2016?",
    "options": {
      "B": "When the item does not exist, and the organization must report this fact as part of compliance with a disclosure requirement.",
      "A": "When the item is confidential and its disclosure would violate legal prohibitions.",
      "C": "When the organization has plans to develop the item in the future but has not yet implemented it.",
      "D": "When the required information about the item has already been published elsewhere, such as on a webpage or in an annual report.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "5-6",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 201_  Economic Performance 2016.pdf",
    "source_text": "Figure 1. GRI Standards: Universal, Sector and Topic Standards Apply all three Universal Standards to your reportingUse the Sector Standards that apply to your sectorsSelect Topic Standards to report specific information on your material topicsSector Standards Universal Standards Topic StandardsGRI Standards Requirements and principles for using the GRI Standards Disclosures about the reporting organization Disclosures and guidance about the organization's material topics Using this Standard This Standard can be used by any organization – regardless of size, type, sector, geographic location, or reporting experience – to report information about its economic performance-related impacts . An organization reporting in accordance with the GRI Standards is required to report the following disclosures if it has determined economic performance to be a material topic : See Requirements 4 and 5 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 . Reasons for omission are permitted for these disclosures. If the organization cannot comply with a disclosure or with a requirement in a disclosure (e.g., because the required information is confidential or subject to legal prohibitions), the organization is required to specify the disclosure or the requirement it cannot comply with, and provide a reason for omission together with an explanation in the GRI content index. See Requirement 6 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 for more information on reasons for omission. If the organization cannot report the required information about an item specified in a disclosure because the item (e.g., committee, policy, practice, process) does not exist, it can comply with the requirement by reporting this to be the case. The organization can explain the reasons for not having this item, or describe any plans to develop it. The disclosure does not require the organization to implement the item (e.g., developing a policy), but to report that the item does not exist. If the organization intends to publish a standalone sustainability report, it does not need to repeat information that it has already reported publicly elsewhere, such as on web pages or in its annual report. In such a case, the organization can report a required disclosure by providing a reference in the GRI content index as to where this information can be found (e.g., by providing a link to the web page or citing the page in the annual report where the information has been published). Disclosure 3-3 in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 (see clause 1.1 in this Standard); • Any disclosures from this Topic Standard that are relevant to the organization’s economic performance-related impacts (Disclosure 201-1 through Disclosure 201-4).• GRI 201: Economic Performance 2016 5\n\n[Page 6]\nRequirements, guidance and defined terms The following apply throughout this Standard: Requirements are presented in bold font and indicated by the word 'shall'. An organization must comply with requirements to report in accordance with the GRI Standards. Requirements may be accompanied by guidance. Guidance includes background information, explanations, and examples to help the organization better understand the requirements. The organization is not required to comply with guidance. The Standards may also include recommendations. These are cases where a particular course of action is encouraged but not required. The word ‘should’ indicates a recommendation, and the word ‘can’ indicates a possibility or option. Defined terms are underlined in the text of the GRI Standards and linked to their definitions in the Glossary . The organization is required to apply the definitions in the Glossary. GRI 201: Economic Performance 2016 6",
    "new_id": 698
  },
  {
    "id": 75182,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between defined benefit plans and the organization's financial obligations, as described in GRI 201: Economic Performance 2016?",
    "options": {
      "C": "If a separate fund for pension liabilities is not fully covered, the organization must disclose its strategy to achieve full coverage, though no specific timeline is required.",
      "A": "Defined benefit plans are explicitly excluded from IAS 19 Employee Benefits, which only covers other types of retirement schemes.",
      "B": "An organization’s general resources may cover pension liabilities, but if a separate fund exists, full coverage is mandatory under IAS 19.",
      "D": "The calculation methods for determining plan coverage are uniform across jurisdictions, ensuring consistency in reporting obligations.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "13-14",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 201_  Economic Performance 2016.pdf",
    "source_text": "Disclosure 201-3 Defined benefit plan obligations and other retirement plans The reporting organization shall report the following information:REQUIREMENTS If the plan’s liabilities are met by the organization’s general resources, the estimated value of those liabilities.a. If a separate fund exists to pay the plan’s pension liabilities: the extent to which the scheme’s liabilities are estimated to be covered by the assets that have been set aside to meet them;i. the basis on which that estimate has been arrived at; ii. when that estimate was made. iii.b. If a fund set up to pay the plan’s pension liabilities is not fully covered, explain the strategy, if any, adopted by the employer to work towards full coverage , and the timescale, if any, by which the employer hopes to achieve full coverage.c. Percentage of salary contributed by employee or employer. d. Level of participation in retirement plans, such as participation in mandatory or voluntary schemes, regional, or country-based schemes, or those with financial impact.e. RECOMMENDATIONSWhen compiling the information specified in Disclosure 201-3, the reporting organization should:2.4 calculate the information in accordance with the regulations and methods for relevant jurisdictions, and report aggregated totals;2.4.1 use the same consolidation techniques as those applied in preparing the financial accounts of the organization.2.4.2 Guidance for Disclosure 201-3 The structure of retirement plans offered to employees can be based on: Different jurisdictions, such as countries, have varying interpretations and guidance regarding calculations used to determine plan coverage. Note that benefit pension plans are part of the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) IAS 19 Employee Benefits , however IAS 19 covers additional topics. See reference [7] in the Bibliography . Background When an organization provides a retirement plan for its employees, these benefits can become a commitment that members of the schemes plan on for their long-term economic well-being. Defined benefit plans have potential implications for employers in terms of the obligations that need to be met. Other types of plans, such as defined contribution plans, do not guarantee access to a retirement plan or the quality of the benefits. Thus, the type of plan chosen has implications for both employees and employers. Conversely, a properly funded pension plan can help to attract and maintain employees and support long-term financial and strategic planning on the part of the employer.GUIDANCE defined benefit plans ; • defined contribution plans ; • other types of retirement benefits.• GRI 201: Economic Performance 2016 13\n\n[Page 14]\nDisclosure 201-4 Financial assistance received from government The reporting organization shall report the following information: Compilation requirementsREQUIREMENTS Total monetary value of financial assistance received by the organization from any government during the reporting period, including: tax relief and tax credits; i. subsidies; ii. investment grants, research and development grants, and other relevant types of grant;iii. awards; iv. royalty holidays; v. financial assistance from Export Credit Agencies (ECAs); vi. financial incentives; vii. other financial benefits received or receivable from any government for any operation.viii.a. The information in 201-4-a by country. b. Whether, and the extent to which, any government is present in the shareholding structure.c. When compiling the information specified in Disclosure 201-4, the reporting organization shall identify the monetary value of financial assistance received from government through consistent application of generally accepted accounting principles.2.5 Background This disclosure provides a measure of governments’ contributions to an organization. The significant financial assistance received from a government, in comparison with taxes paid, can be useful for developing a balanced picture of the transactions between the organization and government. See reference [8] in the Bibliography .GUIDANCE GRI 201: Economic Performance 2016 14",
    "new_id": 699
  },
  {
    "id": 75198,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the relationship between an organization's obligation to report on material topics and its ability to omit disclosures under the GRI Standards, as outlined in GRI 402: Labor/Management Relations 2016?",
    "options": {
      "D": "An organization can omit specific disclosures if it provides a reason, but it is not obligated to implement missing items such as policies or committees unless they directly affect labor/management relations.",
      "A": "An organization must create any missing policies or practices if they relate to material topics, as omission is only permitted for legally prohibited information.",
      "B": "An organization is required to modify its existing reporting structure to include all Topic Standards, regardless of whether specific items exist or are relevant to its operations.",
      "C": "An organization may exclude entire sections of the GRI Standards if the associated impacts are deemed immaterial, without providing any justification in the content index.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "5-6",
    "ref_doc": "Management Relations 2016.pdf",
    "source_text": "to particular topics. The organization uses the Topic Standards according to the list of material topics it has determined using GRI 3 . Figure 1. GRI Standards: Universal, Sector and Topic Standards Apply all three Universal Standards to your reportingUse the Sector Standards that apply to your sectorsSelect Topic Standards to report specific information on your material topicsSector Standards Universal Standards Topic StandardsGRI Standards Requirements and principles for using the GRI Standards Disclosures about the reporting organization Disclosures and guidance about the organization's material topics Using this Standard This Standard can be used by any organization – regardless of size, type, sector, geographic location, or reporting experience – to report information about its impacts related to labor/management relations. An organization reporting in accordance with the GRI Standards is required to report the following disclosures if it has determined labor/management relations to be a material topic : See Requirements 4 and 5 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 . Reasons for omission are permitted for these disclosures. If the organization cannot comply with a disclosure or with a requirement in a disclosure (e.g., because the required information is confidential or subject to legal prohibitions), the organization is required to specify the disclosure or the requirement it cannot comply with, and provide a reason for omission together with an explanation in the GRI content index. See Requirement 6 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 for more information on reasons for omission. If the organization cannot report the required information about an item specified in a disclosure because the item (e.g., committee, policy, practice, process) does not exist, it can comply with the requirement by reporting this to be the case. The organization can explain the reasons for not having this item, or describe any plans to develop it. The disclosure does not require the organization to implement the item (e.g., developing a policy), but to report that the item does not exist. If the organization intends to publish a standalone sustainability report, it does not need to repeat information that it has already reported publicly elsewhere, such as on web pages or in its annual report. In such a case, the organization can report a required disclosure by providing a reference in the GRI content index as to where thisDisclosure 3-3 in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 (see clause 1.1 in this Standard); • Any disclosure from this Topic Standard that is relevant to the organization’s impacts related to labor/management relations (Disclosure 402-1).• GRI 402: Labor/Management Relations 2016 5\n\n[Page 6]\ninformation can be found (e.g., by providing a link to the web page or citing the page in the annual report where the information has been published). Requirements, guidance and defined terms The following apply throughout this Standard: Requirements are presented in bold font and indicated by the word 'shall'. An organization must comply with requirements to report in accordance with the GRI Standards. Requirements may be accompanied by guidance. Guidance includes background information, explanations, and examples to help the organization better understand the requirements. The organization is not required to comply with guidance. The Standards may also include recommendations. These are cases where a particular course of action is encouraged but not required. The word ‘should’ indicates a recommendation, and the word ‘can’ indicates a possibility or option. Defined terms are underlined in the text of the GRI Standards and linked to their definitions in the Glossary . The organization is required to apply the definitions in the Glossary. GRI 402: Labor/Management Relations 2016 6",
    "new_id": 700
  },
  {
    "id": 75246,
    "question": "Which scenario best illustrates the distinction between mitigating a potential negative impact and addressing an actual negative impact, as described in GRI 13: Agriculture, Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022?",
    "options": {
      "A": "A company implements stricter safety protocols after an accident to prevent future occurrences.",
      "B": "A corporation apologizes and offers financial compensation following harm caused by its operations.",
      "C": "An organization invests in renewable energy to reduce the likelihood of contributing to climate change.",
      "D": "A business cleans up hazardous waste spilled during transportation to minimize environmental damage.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "74",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 13_ Agriculture Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022.pdf",
    "source_text": "mitigation action(s) taken to reduce the extent of a negative impact Source: United Nations (UN), The Corporate Responsibility to Respect Human Rights: An Interpretive Guide , 2012; modified Note: The mitigation of an actual negative impact refers to actions taken to reduce the severity of the negative impact that has occurred, with any residual impact needing remediation . The mitigation of a potential negative impact refers to actions taken to reduce the likelihood of the negative impact occurring. other indirect (Scope 3) GHG emissions indirect greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions not included in energy indirect (Scope 2) GHG emissions that occur outside of the organization, including both upstream and downstream emissions preparation for reuse checking, cleaning, or repairing operations, by which products or components of products that have become waste are prepared to be put to use for the same purpose for which they were conceived Source: European Union (EU), Waste Framework Directive , 2008 (Directive 2008/98/EC); modified recovery operation wherein products, components of products, or materials that have become waste are prepared to fulfill a purpose in place of new products, components, or materials that would otherwise have been used for that purpose Source: United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal , 1989; modified Examples: preparation for reuse , recycling Note: In the context of waste reporting, recovery operations do not include energy recovery. recycling reprocessing of products or components of products that have become waste, to make new materials Sources: United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal , 1989; modified remedy / remediation means to counteract or make good a negative impact or provision of remedy Source: United Nations (UN), The Corporate Responsibility to Respect Human Rights: An Interpretive Guide , 2012; modified Examples: apologies, financial or non-financial compensation, prevention of harm through injunctions or guarantees of non-repetition, punitive sanctions (whether criminal or administrative, such as fines), restitution, restoration, rehabilitation remuneration basic salary plus additional amounts paid to a worker Note: Examples of additional amounts paid to a worker can include those based on years of service, bonuses including cash and equity such as stocks and shares, benefit payments, overtime, time owed, and any additional allowances, such as transportation, living and childcare allowances. reporting period specific time period covered by the reported information GRI 13: Agriculture, Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022 74",
    "new_id": 701
  },
  {
    "id": 75251,
    "question": "Which of the following scenarios would most directly challenge the assertion that anti-competitive practices in agriculture, aquaculture, and fishing sectors can lead to economic exclusion for small producers, as discussed in GRI 13: Agriculture, Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022?",
    "options": {
      "B": "A large cooperative negotiates higher prices for its members' products on international markets, improving their income.",
      "A": "Small producers form a coalition to collectively negotiate better terms with dominant buyers, increasing their market power.",
      "C": "Dominant organizations allocate geographic quotas among themselves, leading to reduced purchasing options for small producers.",
      "D": "Large organizations exploit information asymmetry to dictate terms to small producers, forcing them into subsidiary roles.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "65-66",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 13_ Agriculture Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022.pdf",
    "source_text": "Topic 13.25 Anti-competitive behavior Anti-competitive behavior refers to actions by an organization that can result in collusion with potential competitors, abuse of dominant market position or exclusion of potential competitors, thereby limiting the effects of market competition. This can include fixing prices or coordinating bids, creating market or output restrictions, imposing geographic quotas, and allocating customers, suppliers, geographic areas, or product lines. This topic covers impacts as a result of anti-competitive behavior. Many agriculture, aquaculture, and fishing products are purchased from producers and traded by a limited number of organizations. In situations of limited market options, traders and buyers can exert significant market power. Anti-competitive agreements between agriculture, aquaculture, and fishing organizations can lead to purchasing prices for products being set below those in a competitive market and restrictions on the product volumes. Many producers in these sectors are smallholder farmers and small-scale fishers, often working in the informal sector and facing substantial barriers to accessing markets (see also topic 13.22 Economic inclusion ). Large organizations that source supplies from small producers can take advantage of information asymmetry and market fragmentation to limit their choices of whom to supply. Anti-competitive practices may render small producers in these sectors unable to cover their costs, achieve living income, or pay wages to their workers , resulting in economic exclusion and risk to livelihoods (see topic 13.21 Living income and living wage ). Other actions that purposely limit the effects of market competition can also cause small producers to lose their independence and be pressured into becoming subsidiaries of large multinational organizations. In some parts of the sectors, cartels have caused the exclusion of small producers from international markets. Large cooperatives, commonly found in the sectors, can affect market competition by requiring farmers and fishers to sell their products exclusively through them. While such arrangements can benefit producers, they can also pose anti- competitive concerns by limiting consumers’ choices in cases where they represent a major share of the sector’s productive capacity. GRI 13: Agriculture, Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022 65\n\n[Page 66]\nReporting on anti-competitive behavior If the organization has determined anti-competitive behavior to be a material topic , this sub-section lists the disclosures identified as relevant for reporting on the topic by the agriculture, aquaculture, and fishing sectors. STANDARD DISCLOSURE SECTOR STANDARD REF. NO. Management of the topic GRI 3: Material Topics 2021Disclosure 3-3 Management of material topics 13.25.1 Topic Standard disclosures GRI 206: Anti- competitive Behavior 2016Disclosure 206-1 Legal actions for anti-competitive behavior, anti-trust, and monopoly practices13.25.2 References and resources GRI 206: Anti-competitive Behavior 2016 lists authoritative intergovernmental instruments. The additional references used in developing this topic, as well as resources that may be helpful for reporting on anti- competitive behavior by the agriculture, aquaculture, and fishing sectors are listed in the Bibliography . GRI 13: Agriculture, Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022 66",
    "new_id": 702
  },
  {
    "id": 75337,
    "question": "Which of the following scenarios exemplifies a situation where an organization could be directly linked to human rights impacts through its operations, while also considering environmental measures, as outlined in GRI 13: Agriculture, Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022?",
    "options": {
      "C": "An organization collaborates with a non-governmental organization to deliver community support, but its greenhouse gas emissions exceed the CO2 equivalent threshold determined by global warming potential.",
      "A": "State security forces protect an organization’s facilities in a region where child labor is prevalent, and the organization fails to implement circularity measures to reduce resource extraction.",
      "B": "An organization partners with a local trade union for collective bargaining, ensuring fair working conditions while achieving carbon neutrality through offset programs.",
      "D": "An organization experiences a close call incident involving state security forces, prompting negotiations over catchment area water usage without addressing broader watershed sustainability.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "70",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 13_ Agriculture Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022.pdf",
    "source_text": "Source: United Nations (UN), Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework , 2011; modified Note: Examples of other entities directly linked to the organization’s operations, products, or services are a non-governmental organization with which the organization delivers support to a local community or state security forces that protect the organization’s facilities. carbon dioxide (CO2) equivalent measure used to compare the emissions from various types of greenhouse gas (GHG) based on their global warming potential (GWP) Note: The CO2 equivalent for a gas is determined by multiplying the metric tons of the gas by the associated GWP. catchment area of land from which all surface runoff and subsurface water flows through a sequence of streams, rivers, aquifers, and lakes into the sea or another outlet at a single river mouth, estuary, or delta Source: Alliance for Water Stewardship (AWS), AWS International Water Stewardship Standard, Version 1.0 , 2014; modified Note: Catchments include associated groundwater areas and might include portions of waterbodies (such as lakes or rivers). In different parts of the world, catchments are also referred to as ‘watersheds’ or ‘basins’ (or sub-basins). child person under the age of 15 years, or under the age of completion of compulsory schooling, whichever is higher Note 1: Exceptions can occur in certain countries where economies and educational facilities are insufficiently developed, and a minimum age of 14 years applies. These countries of exception are specified by the International Labour Organization (ILO) in response to a special application by the country concerned and in consultation with representative organizations of employers and workers. Note 2: The ILO Minimum Age Convention, 1973, (No. 138), refers to both child labor and young workers. circularity measures measures taken to retain the value of products, materials, and resources and redirect them back to use for as long as possible with the lowest carbon and resource footprint possible, such that fewer raw materials and resources are extracted and waste generation is prevented close call work-related incident where no injury or ill health occurs, but which has the potential to cause these Source: International Organization for Standardization. ISO 45001:2018. Occupational health and safety management systems — Requirements with guidance for use. Geneva: ISO, 2018; modified Note: A ‘close call’ might also be referred to as a ‘near-miss’ or ‘near-hit’. collective bargaining all negotiations that take place between one or more employers or employers' organizations, on the one hand, and one or more workers' organizations (e.g., trade unions), on the other, for determining working conditions and terms of employment or for regulating relations between employers and workers Source: International Labour Organization (ILO), Collective Bargaining Convention , 1981 (No. 154); modified GRI 13: Agriculture, Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022 70",
    "new_id": 703
  },
  {
    "id": 75388,
    "question": "Which of the following scenarios would be considered a violation under the provided definition of corruption, but not explicitly categorized as bribery, according to GRI 13: Agriculture, Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022?",
    "options": {
      "D": "A company provides free holidays to a regulator's family with the intention of creating moral pressure to expedite permit approvals.",
      "A": "An employee receives a cash payment in exchange for awarding a contract to a specific vendor.",
      "B": "A manager demands personal services from a subordinate under the threat of termination if they refuse.",
      "C": "A business sponsors an unrelated charity event where no direct benefit to its operations is evident.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "71",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 13_ Agriculture Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022.pdf",
    "source_text": "corruption ‘abuse of entrusted power for private gain’, which can be instigated by individuals or organizations Source: Transparency International, Business Principles for Countering Bribery , 2011 Note: Corruption includes practices such as bribery, facilitation payments, fraud, extortion, collusion, and money laundering. It also includes an offer or receipt of any gift, loan, fee, reward, or other advantage to or from any person as an inducement to do something that is dishonest, illegal, or a breach of trust in the conduct of the enterprise’s business. This can include cash or in-kind benefits, such as free goods, gifts, and holidays, or special personal services provided for the purpose of an improper advantage, or that can result in moral pressure to receive such an advantage. direct (Scope 1) GHG emissions greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from sources that are owned or controlled by the organization Examples: CO2 emissions from fuel consumption Note: A GHG source is any physical unit or process that releases GHG into the atmosphere. discrimination act and result of treating persons unequally by imposing unequal burdens or denying benefits instead of treating each person fairly on the basis of individual merit Note: Discrimination can also include harassment, defined as a course of comments or actions that are unwelcome, or should reasonably be known to be unwelcome, to the person towards whom they are addressed. disposal any operation which is not recovery , even where the operation has as a secondary consequence the recovery of energy Source: European Union (EU), Waste Framework Directive , 2008 (Directive 2008/98/EC) Note: Disposal is the end-of-life management of discarded products, materials, and resources in a sink or through a chemical or thermal transformation that makes these products, materials, and resources unavailable for further use. effluent treated or untreated wastewater that is discharged Source: Alliance for Water Stewardship (AWS), AWS International Water Stewardship Standard, Version 1.0 , 2014 employee individual who is in an employment relationship with the organization according to national law or practice energy indirect (Scope 2) GHG emissions greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions that result from the generation of purchased or acquired electricity, heating, cooling, and steam consumed by the organization exposure quantity of time spent at or the nature of contact with certain environments that possess various degrees and kinds of hazard , or proximity to a condition that might cause injury or ill health (e.g., chemicals, radiation, high pressure, noise, fire, explosives) forced or compulsory labor all work and service that is exacted from any person under the menace of any penalty and for which the said person has not offered herself or himself voluntarily GRI 13: Agriculture, Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022 71",
    "new_id": 704
  },
  {
    "id": 75467,
    "question": "Which statement accurately captures the relationship between 'water consumption' and the entities involved in the value chain, as described in GRI 13: Agriculture, Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Water consumption encompasses water that is polluted to the extent it becomes unusable by other users, regardless of whether it remains within the organization’s value chain.",
      "B": "Water consumption excludes water that is polluted to the point of being unusable, as this water remains within the cycle of utility.",
      "C": "Entities downstream from the organization are primarily responsible for water consumption through their direct use in production processes.",
      "D": "The concept of water consumption applies only to water directly used or stored by the reporting organization during the reporting period.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "76",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 13_ Agriculture Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022.pdf",
    "source_text": "generations to meet their own needs Source: World Commission on Environment and Development, Our Common Future , 1987 Note: The terms ‘sustainability’ and ‘sustainable development’ are used interchangeably in the GRI Standards. third-party water municipal water suppliers and municipal wastewater treatment plants, public or private utilities, and other organizations involved in the provision, transport, treatment, disposal, or use of water and effluent value chain range of activities carried out by the organization, and by entities upstream and downstream from the organization, to bring the organization’s products or services from their conception to their end use Note 1: Entities upstream from the organization (e.g., suppliers ) provide products or services that are used in the development of the organization’s own products or services. Entities downstream from the organization (e.g., distributors, customers) receive products or services from the organization. Note 2: The value chain includes the supply chain . vulnerable group group of individuals with a specific condition or characteristic (e.g., economic, physical, political, social) that could experience negative impacts as a result of the organization’s activities more severely than the general population Examples: children and youth; elderly persons; ex-combatants; HIV/AIDS-affected households; human rights defenders; indigenous peoples ; internally displaced persons; migrant workers and their families; national or ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities; persons who might be discriminated against based on their sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, or sex characteristics (e.g., lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex); persons with disabilities; refugees or returning refugees; women Note: Vulnerabilities and impacts can differ by gender. waste anything that the holder discards, intends to discard, or is required to discard Source: United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal , 1989 Note 1: Waste can be defined according to the national legislation at the point of generation. Note 2: A holder can be the reporting organization, an entity in the organization’s value chain upstream or downstream (e.g., supplier or consumer), or a waste management organization, among others. water consumption sum of all water that has been withdrawn and incorporated into products, used in the production of crops or generated as waste, has evaporated, transpired, or been consumed by humans or livestock, or is polluted to the point of being unusable by other users, and is therefore not released back to surface water , groundwater , seawater , or a third party over the course of the reporting period Source: CDP, CDP Water Security Reporting Guidance , 2018; modified Note: Water consumption includes water that has been stored during the reporting period for use or discharge in a subsequent reporting period. water withdrawal GRI 13: Agriculture, Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022 76",
    "new_id": 705
  },
  {
    "id": 75468,
    "question": "Which of the following represents a potential consequence of lobbying activities by agriculture organizations that is explicitly supported by the text in GRI 13: Agriculture, Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Lobbying efforts can result in subsidies that allow animal products to be sold below their true environmental cost.",
      "A": "Lobbying leads to uniform global standards for environmental protection in agriculture.",
      "C": "Lobbying ensures equal access to genetic resources such as seeds for all farmers, regardless of size.",
      "D": "Lobbying primarily focuses on reducing pesticide and fertilizer use across the industry.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "63-64",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 13_ Agriculture Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022.pdf",
    "source_text": "Topic 13.24 Public policy An organization can participate in public policy development, directly or through an intermediary organization, by means of lobbying or making financial or in-kind contributions to political parties, politicians, or causes. While an organization can encourage public policy development that benefits society, participation can also be associated with corruption, bribery, undue influence, or an imbalanced representation of the organization’s interests. This topic covers an organization’s approach to public policy advocacy and the impacts that can result from an organization's influence. Agriculture, aquaculture, and fishing organizations can potentially influence local, national, or international policy concerning environmental regulations, access to natural resources, labor laws, food safety, public health, and animal welfare. Advocacy or lobbying by the agriculture, aquaculture, and fishing sectors may target policies that limit the sectors' environmental impact; government price setting and subsidies; or mandatory quotas on products. In agriculture, documented cases show that large agricultural organizations advocated for postponing legal requirements for rotating crops and avoiding penalties for inadequate land use. Agriculture lobby activities can also target approvals of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and objectives to decrease the use of pesticides, fertilizers, and animal antibiotics. Lobbying can also affect farmers’ access to technology and genetic resources, such as seeds. In animal production, lobbying can inhibit public policy development that deals with livestock’s negative impacts on the environment. Livestock products – particularly dairy and beef – are heavily subsidized in many countries due to livestock organizations' influence. Subsidies enabled expressly through lobbying can facilitate the supply of animal products at prices that do not cover the costs to the environment. Lobbying can also prevent stricter standards of animal welfare. In fishing, organizations can influence allowable catch and quota regulations, including international trade negotiations and inter-country agreements on fishing quotas. Locally, lobbying can sway attempts to limit catch in order to preserve fishing stocks (see also topic 13.26 Anti-corruption ). GRI 13: Agriculture, Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022 63\n\n[Page 64]\nReporting on public policy If the organization has determined public policy to be a material topic , this sub-section lists the disclosures identified as relevant for reporting on the topic by the agriculture, aquaculture, and fishing sectors. STANDARD DISCLOSURE SECTOR STANDARD REF. NO. Management of the topic GRI 3: Material Topics 2021Disclosure 3-3 Management of material topics 13.24.1 Topic Standard disclosures GRI 415: Public Policy 2016Disclosure 415-1 Political contributions 13.24.2 References and resources GRI 415: Public Policy 2016 lists authoritative intergovernmental instruments relevant to reporting on this topic. The additional references used in developing this topic, as well as resources that may be helpful for reporting on public policy by the agriculture, aquaculture, and fishing sectors are listed in the Bibliography . GRI 13: Agriculture, Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022 64",
    "new_id": 706
  },
  {
    "id": 75469,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why corruption involving land transactions in the agriculture, aquaculture, and fishing sectors can disproportionately affect communities without secure land tenure, as described in GRI 13: Agriculture, Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Communities without secure land tenure are more vulnerable to displacement due to falsified records or bribes influencing land registration processes.",
      "A": "Such corruption undermines the enforcement of anti-competitive behavior laws, leading to market monopolies.",
      "B": "Corruption in these sectors primarily benefits foreign entities, bypassing domestic stakeholders entirely.",
      "D": "It results in unsustainable fishing practices that deplete natural resources relied upon by local populations.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "66-67",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 13_ Agriculture Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022.pdf",
    "source_text": "Reporting on anti-competitive behavior If the organization has determined anti-competitive behavior to be a material topic , this sub-section lists the disclosures identified as relevant for reporting on the topic by the agriculture, aquaculture, and fishing sectors. STANDARD DISCLOSURE SECTOR STANDARD REF. NO. Management of the topic GRI 3: Material Topics 2021Disclosure 3-3 Management of material topics 13.25.1 Topic Standard disclosures GRI 206: Anti- competitive Behavior 2016Disclosure 206-1 Legal actions for anti-competitive behavior, anti-trust, and monopoly practices13.25.2 References and resources GRI 206: Anti-competitive Behavior 2016 lists authoritative intergovernmental instruments. The additional references used in developing this topic, as well as resources that may be helpful for reporting on anti- competitive behavior by the agriculture, aquaculture, and fishing sectors are listed in the Bibliography . GRI 13: Agriculture, Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022 66\n\n[Page 67]\nTopic 13.26 Anti-corruption Anti-corruption refers to how an organization manages the potential of being involved with corruption. Corruption is practices such as bribery, facilitation payments, fraud, extortion, collusion, money laundering, or the offer or receipt of an inducement to do something dishonest or illegal. This topic covers the potential for corruption to occur and the related impacts. Corruption in the agriculture, aquaculture, and fishing sectors can erode the capacity of governments to limit practices, such as deforestation and overfishing. Corruption also increases the likelihood of potential negative impacts on workers and communities and reduces government revenues. Organizations that engage in corruption can have an unfair advantage in competitive markets. In the agriculture, aquaculture, and fishing sectors, corruption may be related to the use of land and other natural resources regulated by government agencies. It can, for example, take the form of bribes paid to officials to register land, acquire land information, or obtain permits to establish an operation. This can affect rightsholders and lead to the displacement of communities, particularly in areas without secure land tenure (see also topic 13.13 Land and resource rights ). Other forms of corruption can also involve the undue benefit from political reforms and land transactions, such as privatizing state-owned land, approving zoning plans, and land expropriation. These practices often ignore legal mechanisms and cause impacts on people and the environment. Corruption in the sectors may include inducing officials to ignore illegal farming or fishing operations, leading to the loss of natural ecosystems when land is cleared. Corrupt practices in fishing can facilitate access agreements between organizations and officials managing fishing resources, which potentially result in unsustainable levels of fishing. Corrupt practices can also allow for illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing (IUU) and exceeding quotas, undermining stocks' sustainability. Fishers themselves might be involved in corruption to increase catch quantities. Records of type or volume of catch may be falsified, or authorities may be bribed to ignore or certify false records. Operating fishing vessels under a flag of convenience or an unknown flag can also be associated with corruption when intended to bypass countries’ legal restrictions. GRI 13: Agriculture, Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022 67",
    "new_id": 707
  },
  {
    "id": 75470,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes a scenario where an organization's actions could be classified as anti-competitive behavior while also indirectly affecting areas of high biodiversity value, as outlined in GRI 13: Agriculture, Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022?",
    "options": {
      "D": "An organization collaborates with competitors to fix prices, and this financial advantage is used to expand operations into habitats prioritized for conservation.",
      "A": "An organization reallocates suppliers to reduce costs, which incidentally leads to increased pollution in a protected area.",
      "B": "An organization coordinates bids with potential competitors, thereby limiting market competition without any connection to environmentally sensitive regions.",
      "C": "An organization establishes geographic quotas with competitors, directly harming ecosystems in legally unprotected but biodiversity-rich zones.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "69",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 13_ Agriculture Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022.pdf",
    "source_text": "Glossary This glossary provides definitions for terms used in this Standard. The organization is required to apply these definitions when using the GRI Standards. The definitions included in this glossary may contain terms that are further defined in the complete GRI Standards Glossary . All defined terms are underlined. If a term is not defined in this glossary or in the complete GRI Standards Glossary , definitions that are commonly used and understood apply. anti-competitive behavior action of the organization or employees that can result in collusion with potential competitors, with the purpose of limiting the effects of market competition Examples: allocating customers, suppliers , geographic areas, and product lines; coordinating bids; creating market or output restrictions; fixing prices; imposing geographic quotas area of high biodiversity value area not subject to legal protection, but recognized for important biodiversity features by a number of governmental and non-governmental organizations Note 1: Areas of high biodiversity value include habitats that are a priority for conservation, which are often defined in National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans prepared under the United Nations (UN) Convention, ‘Convention on Biological Diversity’, 1992. Note 2: Several international conservation organizations have identified particular areas of high biodiversity value. area protected area that is protected from any harm during operational activities, and where the environment remains in its original state with a healthy and functioning ecosystem basic salary fixed, minimum amount paid to an employee for performing his or her duties Note: Basic salary excludes any additional remuneration , such as payments for overtime working or bonuses. benefit direct benefit provided in the form of financial contributions, care paid for by the organization, or the reimbursement of expenses borne by the employee Note: Redundancy payments over and above legal minimums, lay-off pay, extra employment injury benefit, survivors’ benefits, and extra paid holiday entitlements can also be included as a benefit. business partner entity with which the organization has some form of direct and formal engagement for the purpose of meeting its business objectives Source: Shift and Mazars LLP, UN Guiding Principles Reporting Framework , 2015; modified Examples: affiliates, business-to-business customers, clients, first-tier suppliers , franchisees, joint venture partners, investee companies in which the organization has a shareholding position Note: Business partners do not include subsidiaries and affiliates that the organization controls. business relationships relationships that the organization has with business partners , with entities in its value chain including those beyond the first tier, and with any other entities directly linked to its operations, products, or services GRI 13: Agriculture, Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022 69",
    "new_id": 708
  },
  {
    "id": 75471,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes why monitoring tools and systems are essential in addressing natural ecosystem conversion, according to the implications of GRI 13: Agriculture, Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022?",
    "options": {
      "A": "They enable organizations to assess supplier adherence to deforestation policies while also identifying unknown sourcing origins that require traceability improvements.",
      "B": "They primarily serve to ensure compliance with regional certification programs by verifying low-risk jurisdictions.",
      "C": "They are used exclusively to measure the percentage of production volume determined to be deforestation-free across all products.",
      "D": "They provide a mechanism for organizations to report participation in multi-stakeholder initiatives without directly engaging in landscape-level efforts.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "22-23",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 13_ Agriculture Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022.pdf",
    "source_text": "Reporting on natural ecosystem conversion If the organization has determined natural ecosystem conversion to be a material topic , this sub-section lists the disclosures identified as relevant for reporting on the topic by the agriculture, aquaculture, and fishing sectors. STANDARD DISCLOSURE SECTOR STANDARD REF. NO. Management of the topic GRI 3: Material Topics 2021Disclosure 3-3 Management of material topics Additional sector recommendations13.4.1 Additional sector disclosures Report the percentage of production volume from land owned, leased or managed by the organization determined to be deforestation- or conversion-free, by product, and describe the assessment methods used.13.4.2 13.4.3 Report the size in hectares, the location, and the type of natural ecosystems converted since the cut- off date on land owned, leased, or managed by the organization.13.4.4 Report the size in hectares, the location, and the type of natural ecosystems converted since the cut-off date by suppliers or in sourcing locations.13.4.5 Describe policies or commitments to reduce or eliminate natural ecosystem conversion, including target and cut-off dates, for the following:10 11 the organization’s own production;- sourcing of terrestrial animal and fish feed;- products sourced by the organization for aggregation, processing, or trade.-• Describe how the organization ensures that its suppliers comply with its natural ecosystem conversion policies and commitments, including through sourcing policies and contracts.• Report the organization’s participation in multi-stakeholder, landscape, or sectoral initiatives intended to reduce or eliminate natural ecosystem conversion.12• Describe the tools and systems used to monitor natural ecosystem conversion in the organization’s activities, supply chain, and sourcing locations.• 13 For products sourced by the organization, report the following by product: the percentage of sourced volume determined to be deforestation- or conversion-free, and describe the assessment methods used;- the percentage of sourced volume for which origins are not known to the point where it can be determined whether it is deforestation- or conversion-free, and describe actions taken to improve traceability.-• 14 GRI 13: Agriculture, Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022 22\n\n[Page 23]\nReferences and resources The authoritative instruments and references used in developing this topic, as well as resources that may be helpful for reporting on natural ecosystem conversion by the agriculture, aquaculture, and fishing sectors are listed in the Bibliography . 10 A target date is defined by the Accountability Framework as ‘the date by which [the organization] intends to have fully implemented its commitment or policy’ [92]. 11 Cut-off dates may differ between commodities and regions. Appropriate cut-off dates can be selected based on sector-wide or regional cut-off dates, or those specified in certification programs, legislation, or be based on the availability of monitoring data. More guidance on identifying appropriate cut-off dates can be found in Accountability Framework Operational Guidance on Cut-off Dates [93]. 12 Landscapes refer to natural and/or human-modified ecosystems, often with a characteristic configuration of topography, vegetation, land use, and settlements. Landscape initiatives refer to how organizations in the production and sourcing of agricultural products need to work beyond their own supply chains to address sustainability issues and support positive outcomes for the people and sourcing locations. These definitions are based on Food and Agriculture Organization, Landscape approaches: key concepts [84] and Proforest, Landscape initiatives [88]. 13 Assessment methods can include monitoring, certification, sourcing from low-risk jurisdictions with no or negligible recent conversion, or sourcing from verified suppliers. 14 Natural ecosystem type can be characterized by biome, vegetation type, or high conservation value status relevant to the region and regulatory context. GRI 13: Agriculture, Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022 23",
    "new_id": 709
  },
  {
    "id": 75472,
    "question": "What is the primary purpose of including GRI Sector Standard reference numbers in the GRI Content Index, as specified in GRI 13: Agriculture, Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022?",
    "options": {
      "B": "To help information users assess which disclosures listed in the Sector Standards are included in the organization’s reporting.",
      "A": "To provide a comprehensive list of all disclosures from the GRI Standards that apply universally across sectors.",
      "C": "To ensure organizations report sufficient information about their impacts in relation to additional sector recommendations.",
      "D": "To replace the need for defined terms and their associated glossary definitions in organizational reporting.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "9",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 13_ Agriculture Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022.pdf",
    "source_text": "information can be found (e.g., by providing a link to the web page or citing the page in the annual report where the information has been published). See Requirement 5 in GRI 1 for more information on using Sector Standards to report disclosures. GRI Sector Standard reference numbers GRI Sector Standard reference numbers are included for all disclosures listed in this Standard, both those from GRI Standards and additional sector disclosures. When listing the disclosures from this Standard in the GRI content index, the organization is required to include the associated GRI Sector Standard reference numbers (see Requirement 7 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 ). This identifier helps information users assess which of the disclosures listed in the applicable Sector Standards are included in the organization’s reporting. Defined terms Defined terms are underlined in the text of the GRI Standards and linked to their definitions in the Glossary . The organization is required to apply the definitions in the Glossary. References and resources The authoritative intergovernmental instruments and additional references used in developing this Standard, as well as further resources that may help report on likely material topics and can be consulted by the organization are listed in the Bibliography . These complement the references and resources listed in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 and in the GRI Topic Standards. Figure 2 . Structure of reporting included in each topic 5 2 431 Management of the topic The organization is required to report how it manages each material topic using Disclosure 3-3 in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 . Topic Standards disclosures Disclosures from the GRI Topic Standards that have been identified as relevant for organizations in the sector(s) are listed here. When the topic is determined by the organization as material, it is required to report those disclosures or explain why they are not applicable in the GRI context index. See the Topic Standard for the content of the disclosure, including requirements, recommendations, and guidance. Additional sector recommendations Additional sector recommendations may be listed. These complement Topic Standards disclosures and are recommended for an organization in the sector(s). Additional sector disclosures Additional sector disclosures may be listed. Reporting these, together with any Topic Standards disclosures, ensures the organization reports sufficient information about its impacts in relation to the topic. Sector Standard reference numbers GRI Sector Standard reference numbers are required to be included in the GRI Content Index. This helps information users assess which of the disclosures listed in the Sector Standards are included in the organization’s reporting. 1. Sector profile GRI 13: Agriculture, Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022 9",
    "new_id": 710
  },
  {
    "id": 75473,
    "question": "Which of the following scenarios best illustrates a logical consequence of corruption that undermines both environmental sustainability and equitable resource distribution, as implied by GRI 13: Agriculture, Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022?",
    "options": {
      "C": "A fishing operation operates under a flag of convenience to bypass legal restrictions, enabling illegal overfishing that depletes ecosystems and disadvantages law-abiding competitors.",
      "A": "An organization pays bribes to officials to falsify catch records, leading to inflated quotas and long-term depletion of fish stocks without impacting local communities.",
      "B": "A company secures land through corrupt means, displacing communities with insecure land tenure while simultaneously adhering to all legal mechanisms for land acquisition.",
      "D": "Government agencies ignore illegal farming practices due to corruption, resulting in increased agricultural yields and higher revenues for the government.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "67-68",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 13_ Agriculture Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022.pdf",
    "source_text": "Topic 13.26 Anti-corruption Anti-corruption refers to how an organization manages the potential of being involved with corruption. Corruption is practices such as bribery, facilitation payments, fraud, extortion, collusion, money laundering, or the offer or receipt of an inducement to do something dishonest or illegal. This topic covers the potential for corruption to occur and the related impacts. Corruption in the agriculture, aquaculture, and fishing sectors can erode the capacity of governments to limit practices, such as deforestation and overfishing. Corruption also increases the likelihood of potential negative impacts on workers and communities and reduces government revenues. Organizations that engage in corruption can have an unfair advantage in competitive markets. In the agriculture, aquaculture, and fishing sectors, corruption may be related to the use of land and other natural resources regulated by government agencies. It can, for example, take the form of bribes paid to officials to register land, acquire land information, or obtain permits to establish an operation. This can affect rightsholders and lead to the displacement of communities, particularly in areas without secure land tenure (see also topic 13.13 Land and resource rights ). Other forms of corruption can also involve the undue benefit from political reforms and land transactions, such as privatizing state-owned land, approving zoning plans, and land expropriation. These practices often ignore legal mechanisms and cause impacts on people and the environment. Corruption in the sectors may include inducing officials to ignore illegal farming or fishing operations, leading to the loss of natural ecosystems when land is cleared. Corrupt practices in fishing can facilitate access agreements between organizations and officials managing fishing resources, which potentially result in unsustainable levels of fishing. Corrupt practices can also allow for illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing (IUU) and exceeding quotas, undermining stocks' sustainability. Fishers themselves might be involved in corruption to increase catch quantities. Records of type or volume of catch may be falsified, or authorities may be bribed to ignore or certify false records. Operating fishing vessels under a flag of convenience or an unknown flag can also be associated with corruption when intended to bypass countries’ legal restrictions. GRI 13: Agriculture, Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022 67\n\n[Page 68]\nReporting on anti-corruption If the organization has determined anti-corruption to be a material topic , this sub-section lists the disclosures identified as relevant for reporting on the topic by the agriculture, aquaculture, and fishing sectors. STANDARD DISCLOSURE SECTOR STANDARD REF. NO. Management of the topic GRI 3: Material Topics 2021Disclosure 3-3 Management of material topics 13.26.1 Topic Standard disclosures GRI 205: Anti- corruption 2016 Disclosure 205-1 Operations assessed for risks related to corruption 13.26.2 Disclosure 205-2 Communication and training about anti-corruption policies and procedures13.26.3 Disclosure 205-3 Confirmed incidents of corruption and actions taken 13.26.4 References and resources GRI 205: Anti-corruption 2016 lists authoritative intergovernmental instruments and additional references relevant to reporting on this topic. The additional references used in developing this topic, as well as resources that may be helpful for reporting on anti- corruption by the agriculture, aquaculture, and fishing sectors are listed in the Bibliography . GRI 13: Agriculture, Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022 68",
    "new_id": 711
  },
  {
    "id": 75474,
    "question": "Which statement best captures the relationship between the environmental impacts of agriculture and the potential for sustainable practices to address food security, as described in GRI 13: Agriculture, Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The environmental impacts of agriculture, such as biodiversity loss and freshwater depletion, can be offset by sustainable practices that are essential for ensuring long-term food security.",
      "A": "Sustainable practices in agriculture can mitigate environmental footprints but are unlikely to influence global food security due to the overwhelming demand for resources.",
      "B": "Implementing sustainable practices will primarily benefit economic growth and employment, with minimal impact on environmental concerns or food security.",
      "C": "Environmental degradation caused by agriculture is irreversible, making sustainable practices irrelevant to future food security challenges.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "12",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 13_ Agriculture Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022.pdf",
    "source_text": "The sectors and sustainable development Agriculture, aquaculture, and fishing are fundamental to feeding the world’s population. The sectors have a key role in meeting the growing demand for nutritious, affordable, and safe food for an estimated 10 billion people by 2050 [ 30]. At the same time, these sectors’ activities are increasingly recognized as having significant impacts on sustainable development. Intensive use of natural resources, the location of operations in rural areas, and large amounts of labor involved into production globally are factors contributing to the scale of the sectors’ impacts. The agriculture, aquaculture, and fishing sectors are the second largest source of employment worldwide [ 20]. Over 2.5 billion people living in rural areas depend on them these sectors for jobs. At the same time, agriculture, aquaculture, and fishing are sectors with the highest informality rates in employment contracts, commercial transactions, and land tenure, posing challenges to upholding human rights. With 80% of the world’s poor living in rural areas, ensuring sufficient income for rural workers remains an issue [ 37]. Improving incomes means communities need better economic opportunities, access to technology, skills training, and a more equitable distribution of value created by their labor. Growth in the sectors is proportionately more effective in raising the incomes of the world’s poorest people in comparison to other sectors. Agriculture, aquaculture, and fishing have a substantial environmental footprint. For example, agriculture accounts for an estimated 70% of freshwater withdrawals globally and is a substantial source of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, accounting for 22% of the total global emissions [ 25]. Similarly, fishing is responsible for at least 1.2% of global oil consumption [ 10]. Because agriculture, aquaculture, and fishing production rely on biodiversity, soils, and ecosystems, implementing sustainable practices across the sectors is a fundamental condition for food security. However, the agriculture sector is associated with 70% of losses in terrestrial biodiversity because of land conversion, deforestation, soil erosion, and impacts of pesticides [ 21]. Fishing has resulted in significant impacts on global ocean biodiversity, with one-third of fish stocks being overfished and about 60% fished at their maximum sustainable levels [ 24]. There has been ongoing growth in the global consumption of animal and aquaculture products. With approximately 340 million tons of meat, 88 million tons of dairy and 85 million tons of aquaculture products being produced annually, animal health and welfare are fundamental to agriculture and aquaculture activities [ 20]. The conditions animals live in have considerable implications for preventing zoonotic disease and the risks of antimicrobial resistance. Sound animal health and welfare also mean the responsibility for treating animals humanely. Climate change poses challenges for the agriculture, aquaculture, and fishing sectors. It can affect yields, disrupt production and supply chains , jeopardizing food security. Impacts of climate change can also deepen poverty levels, displace people from their lands, and thus increase migration. Agriculture, aquaculture, and fishing organizations can contribute to food security and global development by building resilience to climate change, reducing food loss, and providing income and livelihoods to farmers and fishers and their communities. Sustainable Development Goals The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), part of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development adopted by the 193 United Nations (UN) member states, comprise the world’s comprehensive plan of action for achieving sustainable development [7]. Since the SDGs and the targets associated with them are integrated and indivisible, agriculture, aquaculture, and fishing organizations have the potential to contribute to all SDGs by enhancing their positive impacts or by preventing and mitigating their negative impacts on the economy, environment, and people. The agriculture, aquaculture, and fishing sectors provide food for communities across the world and are best positioned to contribute to Goal 2: Zero Hunger. The sectors are also the world’s biggest employers and the largest economic sectors for many countries, directly impacting Goal 1: No Poverty and Goal 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth. By managing natural resources sustainably and efficiently (Goa",
    "new_id": 712
  },
  {
    "id": 75475,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the implicit relationship between the soil management plan and the reporting requirements outlined for organizations, as described in GRI 13: Agriculture, Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The soil management plan must address specific threats to soil health and include strategies for input optimization to align with reporting standards.",
      "B": "The soil management plan is optional unless the organization operates exclusively in the aquaculture sector.",
      "C": "Public availability of the soil management plan is a mandatory condition for determining soil health as a material topic.",
      "D": "Reporting on soil health is only required when fertilizers are used beyond a threshold amount.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "25",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 13_ Agriculture Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022.pdf",
    "source_text": "Reporting on soil health If the organization has determined soil health to be a material topic , this sub-section lists the disclosures identified as relevant for reporting on the topic by the agriculture, aquaculture, and fishing sectors. STANDARD DISCLOSURE SECTOR STANDARD REF. NO. Management of the topic GRI 3: Material Topics 2021Disclosure 3-3 Management of material topics Additional sector recommendations13.5.1 References and resources The authoritative instruments and references used in developing this topic, as well as resources that may be helpful for reporting on soil health by the agriculture, aquaculture, and fishing sectors are listed in the Bibliography .Describe the soil management plan, including: a link to this plan if publicly available;- the main threats to soil health identified and a description of the soil management practices used;- the approach to input optimization, including the use of fertilizers.-• GRI 13: Agriculture, Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022 25",
    "new_id": 713
  },
  {
    "id": 75476,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why the agriculture, aquaculture, and fishing sectors have a disproportionately larger influence on developing countries despite their relatively stable contribution to global GDP, as described in GRI 13: Agriculture, Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022?",
    "options": {
      "B": "They supply essential goods that meet fundamental human needs, particularly in rural areas of developing nations.",
      "A": "Their consistent GDP contribution ensures long-term economic stability in all regions.",
      "C": "The sectors are primarily driven by large-scale enterprises that dominate the economies of developing countries.",
      "D": "Developing countries rely on these sectors exclusively for international trade and export revenues.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "10",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 13_ Agriculture Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022.pdf",
    "source_text": "1. Sector profile The agriculture, aquaculture, and fishing sectors produce essential food and non-food items, such as fibers, fuels, and rubber products. They play a major role in global development as a provider of food for human consumption and supplier of materials to other economic sectors, such as textiles, construction materials, pharmaceuticals, and the production of biofuels. Production levels and value created by the sectors have increased in almost all countries across the globe in the past 20 years. However, their contribution to global gross domestic product (GDP) across this time period has stayed consistent at about 4%. Despite this relatively limited global economic contribution, the sector has an outsized impact in developing countries and on those in rural areas. In some developing countries, it accounts for more than a quarter of GDP [ 20]. Demand for the products of the sectors is projected to grow into the future, driven by a growing population and changes in income levels. Future production will also be influenced by demographic, socio-cultural, and lifestyle changes, as well as consumer awareness of health and sustainability issues [ 30]. Agriculture, aquaculture, and fishing operations can be formally or informally organized as large-scale or small-scale business enterprises. Operations can also include households, cooperatives, and government institutions. These organizations can own or operate farms, fishing vessels, mills, and hatcheries. Vertically integrated organizations can directly own or manage production, storage, processing, and distribution. Sector activities and business relationships Through their activities and business relationships , organizations can have an effect on the economy, environment, and people, and in turn make negative or positive contributions to sustainable development. When determining its material topics , the organization should consider the impacts of both its activities and its business relationships. Activities The impacts of an organization vary according to the types of activities it undertakes. The following list outlines some of the key activities of the agriculture, aquaculture, and fishing sectors, as defined in this Standard. This list is not exhaustive. Crop production Production: growing and harvesting seeds, trees for rubber and latex, and all crops, such as cereals, vegetables, fruits, fibers, and other types; gathering berries, nuts, mushrooms, and sap. Primary processing: cleaning, grading, hulling, pounding, and milling grains; soaking, heating, and drying leaves; extracting and filtering oils. Aggregation: aggregating crop produce from multiple sources at farm level for sale to downstream markets, which can involve transaction by intermediary organizations or single actors. Storage: keeping crops in a way that preserves their quality and keeps them safe from, for example, molds, yeasts, and rodents. Transportation: using traditional or mechanized transportation to move crops. Trading: buying and selling crops. Animal production Production: breeding and rearing livestock and poultry; collecting live animal products, such as meat, milk, eggs, honey, and wool; farming insects; raising animals in captivity; feeding animals; operating animal farms. Primary processing: cleaning and washing animal products; processing milk; candling eggs; slaughtering animals for meat; deboning, cutting, smoking, and freezing meat; separating fur, skins, feathers, and down. Aggregation: aggregating animal products from multiple farms for sale to downstream markets, which can involve transaction by intermediary organizations or single actors.2 2This figure is based on the agriculture, forestry and fishing sector as defined in the International Standard Industrial Classification of All Economic Activities (ISIC) which includes crop and animal production, hunting and related service activities, forestry and logging, and fishing and aquaculture [20]. GRI 13: Agriculture, Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022 10",
    "new_id": 714
  },
  {
    "id": 75477,
    "question": "Which scenario would most likely be classified as NOT work-related based on the nuanced distinctions provided in GRI 13: Agriculture, Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022?",
    "options": {
      "C": "A worker suffers a seizure at work due to epilepsy, unrelated to workplace conditions or activities.",
      "A": "A worker experiences a heart attack while performing their job duties, with no identifiable connection to occupational hazards.",
      "B": "A worker is injured in a car accident while commuting to work in a vehicle provided and organized by the employer.",
      "D": "A remote worker develops a musculoskeletal disorder directly linked to prolonged use of ergonomic equipment supplied by the employer.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "78",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 13_ Agriculture Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022.pdf",
    "source_text": "Note 1: ‘Ill health’ indicates damage to health and includes diseases, illnesses, and disorders. The terms ‘disease’, ‘illness’, and ‘disorder’ are often used interchangeably and refer to conditions with specific symptoms and diagnoses. Note 2: Work-related injuries and ill health are those that arise from exposure to hazards at work. Other types of incident can occur that are not connected with the work itself. For example, the following incidents are not considered to be work related: Note 3: Traveling for work: Injuries and ill health that occur while a worker is traveling are work related if, at the time of the injury or ill health, the worker was engaged in work activities ‘in the interest of the employer’. Examples of such activities include traveling to and from customer contacts; conducting job tasks; and entertaining or being entertained to transact, discuss, or promote business (at the direction of the employer). Working at home: Injuries and ill health that occur when working at home are work related if the injury or ill health occurs while the worker is performing work at home, and the injury or ill health is directly related to the performance of work rather than the general home environment or setting. Mental illness: A mental illness is considered to be work related if it has been notified voluntarily by the worker and is supported by an opinion from a licensed healthcare professional with appropriate training and experience stating that the illness is work related. For more guidance on determining ‘work-relatedness’, see the United States Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Determination of work-relatedness 1904.5 , https://www.osha.gov/pls/ oshaweb/owadisp.show_document? p_table=STANDARDS&p_id=9636 , accessed on 1 June 2018. Note 4: The terms ‘occupational’ and ‘work-related’ are often used interchangeably.a worker suffers a heart attack while at work that is unconnected with work;• a worker driving to or from work is injured in a car accident (where driving is not part of the work, and where the transport has not been organized by the employer);• a worker with epilepsy has a seizure at work that is unconnected with work.• Bibliography GRI 13: Agriculture, Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022 78",
    "new_id": 715
  },
  {
    "id": 75480,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the nuanced relationship between food security dimensions and agricultural practices, as discussed in GRI 13: Agriculture, Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Regenerative practices, such as crop rotation and optimal planting times, are highlighted as methods to improve soil health and contribute to both productivity and sustainability dimensions of food security.",
      "A": "Intensive farming universally enhances long-term food availability without compromising environmental sustainability.",
      "B": "Food loss at the farm level is primarily caused by inadequate infrastructure, making it the sole factor affecting food security stability.",
      "C": "The use of human-edible products for non-food purposes has no significant trade-offs with respect to achieving global food security.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "32",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 13_ Agriculture Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022.pdf",
    "source_text": "Topic 13.9 Food security Food security means that people have physical and economic access to sufficient, safe, and nutritious food that is acceptable within a given culture and meets people’s dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life. Adequate food is a human right and is crucial to the enjoyment of all rights. This topic covers impacts on the dimensions of food security. Food insecurity is a prevalent global issue. In 2018, more than 820 million people faced hunger, and as populations grow, global food needs will increase [ 147]. Many people cannot afford food or are forced to consume insufficient or low-quality food. Since 2014, undernourishment and food insecurity have consistently increased, putting global goals to end hunger at risk [ 146]. Agriculture, aquaculture, and fishing organizations have impacts on food supply and affordability. Quantity, quality, and accessibility of food also depend on farming and fishing practices. Globally, land used for agriculture is estimated at 38% of the total land surface [ 142]. Some regions are already constrained, limiting further land use expansion for food production (see also topic 13.4 Natural ecosystem conversion ). Almost half of the world’s calorie supply is derived from essential crops, such as maize, rice, and wheat. Competing demands for land, cultivation costs, and low margins may affect the supply and affordability of these crops. Climate change and adverse weather events can also cause impacts on yields, potentially increasing food losses (see also topic 13.2 Climate adaptation and resilience ). Box 1. Food loss In agriculture, aquaculture, and fishing, products originally intended as food for human consumption that end up as waste are categorized as food loss. The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) estimates that 13.8% of food, from harvest to retail, was lost globally in 2016 [ 145]. Inefficiencies can cause food loss at different stages of the supply chain. At the farm level, they can be due to inadequate harvesting time, climatic conditions, handling practices, post-harvest activities, and challenges related to selling products. Food loss is accompanied by the loss of resources – including water, land, energy, labor, and capital – and contributes to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Measures to prevent food loss include adequate storage temperatures and conditions, sound infrastructure, and efficient transportation. Primary processing conditions and packaging can play a role in preserving agriculture, aquaculture, and fishing products. Achieving food security is likely to involve trade-offs in terms of how land and products are used. For example, utilizing human-edible products for other uses means they are not available as food. Intensive crop and animal production can result in increased availability of food. However, intensive production can also be associated with negative impacts on the environment and yields in the longer-term. Many agricultural practices deplete soil nutrients more quickly than can be formed, undermining the sustainability dimension of food security (see also topic 13.5 Soil health ). Regenerative and organic practices, such as rotating crops or planting at optimal times, are considered to have the potential to contribute to greater soil health and productivity, and resilience of food production.19 19 Food security has multiple dimensions: food availability, access, use, stability, and sustainability. An additional dimension of agency is understood as the capacity of individuals or groups to make decisions about the food they eat and how that food is produced [151]. GRI 13: Agriculture, Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022 32",
    "new_id": 716
  },
  {
    "id": 75481,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why addressing illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing is critical to improving occupational health and safety in the fishing sector, as discussed in GRI 13: Agriculture, Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Eliminating IUU fishing removes a major factor contributing to the lack of enforcement of safety standards and worker protections.",
      "B": "IUU fishing directly increases fishers' wages, which in turn reduces their exposure to unsafe working conditions.",
      "C": "IUU fishing operations are more likely to enforce safety norms, creating a model for regulated vessels to follow.",
      "D": "IUU fishing primarily impacts environmental sustainability, with only indirect consequences for occupational health and safety.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "53-54",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 13_ Agriculture Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022.pdf",
    "source_text": "Fishers may be abandoned by vessel owners without the prospect of payment or repatriation (see topic 13.20 Employment practices ). There have been documented cases showing some abandonment lasting for many months. Abandonment can have health and safety impacts, including lack of medical care and regular food provision and harm to mental health caused by keeping people in a state of high uncertainty. Due to a lack of safety norms enforcement and inspection, illegal fishing operations and operations in contested waters can negatively impact the health and safety of workers. Addressing illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing in supply chains can help eliminate factors leading to compromised health and safety standards (see also topic 13.23 Supply chain traceability ). The often isolated and transboundary movement of vessels means consistent access for labor inspection, and occupational health and safety policy enforcement remains difficult. GRI 13: Agriculture, Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022 53\n\n[Page 54]\nReporting on occupational health and safety If the organization has determined occupational health and safety to be a material topic , this sub-section lists the disclosures identified as relevant for reporting on the topic by the agriculture, aquaculture, and fishing sectors. STANDARD DISCLOSURE SECTOR STANDARD REF. NO. Management of the topic GRI 3: Material Topics 2021Disclosure 3-3 Management of material topics Additional sector recommendations The following additional sector recommendation is for organizations in the fishing sector:13.19.1 Topic Standard disclosures GRI 403: Occupational Health and Safety 2018Disclosure 403-1 Occupational health and safety management system 13.19.2 Disclosure 403-2 Hazard identification, risk assessment, and incident investigation13.19.3 Disclosure 403-3 Occupational health services Additional sector recommendations The following additional sector recommendation is for organizations in the fishing sector:13.19.4 Disclosure 403-4 Worker participation, consultation, and communication on occupational health and safety13.19.5 Disclosure 403-5 Worker training on occupational health and safety 13.19.6 Disclosure 403-6 Promotion of worker health 13.19.7 Disclosure 403-7 Prevention and mitigation of occupational health and safety impacts directly linked by business relationships13.19.8 Disclosure 403-8 Workers covered by an occupational health and safety management system13.19.9 Disclosure 403-9 Work-related injuries 13.19.10 Disclosure 403-10 Work-related ill health 13.19.11 References and resources GRI 403: Occupational Health and Safety 2018 lists authoritative intergovernmental instruments and additional references relevant to reporting on this topic. The additional authoritative instruments and references used in developing this topic, as well as resources that may be helpful for reporting on occupational health and safety by the agriculture, aquaculture, and fishing sectors are listed in the Bibliography .Describe policies on maximum working hours and minimum hours of rest for workers on fishing vessels and the approach to limiting worker fatigue.31• Describe any occupational health services’ functions that specifically address the occupational health and safety risks for workers aboard fishing vessels, including workers operating in high seas, and explain how the organization facilitates workers’ access to these services.• 31 The minimum hours of rest are set out in the International Labour Organization (ILO) Convention 188, ‘Work in Fishing Convention’ [388]. GRI 13: Agriculture, Aquaculture and Fishing Sectors 2022 54",
    "new_id": 717
  },
  {
    "id": 75503,
    "question": "Which statement accurately captures the relationship between 'supply chain', 'value chain', and their associated entities, as described in GRI 101: Biodiversity 2024?",
    "options": {
      "B": "The supply chain is a subset of the value chain, encompassing only upstream activities, while downstream entities like distributors are excluded from the supply chain but included in the value chain.",
      "A": "Both the supply chain and value chain include upstream and downstream entities, but the value chain additionally incorporates the organization's internal operations.",
      "C": "The supply chain includes all upstream and downstream entities, whereas the value chain is limited to direct business relationships with first-tier suppliers and customers.",
      "D": "The value chain refers exclusively to upstream activities provided by suppliers, while the supply chain integrates both upstream and downstream activities.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "36",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 101_ Biodiversity 2024 - English.pdf",
    "source_text": "Note: See section 1 in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 for more information on ‘severity’. stakeholder individual or group that has an interest that is affected or could be affected by the organization’s activities Source: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), OECD Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Business Conduct , 2018; modified Examples: business partners , civil society organizations, consumers, customers, employees and other workers , governments, local communities , non-governmental organizations, shareholders and other investors, suppliers , trade unions, vulnerable groups Note: See section 2.4 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 for more information on ‘stakeholder’. supplier entity upstream from the organization (i.e., in the organization’s supply chain ), which provides a product or service that is used in the development of the organization’s own products or services Examples: brokers, consultants, contractors, distributors, franchisees, home workers , independent contractors, licensees, manufacturers, primary producers, sub- contractors, wholesalers Note: A supplier can have a direct business relationship with the organization (often referred to as a first-tier supplier) or an indirect business relationship. supply chain range of activities carried out by entities upstream from the organization, which provide products or services that are used in the development of the organization’s own products or services surface water water that occurs naturally on the Earth’s surface in ice sheets, ice caps, glaciers, icebergs, bogs, ponds, lakes, rivers, and streams Source: CDP, CDP Water Security Reporting Guidance , 2018; modified sustainable development / sustainability development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs Source: World Commission on Environment and Development, Our Common Future , 1987 Note: The terms ‘sustainability’ and ‘sustainable development’ are used interchangeably in the GRI Standards. third-party water municipal water suppliers and municipal wastewater treatment plants, public or private utilities, and other organizations involved in the provision, transport, treatment, disposal, or use of water and effluent value chain range of activities carried out by the organization, and by entities upstream and downstream from the organization, to bring the organization’s products or services from their conception to their end use Note 1: Entities upstream from the organization (e.g., suppliers ) provide products or services that are used in the development of the organization’s own products or services. Entities downstream from the organization (e.g., distributors, customers) receive products or services from the organization. Note 2: The value chain includes the supply chain . vulnerable group group of individuals with a specific condition or characteristic (e.g., economic, physical, political, GRI 101: Biodiversity 2024 36",
    "new_id": 718
  },
  {
    "id": 75517,
    "question": "When reporting on ecologically sensitive areas, which of the following conditions would NOT require an organization to disclose the distance of a radius used, according to GRI 101: Biodiversity 2024?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The site is completely located within an ecologically sensitive area.",
      "A": "The site is near an ecologically sensitive area but cannot identify the area affected by its activities.",
      "B": "The ecologically sensitive area falls within the radius set by the organization and the site is near it.",
      "D": "The organization uses a radius because it cannot determine the precise area potentially affected.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "21-22",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 101_ Biodiversity 2024 - English.pdf",
    "source_text": "A site is in an ecologically sensitive area when it is completely or partially located in the ecologically sensitive area. A site is near an ecologically sensitive area when the ecologically sensitive area falls within the area affected or potentially affected (sometimes referred to as the area of influence) or within the radius set by the organization. The organization can use a radius if it cannot identify the area affected or potentially affected by its activities. If the organization uses a radius, it should explain this and report the distance of the radius used. The organization is required to report the distance only in cases where the site is near an ecologically sensitive area. The organization should report the size in hectares of the ecologically sensitive areas within its sites. The organization can also report polygon outlines, or maps of the ecologically sensitive areas and overlay them with the polygon outlines or maps of its sites. The organization can also report the percentage of sites in or near ecologically sensitive areas. This information provides a high-level understanding of the significance of biodiversity across the organization’s operations. The percentage of sites in or near ecologically sensitive areas is calculated using the following formula: Percentage of sites in or near ecologically sensitive areas=Number of sites in or near ecologically sensitive areas ___________________________________________ Total number of sitesx 100 See reference [41] in the Bibliography . Guidance to 101-5-b -i The organization should specify whether the areas of biodiversity importance are: See Table 1 in the Appendix for more information on areas of biodiversity importance. Guidance to 101-5-d Where possible, the organization should also report the location within the country or jurisdiction (e.g., state, city, Exclusive Economic Zone) or a precise location, such as polygon outlines or maps. The organization can report departure and arrival locations and transport routes for transport activities. For fishing activities, it can report FAO major fishing areas and subareas. For each product and service with the most significant impacts on biodiversity, the organization should describe the level of traceability in place, for example, whether the product or service can be traced to the national, regional, or local level, or a specific point of origin (e.g., farms). The organization can also report the volume sourced or the amount spent on each product and service. If available, the organization should also report the information on ecologically sensitive areas required by 101-5-b for the products and services in its supply chain with the most significant impacts on biodiversity. If the products in its supply chain are or contain high-impact commodities5, the organization can report the quantity of each high-impact commodity sourced (e.g., tons of avocado) and the protected through legal or other effective means;• scientifically recognized for their importance to biodiversity;• important for species;• important for ecosystems; or• important for ecological connectivity.• 5SBTN defines high-impact commodities as raw and value-added materials used in economic activities that are known to have material links to the key drivers of biodiversity loss, resource depletion, and ecosystem degradation. GRI 101: Biodiversity 2024 21\n\n[Page 22]\nproportion of total high-impact commodities sourced. This information provides a high-level understanding of the significance of biodiversity across products in the organization’s supply chain. The organization can use the SBTN High Impact Commodity List to identify whether it sources products that are or contain high-impact commodities. The proportion of total high-impact commodities sourced is calculated using the following formula: Proportion of total high-impact commodities sourced=Quantity of high-impact commodity sourced ___________________________________________ Quantity of total high-impact commodities sourced See references [17] and [35] in the Bibliography . GRI 101: Biodiversity 2024 22",
    "new_id": 719
  },
  {
    "id": 75541,
    "question": "Which of the following scenarios would most directly contradict the criteria for identifying ecologically sensitive areas, as outlined in GRI 101: Biodiversity 2024?",
    "options": {
      "D": "A region designated as a Key Biodiversity Area (KBA) that is being managed to prevent further degradation despite its severely reduced ecosystem integrity.",
      "A": "An area recognized for ecological connectivity where migratory species rely on seasonal corridors, but which has experienced rapid decline in integrity due to human activity.",
      "B": "A wetland listed under the Ramsar Convention that supports livelihoods of local communities but shows no signs of biodiversity importance or ecological function.",
      "C": "A marine area identified as an Ecologically or Biologically Significant Marine Area (EBSA) whose ecosystems are rare and localized yet face no observable threats to their current state.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "43",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 101_ Biodiversity 2024 - English.pdf",
    "source_text": "Table 1 . Criteria for identifying ecologically sensitive areas Area Criteria* Biodiversity importance Areas protected through legal or other effective means Geographically defined areas that are designated or regulated and managed to achieve specific conservation objectives. They include: Examples of protected areas and OECMs are Natural and mixed World Heritage sites [45], Wetlands designated under the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands of International Importance [34], and areas protected under regional seas agreements. Areas scientifically recognized for their importance to biodiversity Areas important for species Areas important for species include areas with: Areas important for ecosystems Areas important for ecosystems contain ecosystems that are rare or very localized, highly threatened, important for ecosystem connectivity, or associated with key evolutionary processes. For example, coastal upwellings and seamounts. Areas important for ecological connectivity Areas important for ecological connectivity include important ecological corridors, areas and routes important for seasonal migratory patterns, and areas that provide adaptive space for species to spread across a landscape in the face of changing environmental conditions. High ecosystem integrity Areas of high ecosystem integrity, both on a global scale and in comparison to the surrounding landscape, contain significant opportunities for preserving environmental assets and sustaining local and global ecosystem services. Rapid decline in integrity Areas of rapid decline in integrity are areas with declining resilience of ecosystem service provision, and that are potentially at risk of ecological tipping points. This could include areas that have declined to a low state of integrity. Ecosystem service delivery importance Examples of areas important for the delivery of ecosystem service benefits to Indigenous Peoples, local communities, and other stakeholders include: Protected areas [53]** (terrestrial, freshwater, and marine) according to local, national, regional, or international conventions and agreements. • Areas conserved through other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs) [ 52]. • Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs) [ 29]** – sites significantly contributing to global biodiversity in terrestrial, freshwater, and marine ecosystems. KBAs include Alliance for Zero Extinction sites, Important Bird and Biodiversity Areas, and Important Plant Areas. • Ecologically or Biologically Significant Marine Areas (EBSAs) [ 12] – special areas in the ocean supporting the healthy functioning of oceans and the many services they provide. • Important Marine Mammal Areas [30]. • threatened species [27]** (critically endangered, endangered, and vulnerable at global, national, or regional levels); • congregatory species; • migratory species; • range-restricted species; • endemic species. • areas in which healthy ecosystems and biodiversity support local livelihoods; • areas that have been traditionally owned, occupied, or otherwise used or acquired by Indigenous Peoples and local communities; • Indigenous Peoples and local communities; GRI 101: Biodiversity 2024 43",
    "new_id": 720
  },
  {
    "id": 75545,
    "question": "When assessing the severity of a biodiversity impact, which factor would NOT independently contribute to increasing its severity, according to GRI 101: Biodiversity 2024?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The quantity of pollutants generated as a direct driver of biodiversity loss.",
      "B": "The presence of threatened species in an ecosystem near a tipping point.",
      "C": "The irremediable character of harm caused by proximity to ecologically sensitive areas.",
      "D": "The scope of an impact measured by the extent of ecosystem damage.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "18",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 101_ Biodiversity 2024 - English.pdf",
    "source_text": "supply chain , as well as identify and measure the changes to the state of biodiversity. It can also identify changes in the provision of ecosystem services. If no primary data is available, the organization can estimate the direct drivers and changes to the state of biodiversity. The indicators in Disclosure 101-6 can be used to measure the direct drivers (e.g., the size of the natural ecosystem converted, or the quantity of the pollutants generated). See Disclosure 101-7 for more information on changes to the state of biodiversity. To determine which of the impacts are most significant, the organization should assess the severity and likelihood of the impacts. The severity of a negative impact is determined by the following characteristics: Any of the three characteristics (scale, scope, and irremediable character) can make an impact severe. The contribution to the direct drivers, the proximity to ecologically sensitive areas, and the changes to the state of biodiversity can make the severity and likelihood of an impact on biodiversity greater. For example, when a site or supplier is in or near an ecologically sensitive area, it can increase the likelihood of an impact on biodiversity. When a site or supplier is in or near an ecosystem close to a tipping point, or where threatened species are present, it can increase the severity of an impact on biodiversity, for example, because the impact would result in irremediable harm. See section 1 in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 for more guidance on assessing the significance of impacts. For more guidance on how to identify biodiversity impacts, the organization can use the following sources: Methodologies Where possible, the organization should use primary data to identify its sites and products and services in its supply chain with the most significant impacts on biodiversity (e.g., using data collected through field or supplier surveys or derived from satellite imagery). The organization can use secondary or modeled data when primary data is unavailable (e.g., data layers on ecosystem extent and condition, life cycle impact assessments). For example, the organization can use secondary data to identify and measure changes to the state of biodiversity. In such a case, geospatial data layers can be overlaid with geographic location data to reflect the size and condition of ecosystems or identify species that may be present at specific sites. For example, the WWF Biodiversity Risk Filter [57] provides information on the ecosystem condition in different locations and the direct drivers most likely to be present and significant for an organization’s or its suppliers’ activities. Secondary data may be appropriate to gain initial information about an organization’s impacts on biodiversity across its sites and products and services in its supply chain. Once the sites and products and services in its supply chain with the most significant impacts have been identified, the organization may collect primary data for those sites and products and services in its supply chain. The organization should use precise locations to assess the proximity to ecologically sensitive areas and to assess the changes to the state of biodiversity. Scale: how grave the impact is.• Scope: how widespread the impact is, for example, the number of species affected or the extent of ecosystem damage.• Irremediable character: how hard it is to counteract or make good the resulting harm.• Aligning accounting approaches for nature (Align) Recommendations and implementation guidance;• Natural Capital Protocol from the Natural Capital Coalition;• Science Based Targets Network (SBTN) Technical Guidance: Step 1: Assess;• The Locate and Evaluate phases of the TNFD LEAP approach.• 4 4The WWF Biodiversity Risk Filter includes over 50 global datasets on biodiversity, which provide information on a sector’s potential contributions to direct drivers of biodiversity loss, proximity to ecologically sensitive areas, and the state of biodiversity (species and ecosystems). GRI 101: Biodiversity 2024 18",
    "new_id": 721
  },
  {
    "id": 75605,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes why an organization should report on invasive alien species introduced through ballast water, according to the implications in GRI 101: Biodiversity 2024?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Because these species could threaten local biodiversity and ecosystems, even if not yet legally regulated.",
      "A": "Because such species are always classified as ecologically harmful under CITES Appendices.",
      "C": "Because reporting is mandatory for all non-native species regardless of their potential impact.",
      "D": "Because national regulations universally require disclosure of all transported organisms.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "26",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 101_ Biodiversity 2024 - English.pdf",
    "source_text": "The organization can report if the species are listed in one of the CITES Appendices. It can also report if the species are harvested from ecologically sensitive areas (e.g., from a Key Biodiversity Area, which aims to protect or conserve the harvested species). To report on the extinction risk of a species, the organization can use information from the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. See references [14] and [27] in the Bibliography . Guidance to 101-6-b-ii The organization should use information reported under Disclosures 303-3 Water withdrawal and 303-5 Water consumption in GRI 303: Water and Effluents 2018 to report water withdrawal and water consumption for each site. Guidance to 101-6-c The organization is only required to report the type and quantity of pollutants that lead or could lead to the most significant impacts on biodiversity. To report on air pollution, the organization should use, where relevant, information reported under Disclosure 305-7 Nitrogen oxides (NOx), sulfur oxides (SOx), and other significant air emissions in GRI 305: Emissions 2016 for: To report on water and soil pollution, the organization should use, where relevant, information reported under: For heat, light, noise, or vibration pollution, the organization should report instances that do not comply with legal requirements for permitted pollution levels. Guidance to 101-6-d Non-invasive alien species are not required to be reported under 101-6-d. Invasive alien species can be introduced accidentally (e.g., transport, discharge of ballast waters) or on purpose (e.g., for pest control, horticulture, pets, zoological gardens, and aquaria). The organization should report the species that are or may be introduced. For example, an organization imports ornamental plants to new areas, which may threaten local biodiversity. A maritime shipping organization may introduce shellfish, crustaceans, and other species to new areas through contaminated ballast water or encrusted organisms on ships. It can also inadvertently introduce other species, such as insects and rodents, through the transport of goods. National regulations define which species are considered invasive alien species in a particular country. The Global Invasive Species Database and Global Register of Introduced and Invasive Species also provide information on invasive alien species. The organization can also describe how those species affect or may affect surrounding species and ecosystems. See references [21] and [22] in the Bibliography . 8 NOx; • SOx; • Persistent organic pollutants (POP); • Volatile organic compounds (VOCs); • Hazardous air pollutants (HAP); • Particulate matter (PM); • Other standard categories of air emissions from relevant regulations. • Disclosure 303-4 Water discharge in GRI 303: Water and Effluents 2018 to have information on priority substances of concern that may cause water pollution (e.g., those leading to eutrophication). • Disclosure 306-3 Significant spills in GRI 306: Effluents and Waste 2016 . • 8The disclosures in GRI 303: Water and Effluents 2018 , GRI 305: Emissions 2016 , and GRI 306: Effluents and Waste 2016 (Disclosure 306-3 Significant spills) do not require information to be reported by site; they require aggregate information. The organization can refer to the original data sources used to compile the information for these disclosures to obtain the data by site. GRI 101: Biodiversity 2024 26",
    "new_id": 722
  },
  {
    "id": 75606,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why an organization's biodiversity-related impacts cannot be fully understood without considering both its direct activities and business relationships, as described in GRI 101: Biodiversity 2024?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Because the activities of business relationships can independently contribute to drivers of biodiversity loss that extend beyond the organization’s operational boundaries.",
      "A": "Because biodiversity impacts are limited to geographic areas where the organization directly operates.",
      "B": "Because the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework mandates reporting on both direct and indirect impacts.",
      "D": "Because the GRI Standards only assess impacts caused by an organization’s internal governance and policies.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "4",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 101_ Biodiversity 2024 - English.pdf",
    "source_text": "Introduction GRI 101: Biodiversity 2024 contains disclosures for organizations to report information about their biodiversity-related impacts , and how they manage these impacts. The Standard is structured as follows: The rest of the Introduction section provides a background on the topic, an overview of the system of GRI Standards and further information on using this Standard. Background on the topic This Standard addresses the topic of biodiversity. Biodiversity encompasses the variability of organisms living in terrestrial, marine, and aquatic ecosystems, as well as the ecological complexes they form. It comprises the genetic diversity within species, the variety of species in an area, and the distinct features of entire ecosystems. Biodiversity is an essential characteristic of nature, which comprises all living and non-living elements on Earth. The activities of an organization can exacerbate the direct drivers of biodiversity loss, such as land and sea use change, exploitation of natural resources, climate change, pollution, and the introduction of invasive alien species. Direct drivers have impacts on species and ecosystems while affecting people who rely on ecosystem services for their livelihood. An organization can have impacts on biodiversity through its activities, the activities of its business relationships , or a combination of both. These impacts can also extend beyond the geographic locations of the organization’s activities. The Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework of the Convention on Biological Diversity sets goals and targets to halt and reverse the continued loss of biodiversity. The UN adopted the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) as part of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. These goals include key targets for halting biodiversity loss and promoting the sustainable use of natural resources under SDG 14: Life below water and SDG 15: Life on land. See references [2] and [3] in the Bibliography . System of GRI Standards This Standard is part of the GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards (GRI Standards). The GRI Standards enable an organization to report information about its most significant impacts on the economy, environment, and people, including impacts on their human rights , and how it manages these impacts. The GRI Standards are structured as a system of interrelated standards that are organized into three series: GRI Universal Standards, GRI Sector Standards, and GRI Topic Standards (see Figure 1 in this Standard). Universal Standards: GRI 1, GRI 2 and GRI 3 GRI 1: Foundation 2021 specifies the requirements that the organization must comply with to report in accordance with the GRI Standards. The organization begins using the GRI Standards by consulting GRI 1 . GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 contains disclosures that the organization uses to provide information about its reporting practices and other organizational details, such as its activities, governance, and policies. GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 provides guidance on how to determine material topics . It also contains disclosures that the organization uses to report information about its process of determining material topics, its list of material topics, and how it manages each topic.Section 1 contains three disclosures, which provide information about how the organization manages its biodiversity-related impacts.• Section 2 contains five disclosures, which provide information about the organization’s biodiversity-related impacts.• The Glossary contains defined terms with a specific meaning when used in the GRI Standards. The terms are underlined in the text of the GRI Standards and linked to the definitions.• The Bibliography lists authoritative intergovernmental instruments and additional references used in developing this Standard, as well as resources that the organization can consult.• The Appendix includes criteria for identifying ecologically sensitive areas, methods to measure or estimate ecosystem condition, and examples of templates for presenting information for Disclosures 101-5, 101-6, 101-7, and 101-8.• GRI 101: Biodiversity 2024 4",
    "new_id": 723
  },
  {
    "id": 75607,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between an organization's activities, ecosystem services, and their impact on local communities, as implied in GRI 101: Biodiversity 2024?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Changes in ecosystem services due to an organization’s activities can create either positive or negative impacts on local communities depending on the specific service affected.",
      "A": "An organization’s reduction in food provisioning services always necessitates the development of alternative food sources by affected communities.",
      "B": "Switching to agroforestry decreases soil erosion control services, indirectly increasing flooding risks for local communities.",
      "C": "The quality and quantity of ecosystem services are solely determined by external environmental factors, independent of an organization’s actions.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "32-33",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 101_ Biodiversity 2024 - English.pdf",
    "source_text": "See references [20], [32 ], [41], [54] and [56] in the Bibliography . Guidance to 101-8-b The organization’s activities may lead to an increase or decrease in the quality and quantity of ecosystem services. For example, the organization can explain that cutting trees in the forest has decreased food provisioning services, which has a negative impact on the local community that needs to find an alternative food source. In another example, the organization can explain that switching to agroforestry has resulted in an increase in soil erosion control services, which has a positive impact on the local community that will face fewer risks from flooding. the Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures (TNFD) LEAP approach, which draws on the UN SEEA Ecosystem Accounting; • the World Resources Institute (WRI) Corporate Ecosystem Services Review . • GRI 101: Biodiversity 2024 32\n\n[Page 33]\nGlossary This glossary provides definitions for terms used in this Standard. The organization is required to apply these definitions when using the GRI Standards. The definitions included in this glossary may contain terms that are further defined in the complete GRI Standards Glossary . All defined terms are underlined. If a term is not defined in this glossary or in the complete GRI Standards Glossary , definitions that are commonly used and understood apply. base year historical datum (such as year) against which a measurement is tracked over time baseline starting point used for comparisons Note: In the context of energy and emissions reporting, the baseline is the projected energy consumption or emissions in the absence of any reduction activity. business partner entity with which the organization has some form of direct and formal engagement for the purpose of meeting its business objectives Source: Shift and Mazars LLP, UN Guiding Principles Reporting Framework , 2015; modified Examples: affiliates, business-to-business customers, clients, first-tier suppliers , franchisees, joint venture partners, investee companies in which the organization has a shareholding position Note: Business partners do not include subsidiaries and affiliates that the organization controls. business relationships relationships that the organization has with business partners , with entities in its value chain including those beyond the first tier, and with any other entities directly linked to its operations, products, or services Source: United Nations (UN), Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework , 2011; modified Note: Examples of other entities directly linked to the organization’s operations, products, or services are a non-governmental organization with which the organization delivers support to a local community or state security forces that protect the organization’s facilities. catchment area of land from which all surface runoff and subsurface water flows through a sequence of streams, rivers, aquifers, and lakes into the sea or another outlet at a single river mouth, estuary, or delta Source: Alliance for Water Stewardship (AWS), AWS International Water Stewardship Standard, Version 1.0 , 2014; modified Note: Catchments include associated groundwater areas and might include portions of waterbodies (such as lakes or rivers). In different parts of the world, catchments are also referred to as ‘watersheds’ or ‘basins’ (or sub-basins). child person under the age of 15 years, or under the age of completion of compulsory schooling, whichever is higher GRI 101: Biodiversity 2024 33",
    "new_id": 724
  },
  {
    "id": 75608,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why an organization might exclude certain parts of its supply chain when identifying biodiversity impacts, based on the methods and assumptions described in GRI 101: Biodiversity 2024?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Due to limitations in data availability or resource constraints that prevent comprehensive analysis of all supply chain tiers.",
      "B": "To focus exclusively on sites owned or managed by the organization, as these are deemed to have the most significant impacts.",
      "C": "Because suppliers beyond the first tier are considered irrelevant to the organization’s biodiversity-related responsibilities.",
      "D": "To prioritize only those products and services that directly contribute to the organization’s revenue generation.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "16",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 101_ Biodiversity 2024 - English.pdf",
    "source_text": "2. Topic disclosures An organization reporting in accordance with the GRI Standards is required to report any disclosures from this section (Disclosure 101-4 through Disclosure 101-8) that are relevant to its biodiversity-related impacts . Disclosure 101-4 Identification of biodiversity impacts The organization shall:REQUIREMENTS explain how it has determined which of its sites and which products and services in its supply chain have the most significant actual and potential impacts on biodiversity.a. This disclosure enables the organization to explain how it has determined which of its sites and which products and services in its supply chain have the most significant actual and potential impacts on biodiversity. It covers products and services from suppliers throughout the organization’s supply chain, including from suppliers beyond the first tier. This provides an understanding of where in the supply chain, potentially many tiers removed from the organization, the most significant impacts on biodiversity are. The organization can additionally report the information for entities downstream in its value chain . The activities undertaken by the organization in its sites can have impacts on biodiversity. Sites include sites owned, leased, or managed by the organization and locations where it conducts its activities. Examples are a mine site owned by an organization or a fishing ground where an organization operates. Sites also include those for which future operations have been announced but not yet started, as well as those no longer active. Sites include subsurface infrastructures under the land or seabed surface, such as underground mining tunnels, cables, and pipelines. The organization may also be involved with negative impacts on biodiversity as a result of its business relationships with suppliers. Suppliers are entities upstream from the organization, which provide products or services used to develop the organization’s own products or services. The activities undertaken by the suppliers to develop their products or services can have impacts on biodiversity. Suppliers that provide products to the organization can provide raw materials, semi-manufactured goods, or final products. Guidance to 101-4-a The organization should describe the methods used and the assumptions made to determine which of its sites and which products and services in its supply chain have the most significant actual and potential impacts on biodiversity. It is up to the organization to set the threshold to determine which sites and which products and services in its supply chain have the most significant impacts on biodiversity. For example, the organization can determine that all of its sites have the most significant impacts on biodiversity, except for its headquarters. An organization that sources many products or services can determine to prioritize the products or services in its supply chain that are likely to have the most significant impacts on biodiversity and of which it sources a high volume or on which it spends a large amount. The organization should describe any limitations or exclusions, for example, whether it has excluded certain parts of its supply chain when identifying the impacts. The organization should describe the sources and the evidence it has used to identify the impacts. It should also explain whether and how it engages with stakeholders to identify impacts on biodiversity. GUIDANCE GRI 101: Biodiversity 2024 16",
    "new_id": 725
  },
  {
    "id": 75609,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the implications of an organization's actions regarding access and benefit-sharing when operating in areas beyond national jurisdiction, as described in GRI 101: Biodiversity 2024?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Even without specific ABS regulations, an organization can implement voluntary actions to ensure fair and equitable benefit-sharing for marine genetic resources in these areas.",
      "A": "An organization is exempt from any access and benefit-sharing obligations for marine genetic resources found in these areas as no international agreement governs them.",
      "C": "The Nagoya Protocol directly mandates how organizations must handle marine genetic resources, including digital genetic sequence information, in such areas.",
      "D": "National focal points are responsible for enforcing access and benefit-sharing compliance for resources located beyond national jurisdiction.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "14",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 101_ Biodiversity 2024 - English.pdf",
    "source_text": "Disclosure 101-3 Access and benefit-sharing The organization shall:REQUIREMENTS describe the process to ensure compliance with access and benefit-sharing regulations and measures;a. describe voluntary actions taken to advance access and benefit-sharing that are additional to legal obligations or when there are no regulations and measures.b. This disclosure provides information on how the organization complies with access and benefit- sharing (ABS) regulations and measures regarding access to genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge held by Indigenous Peoples and local communities . These regulations and measures also establish the rules on fair and equitable benefit-sharing arising from the utilization of genetic resources and the associated traditional knowledge. It also provides information on the voluntary actions taken by the organization to advance access and fair and equitable benefit-sharing. This disclosure is relevant for organizations that use genetic resources to conduct research and development on the genetic or biochemical composition of resources, including through the application of biotechnology. It also applies to organizations that use traditional knowledge associated with genetic resources. These organizations are active in cosmetics, pharmaceuticals, and agriculture, among other sectors. The fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from the utilization of genetic resources is one of the objectives of the Convention on Biological Diversity. The Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilization (hereafter the Nagoya Protocol) further advances this objective. The organization can consult the ABS Clearing-House [ 13] for more information on ABS. The platform intends to provide information on national regulations and measures for accessing genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge. In addition, national focal points might be established to provide information on ABS on the national level. When countries lack ABS regulations and measures, an organization can still take action to share the benefits arising from its use of genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge fairly and equitably. These actions are referred to as voluntary actions. The Nagoya Protocol does not cover ABS of genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge found in areas of the sea that are beyond national jurisdiction. Under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, an agreement has been adopted to conserve and sustain marine biological diversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction. This agreement covers access and benefit-sharing of marine genetic resources, including the digital genetic sequence information of resources located in areas beyond national jurisdiction. If an organization has activities on the sea beyond national jurisdiction, it can report if it implements processes and actions to ensure access and fair and equitable benefit-sharing of marine genetic resources. See references [1], [2], [4] and [13] in the Bibliography . Guidance to 101-3-a Where ABS regulations and measures apply, the organization should describe: When the organization has identified significant instances of non-compliance with laws and regulations related to ABS, these are reported under Disclosure 2-27 in GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 .GUIDANCE how it allocates responsibility to ensure compliance with ABS regulations and measures across different levels within the organization;• how it identifies which provider countries have access and benefit-sharing regulations and measures;• how it integrates ABS regulations and measures into organizational strategies, operational policies, and operational procedures; • what training it provides on implementing the ABS regulations and measures.• GRI 101: Biodiversity 2024 14",
    "new_id": 726
  },
  {
    "id": 75610,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the implicit relationship between biodiversity, ecosystem services, and the resilience of benefits provided to beneficiaries, as described in GRI 101: Biodiversity 2024?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Biodiversity underpins the quality, quantity, and resilience of all types of ecosystem services, thereby indirectly supporting both material and non-material benefits for beneficiaries.",
      "A": "Biodiversity primarily enhances cultural services by increasing aesthetic experiences, which in turn ensures the resilience of ecosystems.",
      "B": "A decline in biodiversity directly reduces the provisioning services but has no significant impact on regulating and maintenance services.",
      "D": "The diversity of genes, species, and ecosystems improves pollination services exclusively, which is critical for maintaining food supply for local communities.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "31",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 101_ Biodiversity 2024 - English.pdf",
    "source_text": "Disclosure 101-8 Ecosystem services The organization shall: REQUIREMENTS for each site reported under 101-5-a, list the ecosystem services and beneficiaries affected or potentially affected by the organization’s activities; a. explain how the ecosystem services and beneficiaries are or could be affected by the organization's activities. b. Ecosystem services occur through an ecosystem's normal functioning and can fall into one or more of the following categories: Provisioning services contribute to benefits extracted or harvested from ecosystems. Examples are timber in a forest, freshwater from a river, and subsistence hunting . Regulating and maintenance services result from the ability of ecosystems to regulate biological processes and influence climate, hydrological, and biochemical cycles, thereby maintaining environmental conditions beneficial to people. An example is the role of forests in preventing soil erosion. Cultural services are the non-material benefits people (beneficiaries) obtain from ecosystems through spiritual enrichment, cognitive development, reflection, recreation, and aesthetic experiences. Examples are the recreational value of a forest and the cultural importance of a heritage landscape for a local community . Biodiversity plays an important role in maintaining the quality, quantity, and resilience of ecosystem service flows, and it provides ecosystem services that beneficiaries rely upon now and into the future. The diversity of genes, species, and ecosystems provides a greater range of ecosystem service and higher overall quantity, quality, and resilience of ecosystem services and improves the capacity of ecosystems to function effectively. A change in the state of biodiversity can lead to changes in ecosystem services. This, in turn, can have an impact on the beneficiaries of these ecosystem services. For example, a decline in the number of bees caused by the organization’s activities can lead to decreased pollination services. If the crops are not properly pollinated by the bees, the quality and quantity of the crops produced may be affected, reducing the available food for the local community that grows the crops. This disclosure gives insight into the ecosystem services and beneficiaries affected or potentially affected by the organization’s activities . The organization should also list the ecosystem services and beneficiaries affected or potentially affected by its suppliers ’ activities for each country or jurisdiction reported under 101-5-d and those affected or potentially affected by the activities of its downstream entities. For an example of how to present information on requirements in Disclosure 101-8, see Table 3 in the Appendix. See references [31] and [54] in the Bibliography . Guidance to 101-8-a Beneficiaries can include Indigenous Peoples , local communities, and other organizations. The reporting organization can also be one of the beneficiaries. The organization can report the number of beneficiaries when disclosing information for this requirement (e.g., 50 farmers located in the area). The organization should describe the approach used to identify the ecosystem services reported under 101-8-a. The organization can explain if it engages with stakeholders to identify the ecosystem services and beneficiaries affected. It can also use the following methodologies and tools to identify ecosystem services : GUIDANCE provisioning services; • regulating and maintenance services; and • cultural services. • the ENCORE tool; • the Natural Capital Protocol from the Natural Capital Coalition ; • GRI 101: Biodiversity 2024 31",
    "new_id": 727
  },
  {
    "id": 75617,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why an entity might choose to disclose detailed information about notable recalls, including causes and financial implications, in relation to its sustainability-related risks, as described in the IFRS S1 Accompanying Guidance on General Requirements for Disclosure of Sustainability-related Financial Information?",
    "options": {
      "D": "To provide context that enables users of financial reports to assess how food safety-related risks could impact the entity's future financial performance.",
      "A": "To comply with mandatory legal requirements for reporting all operational disruptions regardless of their materiality.",
      "B": "To demonstrate the entity’s commitment to transparency by sharing non-material information as part of its corporate social responsibility initiatives.",
      "C": "To align exclusively with the CDSB Framework Application Guidance on Biodiversity-related Disclosures, which mandates recall disclosures.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "10",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S1 Accompanying.pdf",
    "source_text": "Each of these metrics is supported by technical protocols that provide detailed guidance on definitions, scope, implementation and presentation. For example, in applying the accompanying technical protocols, the hypothetical meat, poultry and dairy entity would disclose information related to workforce health and safety for all of its workers, regardless of their location and type of employment, such as full-time, part-time, direct, contract, executive, labour, salary, hourly or seasonal. The entity might disclose this information to comply with the requirement in paragraph 32(a) of IFRS S1 to describe the effects of workforce health and safety-related risks on its business model and its value chain. Furthermore, the entity might disaggregate this information —for example, by location of operations —to disclose information in accordance with the requirement in paragraph 32(b) of IFRS S1 to describe where in the entity ’s business model and value chain workforce health and safety-related risks are concentrated. The technical protocols may also serve as criteria against which the disclosed information can be verified. The accompanying technical protocols would also guide the hypothetical entity in supplementing the metrics with appropriate context —for example, a discussion of notable recalls, including information related to the cause, amount, remediation cost, nature (voluntary or involuntary), associated corrective actions and other significant outcomes related to the recall, such as legal proceedings or consumer illness. The entity might disclose this information to comply with the requirements in paragraph 35 of IFRS S1 to disclose quantitative and qualitative information about the current and anticipated financial effects of food safety-related risks on its financial position, performance and cash flows. CDSB Framework Application Guidance As set out in IFRS S1, an entity may refer to and consider the applicability of the CDSB Framework Application Guidance in identifying sustainability- related risks and opportunities that could reasonably be expected to affect the entity's prospects (see paragraph 55 of IFRS S1). In the absence of an IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standard that specifically applies to a sustainability- related risk or opportunity, an entity may refer to and consider the applicability of the CDSB Framework Application Guidance in identifying information that is relevant to the decision-making of users of general purpose financial reports and faithfully represents the sustainability-related risk or opportunity (see paragraphs 57 –58 of IFRS S1). The CDSB Framework Application Guidance can support entities in identifying water- and biodiversity-related risks and opportunities. For example, the CDSB Framework Application Guidance on Biodiversity-related Disclosures identifies potential physical biodiversity-related risks such as reduction in soil fertility, reduction in pollination for crop production and reduced availability of fish stocks. Similarly, the CDSB Framework Application Guidance on Water-related Disclosures identifies potential water-related opportunities such as improved water efficiency, development of new products and services, and conservation and restoration of ecosystems through engagement and collaboration with stakeholders. In applying the requirement in paragraph 21 of IFRS S1 onIG23 IG24 IG25 IG26IFRS S1 ACCOMPANYING GUIDANCE © IFRS Foundation 9",
    "new_id": 728
  },
  {
    "id": 75618,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the underlying reason why an entity must separately assess the information needs of each type of primary user before combining them to meet common information needs, as described in the IFRS S1 Accompanying Guidance on General Requirements for Disclosure of Sustainability-related Financial Information?",
    "options": {
      "A": "To identify overlapping information needs among different types of primary users while excluding unique or specialized needs.",
      "B": "To ensure that all specialized information needs are addressed in the general purpose financial reports.",
      "C": "Because sustainability-related risks and opportunities differ fundamentally between investors, lenders, and other creditors.",
      "D": "To allow the entity to prioritize the most critical information needs of its largest group of primary users.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "4-5",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S1 Accompanying.pdf",
    "source_text": "CONTENTS from paragraph ILLUSTRATIVE GUIDANCE IG1 Primary users IG1 Meeting primary users ’ information needs IG2 Use of publicly available information IG7 Applying sources of guidance IG8 SASB Standards IG11 CDSB Framework Application Guidance IG25 ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLES IE1 SASB Standards IE2 Example 1 —An entity with a single line of business IE3 Example 2 —A large conglomerate with diverse activities IE9IFRS S1 ACCOMPANYING GUIDANCE © IFRS Foundation 3\n\n[Page 5]\nIFRS S1 General Requirements for Disclosure of Sustainability-related Financial Information Illustrative Guidance This guidance accompanies, but is not part of, IFRS S1. It illustrates aspects of IFRS S1 but is not intended to provide interpretative guidance. Primary users The objective of IFRS S1 is to require an entity to disclose information about its sustainability-related risks and opportunities that is useful to primary users of general purpose financial reports in making decisions relating to providing resources to the entity.1 Meeting primary users ’ information needs Assessing whether information could reasonably be expected to influence decisions made by the primary users of a specific reporting entity ’s general purpose financial reports requires that entity to consider the characteristics of those users while also considering the entity ’s own circumstances. General purpose financial reports include —but are not restricted to —an entity ’s general purpose financial statements and sustainability-related financial disclosures. Existing and potential investors, lenders and other creditors are the primary users to whom general purpose financial reports are directed. General purpose financial reports are prepared for users with a reasonable knowledge of business and economic activities and who review and analyse the information diligently. However, even well-informed and diligent users may need to seek the aid of an adviser to understand sustainability-related financial information. General purpose financial reports do not, and cannot, provide all the information that primary users need. Therefore, the entity aims to meet the common information needs of its primary users. It does not aim to address specialised information needs —information needs that are unique to particular users. To meet the common information needs of its primary users, an entity first separately identifies the information needs of one of the three types of primary users —for example, investors (existing and potential). The entity then repeats the assessment for the two remaining types —lenders (existing and potential) and other creditors (existing and potential). The combined information needs identified by these assessments form the set of common information needs that the entity aims to meet.IG1 IG2 IG3 IG4 IG5 1Throughout IFRS S1, the terms ‘primary users ’ and ‘users’ are used interchangeably, with the same meaning and refer to existing and potential investors, lenders and other creditors.IFRS S1 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR DISCLOSURE OF SUSTAINABILITY- RELATED FINANCIAL INFORMATION —JUNE 2023 4 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 729
  },
  {
    "id": 75689,
    "question": "Which of the following best reflects an implicit relationship or logical consequence regarding how grievances and forced labor might interact in a workplace scenario, as described in GRI 14: Mining Sector 2024?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Grievance mechanisms are designed to address perceived injustices, but they cannot mitigate conditions that constitute forced labor as defined by indicators such as withheld identity papers.",
      "A": "Forced labor is a legally actionable issue only when grievance mechanisms have been formally established and utilized by workers.",
      "C": "The presence of a formal joint management–worker health and safety committee eliminates the possibility of forced labor since it ensures worker participation and consultation.",
      "D": "Indicators of forced labor, such as compulsory deposits or threats of firing, inherently undermine freedom of association and render grievance mechanisms ineffective.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "75",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 14_ Mining Sector 2024 - English.pdf",
    "source_text": "forced or compulsory labor all work and service that is exacted from any person under the menace of any penalty and for which the said person has not offered herself or himself voluntarily Source: International Labour Organization (ILO), Forced Labour Convention , 1930 (No. 29); modified Note 1: The most extreme examples of forced or compulsory labor are slave labor and bonded labor, but debts can also be used as a means of maintaining workers in a state of forced labor. Note 2: Indicators of forced labor include withholding identity papers, requiring compulsory deposits, and compelling workers, under threat of firing, to work extra hours to which they have not previously agreed. formal joint management–worker health and safety committee committee composed of management and worker representatives , whose function is integrated into an organizational structure, and which operates according to agreed written policies, procedures, and rules, and helps facilitate worker participation and consultation on matters of occupational health and safety freedom of association right of employers and workers to form, to join and to run their own organizations without prior authorization or interference by the state or any other entity freshwater water with concentration of total dissolved solids equal to or below 1,000 mg/L Source: Environmental management — Water footprint — Principles, requirements and guidelines. Geneva: ISO, 2014; modified United States Geological Survey (USGS), Water Science Glossary of Terms, water.usgs.gov/edu/dictionary.html , accessed on 1 June 2018; modified World Health Organization (WHO), Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality , 2017; modified greenhouse gas (GHG) gas that contributes to the greenhouse effect by absorbing infrared radiation grievance perceived injustice evoking an individual’s or a group’s sense of entitlement, which may be based on law, contract, explicit or implicit promises, customary practice, or general notions of fairness of aggrieved communities Source: United Nations (UN), Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework , 2011 grievance mechanism routinized process through which grievances can be raised and remedy can be sought Source: United Nations (UN), Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework , 2011; modified Note: See Guidance to Disclosure 2-25 in GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 for more information on ‘grievance mechanism’. groundwater water that is being held in, and that can be recovered from, an underground formation Source: International Organization for Standardization. ISO 14046:2014. Environmental management — Water footprint — Principles, requirements and guidelines . Geneva: ISO, 2014; modified hazardous waste waste that possesses any of the characteristics contained in Annex III of the Basel Convention, GRI 14: Mining Sector 2024 75",
    "new_id": 730
  },
  {
    "id": 75726,
    "question": "Which scenario represents the most comprehensive understanding of how air emissions from mining activities could indirectly exacerbate health and environmental issues beyond direct exposure, as outlined in GRI 14: Mining Sector 2024?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Dust from mining operations impairs photosynthesis in plants, leading to reduced agricultural yields, which then increases food insecurity among nearby communities.",
      "A": "Sulfur oxides released during smelting contribute to acid rain, which degrades soil quality and leads to higher respiratory risks for humans due to increased particulate matter resuspension.",
      "B": "Nitrogen oxide emissions from transportation form ground-level ozone, which directly causes neurological damage in children living near mine sites.",
      "D": "Mercury gases from zinc extraction volatilize into hydrogen cyanide, causing immediate respiratory hazards for workers at gold refineries.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "21",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 14_ Mining Sector 2024 - English.pdf",
    "source_text": "Topic 14.3 Air emissions Air emissions include pollutants that have negative impacts on air quality and ecosystems, including human and animal health. This topic covers impacts from emissions of sulfur oxides (SOx), nitrogen oxides (NOx), particulate matter (PM), volatile organic compounds (VOCs), carbon monoxide (CO), and heavy metals, such as mercury (Hg). In addition to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, mining activities are a source of other anthropogenic air emissions classified as pollutants. Globally, air pollution causes acute health problems and millions of deaths annually by contributing to heart and lung diseases, strokes, respiratory infections, and neurological damage [ 90]. Air emissions are a major concern for the sector’s workers (see also topic 14.16 Occupational health and safety ) and local communities adjacent to mine sites and transportation routes (see also topic 14.10 Local communities ). These emissions disproportionately affect children , the elderly, and the poor [ 89]. Air emissions from mining activities can also have negative impacts on nearby ecosystems (see also topic 14.4 Biodiversity ). Mining activities release air emissions during drilling, blasting, excavation, overburden removal, storage, mineral processing, and transportation. Fugitive emissions can result from earthmoving, crushing, transportation, and pollutants from tailings facilities (see also topic 14.6 Tailings ). These emissions mostly comprise dust and other particulate matter (PM). Depending on the mineral being mined, air emissions can also include heavy metals, carbon monoxide (CO), sulfur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen oxide (NOx), hydrogen sulfide (H2S), and volatile organic compounds (VOCs). The severity of impacts from air emissions can depend on the proximity of local communities and workers, and the sensitivity of local ecosystems. The extraction and smelting of zinc and other non-ferrous metals produce mercury gases, which lead to severe health impacts. Mercury (Hg) is frequently used in artisanal and small-scale gold mining activities, sometimes located adjacent to mining organization’s concessions (see also topic 14.13 Artisanal and small-scale mining ). Many gold and silver operations and refineries use cyanide to extract the mineral from ore, which can under certain conditions volatilize into hydrogen cyanide (HCN) and cause respiratory hazards for workers .8 Nitrogen oxide emissions from transportation can have negative impacts on ecosystems. They can enter waterways and oceans, have negative impacts on marine life, and generate ground-level ozone (O3) or smog. Sulfur oxides from burning fossil fuels and smelting mineral ores containing sulfur can lead to acid rain and contribute to ocean acidification. In addition to negative impacts on human health, acid rain, and smog can degrade water and soil quality, impairing the functions of natural environments and thereby affecting food chains. Box 4. Dust and particulate matter Mining activities release significant amounts of particulate matter (PM), a pollutant mixture of solid particles and liquid droplets in the air. Dust is the main type of PM from mining, generated during blasting, digging, and hauling, as well as through conveyors, vehicles, and ore crushing. Dust can also be generated from exposed surfaces such as dirt roads, pits, waste piles, or dry tailings. Exposure to dust is associated with increased risks of heart and lung conditions for workers and communities. Dust can also impede the photosynthetic functions of trees and other plants. Open-pit mining has a large geographic footprint, making dust management challenging. Organizations utilize dust control measures to prevent or mitigate dust exposure for workers and communities, including ventilation systems, dust collectors, irrigation bars, dry fog, water cannons, and bunds of trees. Air quality surveys can be undertaken to assess the adequacy of these controls. 8Cyanide can also be present in tailings managed in tailings storage facilities. Without proper management controls in place, HCN can be volatilized to the immediate surrounding of the facility. GRI 14: Mining Sector 2024 21",
    "new_id": 731
  },
  {
    "id": 75734,
    "question": "Which scenario best illustrates a mining organization's failure to meet its responsibility to respect human rights, as described in GRI 14: Mining Sector 2024?",
    "options": {
      "D": "An organization conducts due diligence but focuses only on its direct operations, ignoring risks in its supply chain that involve forced labor.",
      "A": "An organization identifies risks of child labor in its operations but delays implementing corrective measures for two years.",
      "B": "An organization actively screens new suppliers using social criteria but does not report these efforts publicly.",
      "C": "An organization provides migrant workers with valid work permits but fails to educate them about their legal rights.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "56-57",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 14_ Mining Sector 2024 - English.pdf",
    "source_text": "Reporting on child labor If the organization has determined child labor to be a material topic , this sub-section lists the disclosures identified as relevant for reporting on the topic by the mining sector. STANDARD DISCLOSURE SECTOR STANDARD REF # Management of the topic GRI 3: Material Topics 2021Disclosure 3-3 Management of material topics 14.18.1 Topic Standard disclosures GRI 408: Child labor 2016 Disclosure 408-1 Operations and suppliers at significant risk for incidents of child labor 14.18.2 GRI 414: Supplier Social Assessment 2016 Disclosure 414-1 New suppliers that were screened using social criteria 14.18.3 References and resources GRI 408: Child labor 2016 and GRI 414: Supplier Social Assessment 2016 list authoritative intergovernmental instruments and additional references relevant to reporting on this topic. The additional authoritative instruments and references used in developing this topic, as well as resources that may be helpful for reporting on child labor by the mining sector are listed in the Bibliography . GRI 14: Mining Sector 2024 56\n\n[Page 57]\nTopic 14.19 Forced labor and modern slavery Forced labor is defined as all work or service which is exacted from any person under the menace of penalty and for which a person has not offered themselves voluntarily. Freedom from forced labor is a human right and a fundamental right at work. This topic covers an organization’s approach to identifying and addressing forced labor and modern slavery. It is estimated that 4% of all forced labor happens in mining and quarrying [ 299]. Forced labor and modern slavery occur in situations of involuntary recruitment through trafficking, difficulty leaving the employer without penalty, violent threats, sexual exploitation, debt bondage, deceptive recruitment, withholding of wages, or the retention of identification documents. Cases of forced labor and modern slavery are especially prevalent in artisanal and small-scale mining (see also topic 14.13 ) and in conflict-aff ected and high-risk areas (see also topic 14.25 ). Migrant workers in the mining sector are also more likely to work under conditions of coercion. They may be unaware of their legal status, lack valid work permits, and have their passports or identification documents confiscated. Mining organizations can be involved with incidents of forced labor and modern slavery through their business relationships , such as with suppliers who may operate in countries with low enforcement of human rights. In order to fulfill their responsibility to respect human rights , mining organizations are expected to carry out due diligence to identify mine sites and business relationships that are at significant risk for incidents of forced labor and modern slavery. Organizations can also use leverage in their supply chains to combat forced labor and modern slavery. As part of a global effort, several governments have introduced legislation requiring public reporting on addressing modern slavery, including forced labor practices . In these jurisdictions, such legislation applies to organizations in the mining sector. GRI 14: Mining Sector 2024 57",
    "new_id": 732
  },
  {
    "id": 75778,
    "question": "Which of the following scenarios best illustrates a nuanced consequence of corruption in the mining sector that is indirectly tied to both economic and social harm, as implied by GRI 14: Mining Sector 2024?",
    "options": {
      "A": "State-owned enterprises prioritize community development projects over profit, inadvertently creating opportunities for corrupt officials to embezzle funds intended for public welfare.",
      "B": "Corruption leads to inflated prices for mineral extraction licenses, directly increasing government revenue temporarily but causing long-term fiscal instability.",
      "C": "Private companies bypass environmental regulations through bribes, resulting in immediate environmental degradation without affecting local economies.",
      "D": "Collusion between mining organizations and regulators diverts resource revenues to private beneficiaries, exacerbating existing inequalities and hindering critical public investments.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "63",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 14_ Mining Sector 2024 - English.pdf",
    "source_text": "Topic 14.22 Anti-corruption Anti-corruption refers to how an organization manages the potential of being involved with corruption. Corruption is practices such as bribery, facilitation payments, fraud, extortion, collusion, money laundering, or the offer or receipt of an inducement to do something dishonest or illegal. This topic covers impacts related to corruption and an organization’s approach related to contract and ownership transparency. Corruption in the mining sector can occur throughout the value chain , irrespective of the country of operation or the country's economic development, location, and political context. Corruption can have several negative impacts , such as the misallocation of resource revenues and harm to the environment and people when mining projects are awarded to unqualified or unethical organizations. Other impacts include the abuse of democracy and human rights , and the potential for political instability. Corruption can also divert resource revenues to private beneficiaries at the expense of public investments in infrastructure or services. This can be particularly critical in countries with high poverty levels where existing inequalities might be intensified. The risk of corruption is prevalent in conflict-afflicted and high-risk areas since increased pressure on resource availability and instability might be exploited (see also topic 14.25 Conflict-affected and high-risk areas ). Characteristics of the mining sector that increase the likelihood of corruption include frequent interaction between mining organizations and politically exposed persons22, such as government officials, for licenses and regulatory approvals. Other relevant characteristics include complex financial transactions and the international reach of the sector (see also topic 14.23 Payments to governments ). State-owned enterprises (SOEs) in the mining sector are more exposed to corruption, particularly in the process of awarding permits, procuring goods and services, commodity trading, and non-commercial activities such as social expenditures [ 325]. SOEs might have less effective internal controls and fewer transparency expectations than public companies and often receive preferential treatment due to their special legal status in a country. Private mining organizations partnering with SOEs are thus more prone to corruption due to their business relationship . In addition to driving profit, SOEs sometimes pursue broader objectives such as community development. However, without adequate oversight, measures for community development might be abused for corrupt purposes. Corruption has been identified in the mining sector during the process of awarding exploration and production contracts and licenses. This corruption can have the aim of obtaining confidential information, exerting influence on decision-making, or circumventing environmental and local content regulations. Corruption can also occur in the consultation process when seeking consent and when compensating local communities , either directly or through local governments, which might lack transparent financial procedures (see also topic 14.12 Land and resource rights and 14.11 Rights of Indigenous Peoples ). Corruption in these processes may result in licenses being awarded to less qualified organizations, jeopardizing public investments, or negatively impacting the environment and local communities. Corrupt practices can also be aimed at blocking or shaping policies and regulations or influencing their enforcement. This is particularly common to land and resource rights regulations, taxes and other government levies, or environmental protections ( see also topic 14.24 Public policy ). A lack of transparency in procurement practices can have significant economic impacts on host countries and local economic development (see also topic 14.9 Economic impacts ). Examples of this can include paying bribes to have regulations or quality requirements waived, receiving kickbacks for securing contracts at inflated prices, profiting from inflated prices charged by an entity established as a front organization, and favoring companies connected to local regulators. A lack of transparency on contracts and licensing over mineral resource extraction may obstruct public scrutiny of investments and transactions linked to a project’s negative impacts and benefits , including negotiated terms and obligations of organizations. Fair terms for sharing risks and rewarding benefits",
    "new_id": 733
  },
  {
    "id": 75812,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the implicit reasoning behind why entities such as state security forces or non-governmental organizations are included in the definition of 'business relationships', but subsidiaries and affiliates controlled by the organization are explicitly excluded from the definition of 'business partners', as outlined in GRI 14: Mining Sector 2024?",
    "options": {
      "B": "The exclusion of subsidiaries and affiliates ensures that the definition focuses exclusively on entities that influence operational outcomes without organizational control.",
      "A": "Subsidiaries and affiliates are already fully integrated into the organization’s operations, thus making their inclusion redundant for the purpose of defining external relationships.",
      "C": "State security forces and non-governmental organizations represent exceptions to the general rule that business relationships must involve formal engagement.",
      "D": "State security forces and non-governmental organizations are categorized separately because they operate outside the legal framework governing corporate structures.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "72",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 14_ Mining Sector 2024 - English.pdf",
    "source_text": "Glossary This glossary provides definitions for terms used in this Standard. The organization is required to apply these definitions when using the GRI Standards. The definitions included in this glossary may contain terms that are further defined in the complete GRI Standards Glossary . All defined terms are underlined. If a term is not defined in this glossary or in the complete GRI Standards Glossary , definitions that are commonly used and understood apply. baseline starting point used for comparisons Note: In the context of energy and emissions reporting, the baseline is the projected energy consumption or emissions in the absence of any reduction activity. basic salary fixed, minimum amount paid to an employee for performing his or her duties Note: Basic salary excludes any additional remuneration , such as payments for overtime working or bonuses. benefit direct benefit provided in the form of financial contributions, care paid for by the organization, or the reimbursement of expenses borne by the employee Note: Redundancy payments over and above legal minimums, lay-off pay, extra employment injury benefit, survivors’ benefits, and extra paid holiday entitlements can also be included as a benefit. business partner entity with which the organization has some form of direct and formal engagement for the purpose of meeting its business objectives Source: Shift and Mazars LLP, UN Guiding Principles Reporting Framework , 2015; modified Examples: affiliates, business-to-business customers, clients, first-tier suppliers , franchisees, joint venture partners, investee companies in which the organization has a shareholding position Note: Business partners do not include subsidiaries and affiliates that the organization controls. business relationships relationships that the organization has with business partners , with entities in its value chain including those beyond the first tier, and with any other entities directly linked to its operations, products, or services Source: United Nations (UN), Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework , 2011; modified Note: Examples of other entities directly linked to the organization’s operations, products, or services are a non-governmental organization with which the organization delivers support to a local community or state security forces that protect the organization’s facilities. catchment area of land from which all surface runoff and subsurface water flows through a sequence of streams, rivers, aquifers, and lakes into the sea or another outlet at a single river mouth, estuary, or delta Source: Alliance for Water Stewardship (AWS), AWS International Water Stewardship Standard, Version 1.0 , 2014; modified GRI 14: Mining Sector 2024 72",
    "new_id": 734
  },
  {
    "id": 75834,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why redundancy payments exceeding legal minimums could be categorized as a benefit, while basic salary excludes overtime or bonuses, according to GRI 14: Mining Sector 2024?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Redundancy payments are considered a direct financial contribution to employees, whereas basic salary is defined strictly as fixed remuneration without additional components.",
      "A": "Basic salary is legally mandated, while redundancy payments and other benefits are optional and therefore treated as indirect contributions.",
      "B": "Redundancy payments represent variable costs that depend on organizational performance, whereas basic salary remains constant regardless of external factors.",
      "D": "Benefits are inclusive of all forms of compensation beyond base pay, but basic salary is deliberately restricted to exclude any supplementary earnings.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "72",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 14_ Mining Sector 2024 - English.pdf",
    "source_text": "Glossary This glossary provides definitions for terms used in this Standard. The organization is required to apply these definitions when using the GRI Standards. The definitions included in this glossary may contain terms that are further defined in the complete GRI Standards Glossary . All defined terms are underlined. If a term is not defined in this glossary or in the complete GRI Standards Glossary , definitions that are commonly used and understood apply. baseline starting point used for comparisons Note: In the context of energy and emissions reporting, the baseline is the projected energy consumption or emissions in the absence of any reduction activity. basic salary fixed, minimum amount paid to an employee for performing his or her duties Note: Basic salary excludes any additional remuneration , such as payments for overtime working or bonuses. benefit direct benefit provided in the form of financial contributions, care paid for by the organization, or the reimbursement of expenses borne by the employee Note: Redundancy payments over and above legal minimums, lay-off pay, extra employment injury benefit, survivors’ benefits, and extra paid holiday entitlements can also be included as a benefit. business partner entity with which the organization has some form of direct and formal engagement for the purpose of meeting its business objectives Source: Shift and Mazars LLP, UN Guiding Principles Reporting Framework , 2015; modified Examples: affiliates, business-to-business customers, clients, first-tier suppliers , franchisees, joint venture partners, investee companies in which the organization has a shareholding position Note: Business partners do not include subsidiaries and affiliates that the organization controls. business relationships relationships that the organization has with business partners , with entities in its value chain including those beyond the first tier, and with any other entities directly linked to its operations, products, or services Source: United Nations (UN), Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework , 2011; modified Note: Examples of other entities directly linked to the organization’s operations, products, or services are a non-governmental organization with which the organization delivers support to a local community or state security forces that protect the organization’s facilities. catchment area of land from which all surface runoff and subsurface water flows through a sequence of streams, rivers, aquifers, and lakes into the sea or another outlet at a single river mouth, estuary, or delta Source: Alliance for Water Stewardship (AWS), AWS International Water Stewardship Standard, Version 1.0 , 2014; modified GRI 14: Mining Sector 2024 72",
    "new_id": 735
  },
  {
    "id": 75898,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why reporting on the total land disturbed but not yet rehabilitated, alongside the total land already rehabilitated, could enhance transparency and stakeholder trust, according to the outlined requirements in GRI 14: Mining Sector 2024?",
    "options": {
      "D": "It provides a clear metric for evaluating the environmental impact relative to operational progress at each mine site.",
      "A": "It demonstrates that all financial provisions for closure are fully compliant with regulatory standards.",
      "B": "It ensures that local communities are aware of skill-upgrade programs provided during the transition to post-mining economies.",
      "C": "It guarantees that minimum notice periods regarding operational changes have been adhered to by the organization.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "33-34",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 14_ Mining Sector 2024 - English.pdf",
    "source_text": "Organizations can conduct periodic reviews and update costs to account for operational changes during the life of a mine and their effect on the cost of closure. However, closure costs are often misunderstood, poorly regulated, or underestimated, resulting in insufficient financial assurances to cover the actual closure costs. Providing transparency over these provisions can improve the relationship between mining organizations and stakeholders, including governments. GRI 14: Mining Sector 2024 33\n\n[Page 34]\nReporting on closure and rehabilitation If the organization has determined closure and rehabilitation to be a material topic , this sub-section lists the disclosures identified as relevant for reporting on the topic by the mining sector. STANDARD DISCLOSURE SECTOR STANDARD REF # Management of the topic GRI 3: Material Topics 2021Disclosure 3-3 Management of material topics Additional sector recommendations14.8.1 Topic Standard disclosures GRI 402: Labor/Management Relations 2016Disclosure 402-1 Minimum notice periods regarding operational changes 14.8.2 GRI 404: Training and Education 2016Disclosure 404-2 Programs for upgrading employee skills and transition assistance programs14.8.3 Additional sector disclosures For each mine site, report whether it: 14.8.4 For each closure and rehabilitation plan: 14.8.5 For each mine site, report in hectares: 14.8.6 For each mine site, report the estimated life of the mine (LOM).1414.8.7 For financial provisions made by the organization for closure and rehabilitation, including environmental and socioeconomic post-closure monitoring and aftercare for mine sites, report:14.8.8 Describe non-financial provisions made by the organization to manage the local community's socioeconomic transition to a sustainable post-mining economy, including collaborative efforts, projects, and programs.14.8.9 Describe how engagement with workers , suppliers , local communities , and other relevant stakeholders has informed closure planning and implementation, including post-mining land use.• has a closure and rehabilitation plan in place;• is undergoing closure and rehabilitation activities;• has been closed and rehabilitated.• report whether the plan has been approved by relevant authorities;• report the dates of the most recent and next reviews of the plan.• total land disturbed and not yet rehabilitated;• total land disturbed and rehabilitated (including progressively rehabilitated, if applicable).• the total estimated closure cost (not discounted), whether the financial provision covers the full amount of the current estimated closure cost, and whether the financial provision made is in line with the applicable regulatory requirements, by mine site;• the methodology used to calculate the estimated closure cost;• financial instruments used or developed to guarantee adequate financial provisions for closure and rehabilitation.15• 14 The definition of life of mine (LOM) used by the organization for this additional sector disclosure should be the same as the definition used in its consolidated financial statements or equivalent documents. 15 For further guidance, including definitions for terms used in the additional sector disclosure, see International Council on Mining and Metals (ICMM), Financial concepts for mine closure , 2019 [160]; and Intergovernmental Forum on Mining, Minerals, Metals and Sustainable Development (IGF), Global Review: Financial assurance governance for the post-mining transition , 2021 [157]. GRI 14: Mining Sector 2024 34",
    "new_id": 736
  },
  {
    "id": 75899,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the relationship between climate change adaptation strategies in the mining sector and their potential to mitigate risks to local communities, while considering the broader implications for resource competition and environmental impacts, as outlined in GRI 14: Mining Sector 2024?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Adaptation strategies aim to strengthen community resilience through measures like post-mining land use planning and shared resources, but rising demand for critical minerals could exacerbate environmental and human rights risks in vulnerable regions.",
      "B": "Adaptation strategies primarily focus on reducing GHG emissions from mining activities, which directly mitigates risks to local communities by addressing the root causes of climate change.",
      "C": "By prioritizing renewable energy infrastructure and water-sharing programs, adaptation strategies can reduce resource competition and alleviate disproportionate impacts on women, though they may inadvertently increase environmental degradation in some regions.",
      "D": "The transition to a low-carbon economy eliminates the need for adaptation strategies, as increased mineral extraction inherently supports sustainable development without additional safeguards.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "19",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 14_ Mining Sector 2024 - English.pdf",
    "source_text": "Topic 14.2 Climate adaptation and resilience Organizations contribute to climate change and are simultaneously affected by it. Climate adaptation and resilience refer to how an organization adjusts to current and anticipated climate change-related risks, as well as how it contributes to the ability of societies and economies to withstand impacts from climate change. Across the value chain , mining activities contribute to climate change by releasing GHG emissions (see also topic 14.1 GHG emissions ). Changing climatic conditions, rising sea levels, and increasing intensity and frequency of extreme weather events already affect every region of the globe, causing negative impacts on the health, livelihoods, and human rights of millions of people. Physical impacts also pose risks to the workers , suppliers , local communities , and infrastructure , including transportation routes linked or adjacent to mining activities. Climate change has been found to aggravate the impacts of mining on the local environment, disrupting biodiversity (see also topic 14.4 Biodiversity ), affecting water quality and quantity, and exacerbating water stress (see also topic 14.7 Water and effluents ). Climate change also heightens the risks of tailings storage facility failures due to increased rainfall (see also topic 14.6 Tailings and 14.15 Critical incident management ). Rising temperatures can have negative impacts on air quality through the retention of particulate matter, which can exacerbate the impacts of air pollution (see also topic 14.3 Air emissions ). In addition, climate change has the propensity to create drier climates where mining takes place, increasing the likelihood of dust events while diminishing the availability of water to suppress dust. These impacts can have implications for the health, safety, well-being, and livelihoods of local communities and workers. They can also increase competition for natural resources, which often disproportionately affects women [ 70] (see also topic 14.10 Local communities ). Mining organizations can help strengthen local communities' resilience to climate change-related impacts. Adaptation strategies can involve planning for post-mining land use, ensuring the availability of natural resources for agriculture, promoting climate-resilient economic growth, and long-term emergency planning. Organizations can also assist communities in obtaining reliable access to energy and water by, for example, establishing shared renewable energy infrastructure, implementing energy-saving programs, and sharing water resources. The transition to a low-carbon economy is expected to increase demand for critical minerals needed for clean energy technologies, such as cobalt, copper, lithium, nickel, and rare earth elements. If managed well, this can present opportunities for mineral-rich countries through positive economic development (see also topic 14.9 Economic impacts ). However, increased negative environmental and human rights impacts are recognized as a major risk. Many minerals that face rising demand are extracted from regions vulnerable to political instability, institutional weakness, and human rights violations. Mining in these areas can trigger or exacerbate conflict, corruption , environmental damage, and labor abuses (see also topic 14.25 Conflict-affected and high-risk areas ). Box 3. Scenario analysis Scenario analysis allows for the simultaneous consideration of alternative forms of future states affected by climate change and can be used to explore climate change-related risks. Organizations typically define scenarios according to the transition speed expressed in the average global temperature changes. A scenario compatible with the Paris Agreement will require a temperature rise well below 2ºC, pursuing efforts to limit the temperature rise to 1.5ºC. Other scenarios can be defined according to an organization’s national context. For more guidance, see TCFD, The Use of Scenario Analysis in Disclosure of Climate-Related Risks and Opportunities , 2017 [ 82]. GRI 14: Mining Sector 2024 19",
    "new_id": 737
  },
  {
    "id": 75902,
    "question": "Which scenario best illustrates a situation where GHG emissions from mining activities could be indirectly exacerbated despite direct operational improvements, as described in GRI 14: Mining Sector 2024?",
    "options": {
      "B": "A mine switches its equipment to electric models, but the regional power grid predominantly relies on coal-fired plants.",
      "A": "A mine implements energy-efficient excavation techniques, reducing Scope 1 emissions by 20% annually.",
      "C": "A mine transitions to renewable energy sources for all electricity needs, eliminating all Scope 2 emissions.",
      "D": "A mine rehabilitates its site post-closure, capturing significant amounts of CO2 through reforestation.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "17",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 14_ Mining Sector 2024 - English.pdf",
    "source_text": "Topic 14.1 GHG emissions Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions comprise air emissions that contribute to climate change. This topic covers direct (Scope 1) and energy indirect (Scope 2) GHG emissions related to an organization’s activities, as well as other indirect (Scope 3) GHG emissions that occur upstream and downstream of the organization’s activities. Mining activities are energy-intensive and contribute to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions that cause climate change. Most GHG emissions from mining activities are associated with the use of fossil fuel-powered vehicles and the consumption of self-generated and purchased electricity. Therefore, most emissions in the mining sector are direct (Scope 1) GHG emissions from sources owned or controlled by the organization. Additionally, energy indirect (Scope 2) GHG emissions result from the generation of purchased or acquired electricity, heating, cooling, and steam consumed by the organization. Energy-intensive processes and activities include excavation, mine operations, and material transfer. The primary GHG emitted through the sector’s activities is carbon dioxide (CO2). Other GHGs include methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), sulfur hexafluoride (SF6), and nitrogen trifluoride (NF3). The amount of energy used at a mine and the resulting emissions depend on several factors, such as mining method, mine depth, geology, mine productivity, and the degree and method of processing required. For example, most of the energy needs of open pit mines are associated with extensive soil and rock movement and longer haul distances, while underground mines have greater pumping, ventilation, cooling, and hoisting-related energy requirements. Beyond the total amount of energy used, the GHG emissions intensity of mining activities can vary according to mine design and planning, operational practices, and the energy source used. Coal as a fuel source has the highest emissions intensity compared to other fossil fuels, typically releasing more than twice the amount of GHGs than natural gas per unit of electricity produced. GHG emissions can also increase due to a human-induced change in the use or management of lands, which may lead to a change in land cover. For instance, when forests are cleared to enable mineral extraction and the supporting infrastructure (see also topic 14.4 Biodiversity ). Land use change emissions are more prevalent in surface mining due to the greater land use requirements and often lower-grade ores. Methane (CH4) can also be released through extraction, venting, or as fugitive emissions. Closure activities can further contribute to GHG emissions. However, the rehabilitation of mine sites can be used to capture CO2 with appropriate reclamation and post-reclamation strategies. In addition to Scope 1 and Scope 2 GHG emissions, mining organizations are also under increasing scrutiny over other indirect (Scope 3) GHG emissions up and downstream from mining activities. There is a growing expectation for emissions reduction throughout the value chain . For organizations mining gold and other precious metals, the most substantial emissions tend to originate upstream from the organization, namely, from the goods and services they procure. Where minerals require extensive refining, such as smelting, most Scope 3 GHG emissions tend to originate in downstream processes, in particular where coal is used as an energy source. Examples include the manufacture of steel, aluminum, and cement. To combat climate change, parties to the Paris Agreement have committed to transition to a low-carbon economy. Organizations in the sector are increasingly expected to set GHG emissions targets and reduce emissions in line with the latest scientific evidence on the global effort needed to limit global warming to 1.5° C [ 42] (see also topic 14.2 Climate adaptation and resilience ). Scope 1 and Scope 2 GHG emissions can be reduced, for example, through energy efficiency measures, electrification of equipment, and switching to renewable or low-carbon fuel sources. In some cases, emissions reduction initiatives such as the electrification of a mine may bring shared power to local communities and businesses. However, it can pose additional challenges to communities, including increased pressure on regional and national energy grids, energy supply disruptions, job losses, or new environmental challenges. Organizations can partner with governments to mitig",
    "new_id": 738
  },
  {
    "id": 75903,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures an underlying implication regarding the relationship between 'freedom of association' and 'grievance mechanisms', as described in GRI 14: Mining Sector 2024?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Freedom of association supports the establishment of grievance mechanisms by enabling workers to organize and advocate for their rights collectively.",
      "A": "Freedom of association ensures that grievance mechanisms are unnecessary, as workers can directly resolve disputes without formal processes.",
      "B": "Grievance mechanisms inherently undermine freedom of association by imposing state-controlled structures on worker organizations.",
      "D": "Grievance mechanisms replace the need for freedom of association, as they provide a routinized process for addressing injustices independently of worker participation.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "75",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 14_ Mining Sector 2024 - English.pdf",
    "source_text": "forced or compulsory labor all work and service that is exacted from any person under the menace of any penalty and for which the said person has not offered herself or himself voluntarily Source: International Labour Organization (ILO), Forced Labour Convention , 1930 (No. 29); modified Note 1: The most extreme examples of forced or compulsory labor are slave labor and bonded labor, but debts can also be used as a means of maintaining workers in a state of forced labor. Note 2: Indicators of forced labor include withholding identity papers, requiring compulsory deposits, and compelling workers, under threat of firing, to work extra hours to which they have not previously agreed. formal joint management–worker health and safety committee committee composed of management and worker representatives , whose function is integrated into an organizational structure, and which operates according to agreed written policies, procedures, and rules, and helps facilitate worker participation and consultation on matters of occupational health and safety freedom of association right of employers and workers to form, to join and to run their own organizations without prior authorization or interference by the state or any other entity freshwater water with concentration of total dissolved solids equal to or below 1,000 mg/L Source: Environmental management — Water footprint — Principles, requirements and guidelines. Geneva: ISO, 2014; modified United States Geological Survey (USGS), Water Science Glossary of Terms, water.usgs.gov/edu/dictionary.html , accessed on 1 June 2018; modified World Health Organization (WHO), Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality , 2017; modified greenhouse gas (GHG) gas that contributes to the greenhouse effect by absorbing infrared radiation grievance perceived injustice evoking an individual’s or a group’s sense of entitlement, which may be based on law, contract, explicit or implicit promises, customary practice, or general notions of fairness of aggrieved communities Source: United Nations (UN), Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework , 2011 grievance mechanism routinized process through which grievances can be raised and remedy can be sought Source: United Nations (UN), Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework , 2011; modified Note: See Guidance to Disclosure 2-25 in GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 for more information on ‘grievance mechanism’. groundwater water that is being held in, and that can be recovered from, an underground formation Source: International Organization for Standardization. ISO 14046:2014. Environmental management — Water footprint — Principles, requirements and guidelines . Geneva: ISO, 2014; modified hazardous waste waste that possesses any of the characteristics contained in Annex III of the Basel Convention, GRI 14: Mining Sector 2024 75",
    "new_id": 739
  },
  {
    "id": 75904,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why mining operations in water-stressed areas could intensify existing social tensions, according to the interrelated impacts described in GRI 14: Mining Sector 2024?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Reduced water availability due to mining can heighten competition among users, especially where rights and regulations are poorly enforced.",
      "A": "Mining activities primarily increase water accessibility for local communities, inadvertently causing overuse and depletion.",
      "B": "The construction of dams for mining purposes directly improves water quality, leading to disputes over perceived preferential treatment.",
      "C": "Acid mine drainage is often celebrated as a solution to water scarcity, creating conflict over its environmental benefits.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "30",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 14_ Mining Sector 2024 - English.pdf",
    "source_text": "Topic 14.7 Water and effluents Recognized as a human right, access to fresh water is essential for human life and well-being. The amount of water withdrawn and consumed by an organization and the quality of its discharges can have impacts on ecosystems and people. This topic covers impacts related to the withdrawal and consumption of water and the quality of water discharged. Mining can have significant impacts on water availability and quality, resulting in long-term consequences on biodiversity, human health and development, and food security (see also topics 14.4 Biodiversity , 14.10 Local communities , and 14.11 Rights of Indigenous Peoples ). Impacts on water occur throughout the life of a mine and beyond closure. Mining organizations use water throughout their operations, including mineral extraction, processing, cooling, dust suppression, and the transportation of ore and waste in slurries. Mining activities can reduce water availability for local communities and other water users, potentially affecting people’s right to clean drinking water. In areas where water is collected manually, reduced access to water can have disproportionate impacts on women and girls, who are typically responsible for this task [ 141]. The amount of water needed for mining operations depends on operational efficiency and mining methods. The total volume of freshwater withdrawn for mining operations can also vary according to an organization’s ability to substitute freshwater, the quality of water required, characteristics of local water resources, and recycling infrastructure. Mining organizations can improve local communities’ access to freshwater by bolstering water and sanitation infrastructure and improving water quality, for example, by treating naturally occurring acid rock drainage. Mining organizations can also influence hydrology and have impacts on the livelihoods of local communities by altering groundwater levels, shifting river flow regimes, and using dams for freshwater needs in mining activities. In areas already facing water stress , mining operations can aggravate the problem by reducing water accessibility for other users and intensifying competition for water. These impacts can exacerbate tensions between and within other sectors or local communities, especially in cases where water rights and regulations are poorly managed or enforced. The impacts of mining activities on the quality of surface water , groundwater, and seawater can be due to water discharge and runoff , heavy metal contamination, spills , leaks or leaching of chemicals, and the failure of tailings facilities (see also topic 14.5 Waste and 14.6 Tailings ). Acid mine drainage can be one of the most significant water impacts from metal mines, occurring when water and oxygen react with rocks containing sulfur-bearing minerals, forming an acidic runoff. Underground operations might also disrupt or contaminate aquifers. Contamination risks can be higher when mining occurs in areas with frequent heavy rainfall events, which can cause flooding and make the containment of effluents more challenging. The level of water treatment and water quality standards applied to effluent discharges, as well as the sensitivity of the local ecosystem, can affect the impact that mining organizations have on the receiving waterbody. Droughts, floods, and other extreme weather events due to climate change pose more frequent challenges to water availability and quality (see also topic 14.2 Climate adaptation and resilience ), requiring collaborative approaches by the mining sector to prevent or mitigate impacts on local communities [ 153]. GRI 14: Mining Sector 2024 30",
    "new_id": 740
  },
  {
    "id": 75905,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between the reporting requirements for non-discrimination and equal opportunity in the mining sector and the additional authoritative instruments mentioned in GRI 14: Mining Sector 2024?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The additional authoritative instruments provide context and support for disclosures but are not directly tied to specific reporting metrics within the text.",
      "B": "The additional authoritative instruments are optional guidelines that organizations may use to supplement their gender equality plans.",
      "C": "Reporting on non-discrimination and equal opportunity is considered complete only when organizations include data from the additional authoritative instruments listed in the Bibliography.",
      "D": "Organizations must explicitly align their parental leave policies with the additional authoritative instruments to meet reporting standards.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "62",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 14_ Mining Sector 2024 - English.pdf",
    "source_text": "Reporting on non-discrimination and equal opportunity If the organization has determined non-discrimination and equal opportunity to be a material topic , this sub-section lists the disclosures identified as relevant for reporting on the topic by the mining sector. STANDARD DISCLOSURE SECTOR STANDARD REF # Management of the topic GRI 3: Material Topics 2021Disclosure 3-3 Management of material topics 14.21.1 Topic Standard disclosures GRI 202: Market Presence 2016 Disclosure 202-2 Proportion of senior management hired from the local community Additional sector recommendations 14.21.2 GRI 401: Employment 2016 Disclosure 401-3 Parental leave 14.21.3 GRI 404: Training and Education 2016 Disclosure 404-1 Average hours of training per year per employee 14.21.4 GRI 405: Diversity and Equal Opportunity 2016 Disclosure 405-1 Diversity of governance bodies and employees Additional sector recommendations 14.21.5 Disclosure 405-2 Ratio of basic salary and remuneration of women to men Additional sector recommendations 14.21.6 GRI 406: Non- discrimination 2016 Disclosure 406-1 Incidents of discrimination and corrective actions taken 14.21.7 References and resources GRI 202: Market Presence 2016 , GRI 401: Employment 2016 , GRI 404: Training and Education 2016 , GRI 405: Diversity and Equal Opportunity 2016 , and GRI 406: Non-discrimination 2016 list authoritative intergovernmental instruments relevant to reporting on this topic. The additional authoritative instruments and references used in developing this topic, as well as resources that may be helpful for reporting on non-discrimination and equal opportunity by the mining sector are listed in the Bibliography . Report a breakdown of the percentage of senior management hired from the local community by gender. • Report whether the organization has a gender equality or gender equity plan or policy in place and, if so, provide a summary of the plan, and progress made in implementing the plan. • Report the ratio of basic salary and remuneration of women to men by mine site. • Report the ratio of basic salary and remuneration by other relevant indicators of diversity by mine site.21 • 21 Organizations should report the ratio of the basic salary and remuneration for priority areas of equality: women to men, minor to major ethnic groups, and other relevant equality areas (as appropriate based on the organization’s local operating context and legal framework). GRI 14: Mining Sector 2024 62",
    "new_id": 741
  },
  {
    "id": 75908,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between emergency preparedness plans and the reporting requirements for critical incident management in the mining sector, as outlined in GRI 14: Mining Sector 2024?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Engagement with local communities and public agencies is integral to shaping emergency preparedness plans, and both the frequency of testing these plans and site-specific details must be disclosed.",
      "A": "Emergency preparedness plans are considered sufficient if they are developed in isolation by the organization without external input, as long as they are tested annually.",
      "C": "The percentage of mine sites with emergency preparedness plans is reported to demonstrate compliance, but the text does not require listing specific sites lacking such plans.",
      "D": "Reporting on critical incidents excludes detailing their impacts or remedial actions, focusing solely on the number of incidents during the reporting period.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "50",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 14_ Mining Sector 2024 - English.pdf",
    "source_text": "Reporting on critical incident management If the organization has determined critical incident management to be a material topic , this sub-section lists the disclosures identified as relevant for reporting on the topic by the mining sector. STANDARD DISCLOSURE SECTOR STANDARD REF # Management of the topic GRI 3: Material Topics 2021Disclosure 3-3 Management of material topics Additional sector recommendations 14.15.1 Describe the organization’s approach to emergency preparedness and• Topic Standard disclosures GRI 306: Effluents and Waste 2016Disclosure 306-3 Significant spills19 14.15.2 Additional sector disclosures Report the number of critical incidents in the reporting period , describe their impacts , and actions taken to remediate them. 14.15.3 Report the percentage of mine sites that have emergency preparedness and response plans in place, and list the sites that do not. 14.15.4 References and resources GRI 306: Effluents and Waste 2016 lists authoritative intergovernmental instruments relevant to reporting on this topic. The additional authoritative instruments and references used in developing this topic, as well as resources that may be helpful for reporting on critical incident management by the mining sector are listed in the Bibliography .Describe the organization’s approach to emergency preparedness and response plans, including frequency of testing the plans, and how engagement with local communities , workers , public sector agencies, first responders, and local authorities and institutions has informed the plans. • 19 The effluents-related content of GRI 306: Effluents and Waste 2016 has been superseded by GRI 303: Water and Effluents 2018 , and the waste-related content has been superseded by GRI 306: Waste 2020 . The spills-related content in GRI 306: Effluents and Waste 2016 remains in effect. GRI 14: Mining Sector 2024 50",
    "new_id": 742
  },
  {
    "id": 75910,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between water consumption and waste, as defined in GRI 14: Mining Sector 2024?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Water consumption encompasses water polluted to the extent it becomes unusable, distinguishing it from waste which involves discarded materials.",
      "A": "Water consumption excludes water that is polluted to the point of being unusable, as this water is classified as waste.",
      "B": "Waste includes water that has evaporated or been consumed by humans, aligning with the definition of water consumption.",
      "D": "Water discharge is considered a subset of waste, directly overlapping with the definition of water consumption.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "80",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 14_ Mining Sector 2024 - English.pdf",
    "source_text": "generations to meet their own needs Source: World Commission on Environment and Development, Our Common Future , 1987 Note: The terms ‘sustainability’ and ‘sustainable development’ are used interchangeably in the GRI Standards. third-party water municipal water suppliers and municipal wastewater treatment plants, public or private utilities, and other organizations involved in the provision, transport, treatment, disposal, or use of water and effluent value chain range of activities carried out by the organization, and by entities upstream and downstream from the organization, to bring the organization’s products or services from their conception to their end use Note 1: Entities upstream from the organization (e.g., suppliers ) provide products or services that are used in the development of the organization’s own products or services. Entities downstream from the organization (e.g., distributors, customers) receive products or services from the organization. Note 2: The value chain includes the supply chain . vulnerable group group of individuals with a specific condition or characteristic (e.g., economic, physical, political, social) that could experience negative impacts as a result of the organization’s activities more severely than the general population Examples: children and youth; elderly persons; ex-combatants; HIV/AIDS-affected households; human rights defenders; indigenous peoples ; internally displaced persons; migrant workers and their families; national or ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities; persons who might be discriminated against based on their sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, or sex characteristics (e.g., lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex); persons with disabilities; refugees or returning refugees; women Note: Vulnerabilities and impacts can differ by gender. waste anything that the holder discards, intends to discard, or is required to discard Source: United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal , 1989 Note 1: Waste can be defined according to the national legislation at the point of generation. Note 2: A holder can be the reporting organization, an entity in the organization’s value chain upstream or downstream (e.g., supplier or consumer), or a waste management organization, among others. water consumption sum of all water that has been withdrawn and incorporated into products, used in the production of crops or generated as waste, has evaporated, transpired, or been consumed by humans or livestock, or is polluted to the point of being unusable by other users, and is therefore not released back to surface water , groundwater , seawater , or a third party over the course of the reporting period Source: CDP, CDP Water Security Reporting Guidance , 2018; modified Note: Water consumption includes water that has been stored during the reporting period for use or discharge in a subsequent reporting period. water discharge GRI 14: Mining Sector 2024 80",
    "new_id": 743
  },
  {
    "id": 75911,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the implicit relationship between the definitions of 'value chain' and 'water consumption' as they pertain to organizational accountability, according to GRI 14: Mining Sector 2024?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Entities within the value chain, both upstream and downstream, may contribute to or be affected by an organization’s water consumption, necessitating broader accountability.",
      "A": "The value chain excludes entities involved in water consumption, focusing solely on product development and distribution.",
      "B": "Water consumption is a concept unrelated to the value chain since it only applies to internal organizational processes.",
      "C": "Water consumption is exclusively tied to municipal suppliers, making them the sole accountable party within the value chain.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "80",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 14_ Mining Sector 2024 - English.pdf",
    "source_text": "generations to meet their own needs Source: World Commission on Environment and Development, Our Common Future , 1987 Note: The terms ‘sustainability’ and ‘sustainable development’ are used interchangeably in the GRI Standards. third-party water municipal water suppliers and municipal wastewater treatment plants, public or private utilities, and other organizations involved in the provision, transport, treatment, disposal, or use of water and effluent value chain range of activities carried out by the organization, and by entities upstream and downstream from the organization, to bring the organization’s products or services from their conception to their end use Note 1: Entities upstream from the organization (e.g., suppliers ) provide products or services that are used in the development of the organization’s own products or services. Entities downstream from the organization (e.g., distributors, customers) receive products or services from the organization. Note 2: The value chain includes the supply chain . vulnerable group group of individuals with a specific condition or characteristic (e.g., economic, physical, political, social) that could experience negative impacts as a result of the organization’s activities more severely than the general population Examples: children and youth; elderly persons; ex-combatants; HIV/AIDS-affected households; human rights defenders; indigenous peoples ; internally displaced persons; migrant workers and their families; national or ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities; persons who might be discriminated against based on their sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, or sex characteristics (e.g., lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex); persons with disabilities; refugees or returning refugees; women Note: Vulnerabilities and impacts can differ by gender. waste anything that the holder discards, intends to discard, or is required to discard Source: United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal , 1989 Note 1: Waste can be defined according to the national legislation at the point of generation. Note 2: A holder can be the reporting organization, an entity in the organization’s value chain upstream or downstream (e.g., supplier or consumer), or a waste management organization, among others. water consumption sum of all water that has been withdrawn and incorporated into products, used in the production of crops or generated as waste, has evaporated, transpired, or been consumed by humans or livestock, or is polluted to the point of being unusable by other users, and is therefore not released back to surface water , groundwater , seawater , or a third party over the course of the reporting period Source: CDP, CDP Water Security Reporting Guidance , 2018; modified Note: Water consumption includes water that has been stored during the reporting period for use or discharge in a subsequent reporting period. water discharge GRI 14: Mining Sector 2024 80",
    "new_id": 744
  },
  {
    "id": 75916,
    "question": "Which scenario would most likely lead to a regulatory risk for an EMS or ODM entity under the described water management metrics, as outlined in the Electronic Manufacturing Services & Original Design Manufacturing – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "An entity accurately reports all water withdrawals in thousands of cubic meters but excludes data on water returned to different catchment areas.",
      "B": "An entity reduces its total water consumption but fails to disclose the percentage of water withdrawn from regions with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress.",
      "C": "An entity relies predominantly on non-freshwater sources for its operations and does not report specific volumes of water consumed versus withdrawn.",
      "D": "An entity increases its water use efficiency but operates in regions where local laws define fresh water as having less than 500 parts per million of dissolved solids.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "7-8",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Electronic Manufacturing Services & Original Design Manufacturing.pdf",
    "source_text": "...continued ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORYUNIT OF MEASURECODE Number of employees Quantitative Number TC-ES-000.C SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |EMS & ODM |7\n\n[Page 8]\nWater Management Topic Summary The manufacturing of computers, computer components and other electronics requires significant volumes of water. Water is becoming a globally scarce resource because of increasing consumption from population growth, rapid urbanisation and climate change. Without careful planning, water scarcity may result in higher supply costs, social tensions with local communities and governments, or loss of access to water in water-scarce regions thereby presenting a critical risk to production and revenue. Electronic Manufacturing Services (EMS) & Original Design Manufacturing (ODM) entities that improve water use efficiency may reduce operating costs and maintain a lower risk profile, ultimately affecting cost of capital and market valuation. Furthermore, entities that prioritise water use efficiency may reduce regulatory risks as applicable jurisdictional environmental laws or regulations place more emphasis on resource conservation. Metrics TC-ES-140a.1. (1) Total water withdrawn, (2) total water consumed; percentage of each in regions with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress 1The entity shall disclose the amount of water, in thousands of cubic metres, withdrawn from all sources. 1.1 Water sources include surface water (including water from wetlands, rivers, lakes and oceans), groundwater, rainwater collected directly and stored by the entity, and water and wastewater obtained from municipal water supplies, water utilities or other entities. 2The entity may disclose portions of its supply by source if, for example, significant portions of withdrawals are from non-freshwater sources. 2.1 Fresh water may be defined according to the local laws and regulations where the entity operates. If no legal definition exists, fresh water shall be considered to be water that has less than 1,000 parts per million of dissolved solids. 2.2 Water obtained from a water utility in compliance with jurisdictional drinking water regulations can be assumed to meet the definition of fresh water. 3The entity shall disclose the amount of water, in thousands of cubic metres, consumed in operations. 3.1 Water consumption is defined as: 3.1.1 Water that evaporates during withdrawal, use and discharge 3.1.2 Water that is directly or indirectly included in the entity ’s product or service 3.1.3 Water that does not otherwise return to the same catchment area from which it was withdrawn, such as water returned to another catchment area or the sea SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |EMS & ODM |8",
    "new_id": 745
  },
  {
    "id": 75929,
    "question": "Which of the following scenarios would require exclusion from the disclosed rate calculation due to failing the criteria for work-related incidents, as outlined in the Electronic Manufacturing Services & Original Design Manufacturing – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "A contract worker updating medical records for a previously documented injury that occurred on the job last year.",
      "A": "An injury sustained by a full-time employee while operating company machinery during their scheduled shift.",
      "C": "A part-time employee developing an illness after prolonged exposure to hazardous materials in a high-risk facility audited under RBA VAP protocol.",
      "D": "A seasonal employee experiencing an injury while traveling for work but not actively engaged in any work-related activity at the time.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "14",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Electronic Manufacturing Services & Original Design Manufacturing.pdf",
    "source_text": "3All disclosed rates shall be calculated as: (statistic count × 200,000) / total number of hours worked by all employees in the year reported. 3.1 The ‘200,000’ in the rate calculation represents the total number of hours 100 full-time workers working 40 hours per week for 50 weeks per year can provide annually. 4 The scope of the disclosure includes work-related incidents only. 4.1 Work-related incidents are injuries and illnesses resulting from events or exposures in the work environment. 4.2 The work environment is the establishment and other locations where one or more employees are working or are present as a condition of their employment. 4.3 The work environment includes not only physical locations, but also the equipment or materials used by the employee during the course of work. 4.4 Incidents that occur while an employee is travelling are work-related if, at the time of the injury or illness, the employee was engaged in work activities in the interest of the employer. 4.5 A work-related incident must be a new case, not a previously recorded injury or illness being updated. 5The entity shall disclose the rates by each of these employee categories: 5.1 direct employees, defined as individuals on the entity ’s payroll, whether they are full-time, short service, part-time, executive, labour, salary, seasonal, migrant or hourly employees; and 5.2 contract employees, defined as individuals who are not on the entity ’s payroll, but whom the entity supervises or manages, including independent contractors and those employed by third parties (for example, temp agencies and labour brokers). 6The scope of the disclosure includes all employees regardless of employee location or type of employment. TC-ES-320a.2. Percentage of (1) entity ’s facilities and (2) Tier 1 supplier facilities audited in the RBA Validated Audit Process (VAP) or equivalent, by (a) all facilities and (b) high-risk facilities 1The entity shall disclose (1) the percentage of manufacturing facilities audited in compliance with the Responsible Business Alliance (RBA) Validated Audit Process (VAP) protocol for (a) all the entity ’s manufacturing facilities, and separately, (b) the entity ’s manufacturing facilities deemed ‘high-risk ’. 1.1 High-risk facilities are defined as facilities that scored 65% or less on at least five sections of the RBA Self- Assessment Questionnaire, or that exhibit any of the disqualifying priority findings noted by the RBA, such as: 1.1.1 child labour; 1.1.2 forced labour; SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |EMS & ODM |14",
    "new_id": 746
  },
  {
    "id": 75930,
    "question": "Which scenario would most likely result in the highest reported 'total days idle' according to the disclosed metrics, assuming all other factors are equal in the Electronic Manufacturing Services & Original Design Manufacturing – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "A strike involving 1,500 workers lasting three full shifts.",
      "A": "Two separate strikes, each involving 800 workers and lasting five full shifts.",
      "B": "A lockout involving 2,000 workers lasting two full shifts.",
      "D": "Three separate strikes, each involving 600 workers and lasting four full shifts.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "12",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Electronic Manufacturing Services & Original Design Manufacturing.pdf",
    "source_text": "Labour Practices Topic Summary Electronic Manufacturing Services (EMS) & Original Design Manufacturing (ODM) entities operate in a highly cost competitive environment and are therefore sensitive to labour costs and risks. Additionally, customers commonly require entities to meet tight production deadlines for important product launches, such as releases of new technology by hardware entities. Combined, these factors increase the importance of entities maintaining good relations with labour. Poor labour relations may expose entities to work stoppages and production disruptions. Such disruptions may result in reduced near-term revenue, as well as possible adverse effects on long-term productivity because of lower employee morale. In addition to maintaining an entity ’s brand value and social licence to operate, improvements in labour practices may mitigate production disruptions. Metrics TC-ES-310a.1. (1) Number of work stoppages and (2) total days idle 1The entity shall disclose (1) the number of work stoppages involving 1,000 or more workers lasting one full shift or longer. 1.1 The scope of work stoppages includes strikes and lockouts. 1.1.1 A strike is defined as a temporary stoppage of work by a group of employees (not necessarily union members) to express a grievance or enforce a demand. 1.1.2 A lockout is defined as a temporary withholding or denial of employment during a labour dispute to enforce terms of employment upon a group of employees. 2The entity shall disclose (2) the total days idle because of work stoppages. 2.1‘Days idle ’ is defined as the aggregate number of workdays lost because of work stoppages. 2.2 Total days idle shall be calculated as the sum of the products of the number of workers involved in each work stoppage and the number of days each respective work stoppage was in effect. Note to TC-ES-310a.1 1The entity shall describe the reason for each work stoppage (as stated by labour), the effect on operations and any corrective actions taken as a result. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |EMS & ODM |12",
    "new_id": 747
  },
  {
    "id": 75931,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between the GRI Standards and the reporting of customer privacy impacts, as described in GRI 418: Customer Privacy 2016?",
    "options": {
      "D": "An organization must use GRI 1: Foundation 2021 to ensure compliance with all Topic Standards, including those on customer privacy.",
      "A": "The GRI Sector Standards are optional for organizations determining material topics related to customer privacy.",
      "B": "Customer privacy impacts can be reported without reference to the GRI Universal or Sector Standards if an organization follows voluntary instruments listed in the Bibliography.",
      "C": "Disclosure 418-1 is sufficient for organizations to address all legal and regulatory requirements regarding customer privacy.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "3-4",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 418_ Customer Privacy 2016.pdf",
    "source_text": "Content Introduction 4 1. Topic management disclosures 7 2. Topic disclosures 8 Disclosure 418-1 Substantiated complaints concerning breaches of customer privacy and losses of customer data8 Glossary 9 Bibliography 11 GRI 418: Customer Privacy 2016 3\n\n[Page 4]\nIntroduction GRI 418: Customer Privacy 2016 contains disclosures for organizations to report information about their impacts related to customer privacy , and how they manage these impacts. The Standard is structured as follows: The rest of the Introduction section provides a background on the topic, an overview of the system of GRI Standards and further information on using this Standard. Background on the topic This Standard addresses the topic of customer privacy , including losses of customer data and breaches of customer privacy . These can result from non-compliance with existing laws, regulations and/or other voluntary standards regarding the protection of customer privacy. These concepts are covered in key instruments of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development: see the Bibliography . System of GRI Standards This Standard is part of the GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards (GRI Standards). The GRI Standards enable an organization to report information about its most significant impacts on the economy, environment, and people, including impacts on their human rights , and how it manages these impacts. The GRI Standards are structured as a system of interrelated standards that are organized into three series: GRI Universal Standards, GRI Sector Standards, and GRI Topic Standards (see Figure 1 in this Standard). Universal Standards: GRI 1, GRI 2 and GRI 3 GRI 1: Foundation 2021 specifies the requirements that the organization must comply with to report in accordance with the GRI Standards. The organization begins using the GRI Standards by consulting GRI 1 . GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 contains disclosures that the organization uses to provide information about its reporting practices and other organizational details, such as its activities, governance, and policies. GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 provides guidance on how to determine material topics . It also contains disclosures that the organization uses to report information about its process of determining material topics, its list of material topics, and how it manages each topic. Sector Standards The Sector Standards provide information for organizations about their likely material topics. The organization uses the Sector Standards that apply to its sectors when determining its material topics and when determining what to report for each material topic. Topic Standards The Topic Standards contain disclosures that the organization uses to report information about its impacts in relation to particular topics. The organization uses the Topic Standards according to the list of material topics it has determined using GRI 3 . Section 1 contains a requirement, which provides information about how the organization manages its customer privacy-related impacts.• Section 2 contains one disclosure, which provides information about the organization’s customer privacy-related impacts.• The Glossary contains defined terms with a specific meaning when used in the GRI Standards. The terms are underlined in the text of the GRI Standards and linked to the definitions.• The Bibliography lists authoritative intergovernmental instruments used in developing this Standard. • GRI 418: Customer Privacy 2016 4",
    "new_id": 748
  },
  {
    "id": 75935,
    "question": "Which of the following scenarios would lead to a completer being excluded from the current fiscal year's job placement rate calculation under the described framework?",
    "options": {
      "A": "A completer who received their credential on April 5 and secured gainful employment within 180 days.",
      "B": "A completer who received their credential on April 4 and was employed in a related occupation for 12 weeks after graduation.",
      "C": "A completer who received their credential on January 1 and obtained employment meeting the criteria by June 30.",
      "D": "A completer who received their credential on December 31 and remained unemployed until the following fiscal year.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "14",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Education.pdf",
    "source_text": "1.1.2 The number of completers placed in jobs is defined as the number who, within 180 days of receiving the degree, certificate or other recognised educational credential, (a) obtained gainful employment in the recognised occupation for which they trained or in a related, comparable, recognised occupation and (b) are employed, or have been employed, for at least 13 weeks following receipt of the credential from the institution. 1.2 The measurement period for calculating the job placement rate covers the completers who are conferred a formal award at least 271 days before the end of the entity ’s fiscal year, to allow for the job placement and retention timeframes outlined above. Completers who are conferred an award with fewer than 271 days remaining before the end of the entity ’s fiscal year are counted in the job placement rate for the next fiscal year. 1.3 For an entity whose fiscal year is aligned with the calendar year, it shall include completers who are conferred a formal award on or before April 4 of the current year in its current year disclosure and completers conferred a formal award after April 4 in its disclosure for the next fiscal year. In general, for entities whose fiscal year is aligned with the calendar year, graduates shall be included in the job placement rate for the fiscal year following programme completion. SV-ED-260a.6. Description of policies relating to student indebtedness and programme loan defaults 1The entity shall disclose whether it is subject to any applicable jurisdictional legal or regulatory requirements regarding student loans, including whether the entity ’s revenue could be affected by its students ’ ability to repay loans used to complete the entity ’s educational programmes. 1.1 The entity shall disclose any quantitative indicators by which its performance regarding student loans is measured and reported to applicable jurisdictional authorities. 1.2 The entity shall disclose any targets to which it is subject regarding student loans and indebtedness and provide an analysis of its performance against those targets. 2The entity shall disclose a description of its policies and practices related to ensuring compliance with applicable jurisdictional legal or regulatory requirements regarding student indebtedness and loan defaults. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |EDUCATION |14",
    "new_id": 749
  },
  {
    "id": 75964,
    "question": "Which of the following statements is true regarding the calculation and reporting requirements for air emissions and renewable fuel consumption, as outlined in the Rail Transportation – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Entities may compare their inspection frequencies to jurisdictional legal requirements but are not obligated to disclose deficiencies.",
      "A": "Inspection frequency must always exceed jurisdictional legal requirements to ensure compliance.",
      "C": "Entities are required to disclose whether their inspection practices meet or fall short of jurisdictional legal requirements.",
      "D": "Jurisdictional legal requirements are irrelevant to the calculation and disclosure of inspection frequencies.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "19-20",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Rail Transportation.pdf",
    "source_text": "1.2.4 industrial hygiene (for example, occupational noise exposure); 1.2.5 motive power and equipment (for example, freight car and locomotive safety, passenger equipment safety, passenger train emergency preparedness, marking devices or safety appliances); 1.2.6 railroad operating practices (for example, alcohol and drug use, personnel qualifications, hours of services laws and record keeping, rail communications, rail operating rules and practices, safety enforcement procedures or quiet zones); 1.2.7 signal system safety (for example, signal inspections or positive train control system implementation); and 1.2.8 track safety (for example, bridge and track safety standards or worker protection and safety standards). 1.3 The scope of the disclosure may include defects that both did and did not result in administrative, civil or criminal fines or other penalties, such as the revocation of safety certifications permitting operations. 2The number shall include each distinct, relevant defect cited by jurisdictional rail safety authorities regardless of whether numerous defects are combined in a single report to the entity. TR-RA-540a.4. Frequency of internal railway integrity inspections 1The entity shall disclose the frequency with which it conducts inspections of its tracks. 1.1 Frequency of inspections of tracks shall be disclosed as the number of inspections per week, weighted for the number of main rail line kilometres on which those inspections took place. 1.1.1 The frequency shall be calculated as the sum for all track of: (weekly inspections × kilometres of track on which they took place) / (total main rail line kilometres). 1.2 The scope of the disclosure excludes track other than main track. 2The entity may discuss the frequency of its inspections in relation to applicable jurisdictional legal or regulatory requirements. Note to TR-RA-540a.4 1If relevant, the entity shall discuss rail-maintenance practices, operating measures and technologies it implements in addition to inspections. 1.1 Relevant practices to discuss may include the use of management systems, safety technologies and employee training. 1.2 Relevant measures to discuss include optimisation of tank car design, adding monitoring equipment, strengthening emergency-response capabilities by sharing relevant information with communities, providing training support and implementing mutual aid intervention protocols. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |RAIL TRANSPORTATION |19\n\n[Page 20]\n1.3 Relevant technologies to discuss include positive train control (PTC) technology, wayside detectors, wheel profile monitors, acoustic detectors, track geometry cars, advanced track grinding to reduce rail fatigue, improved track lubrication techniques and electronically controlled pneumatic brakes. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |RAIL TRANSPORTATION |20",
    "new_id": 750
  },
  {
    "id": 75975,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the relationship between the entity's emissions reduction targets and its required disclosures about GHG emissions, as described in the Rail Transportation – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The entity is required to disclose emissions reduction targets, analyze performance against them, and specify whether any divergence from previous reports is due to changes in output, acquisitions, or calculation methods.",
      "A": "The entity must align its emissions reduction targets with the financial control approach for reporting, but it is not required to disclose how these targets relate to changes in output or methodology.",
      "B": "Emissions reduction targets are optional, but if disclosed, they must include an analysis of their alignment with the Kyoto Protocol's seven GHGs.",
      "D": "The entity only needs to discuss long-term strategies for managing Scope 1 emissions if its reduction targets fail to meet the percentage applicable to total emissions.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "9",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Rail Transportation.pdf",
    "source_text": "2.1.3 India GHG Inventory Program 2.1.4 ISO 14064-1 2.1.5 Petroleum Industry Guidelines for reporting GHG emissions , 2nd edition, 2011, published by Ipieca 2.1.6 Protocol for the Quantification of greenhouse gas emissions from waste management activities published by Entreprises pour l ’Environnement (EpE) 2.2 GHG emissions data shall be consolidated and disclosed according to the approach with which the entity consolidates its financial reporting data, which generally is aligned with the ‘financial control’ approach defined by the GHG Protocol , and the approach published by the Climate Disclosure Standards Board (CDSB) described in REQ-07, ‘Organisational boundary ’, of the CDSB Framework for reporting environmental and social information . 3The entity may discuss any change in emissions from the previous reporting period, including whether the change was because of emissions reductions, divestment, acquisition, mergers, changes in output or changes in calculation methodology. 4In the case that current reporting of GHG emissions to the CDP or other entity (for example, a national regulatory disclosure programme) differs in terms of the scope and consolidation approach used, the entity may disclose those emissions. However, primary disclosure shall be according to the guidelines described above. 5The entity may discuss the calculation methodology for its emissions disclosure, such as if data are from continuous emissions monitoring systems (CEMS), engineering calculations or mass balance calculations. TR-RA-110a.2. Discussion of long- and short-term strategy or plan to manage Scope 1 emissions, emissions reduction targets, and an analysis of performance against those targets 1The entity shall discuss its long- and short-term strategy or plan to manage its Scope 1 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. 1.1 Scope 1 emissions are defined according to The Greenhouse Gas Protocol: A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard (GHG Protocol), Revised Edition, March 2004, published by the World Resources Institute and the World Business Council on Sustainable Development (WRI/WBCSD). 1.2 The scope of GHG emissions includes the seven GHGs covered under the Kyoto Protocol —carbon dioxide (CO 2), methane (CH 4), nitrous oxide (N 2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), sulphur hexafluoride (SF 6), and nitrogen trifluoride (NF 3). 2The entity shall discuss its emission reduction target(s) and analyse its performance against the target(s), including, if relevant: 2.1 The scope of the emission reduction target (for example, the percentage of total emissions to which the target is applicable); SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |RAIL TRANSPORTATION |9",
    "new_id": 751
  },
  {
    "id": 75976,
    "question": "Which of the following statements is true regarding the calculation and reporting requirements for air emissions and renewable fuel consumption as outlined in the text?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The calculation of renewable fuel consumption requires the use of gross calorific values (GCV), and the reported percentage excludes fuels that do not achieve lifecycle net GHG reductions.",
      "A": "The entity must report NOx emissions inclusive of N2O to align with international standards for greenhouse gas emissions.",
      "B": "The percentage of renewable fuel consumed can be calculated using either higher heating values (HHV) or lower heating values (LHV), provided the method is consistently applied.",
      "C": "An entity’s disclosure of PM10 emissions must include only solid particles, excluding liquid materials, to ensure accurate representation of particulate matter.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "11-12",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Rail Transportation.pdf",
    "source_text": "2 The entity shall disclose the percentage of fuel consumed that was renewable fuel. 2.1 Renewable fuel generally is defined as fuel that meets all of these requirements: 2.1.1 Produced from renewable biomass; 2.1.2 Used to replace or reduce the quantity of fossil fuel present in a transportation fuel, heating oil or jet fuel; and 2.1.3 Achieved net greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction on a lifecycle basis. 2.2 The entity shall disclose the standard or regulation used to determine if a fuel is renewable 2.3 The percentage shall be calculated as the amount of renewable fuel consumed (in GJ) divided by the total amount of fuel consumed (in GJ). 3 The scope of disclosure only includes fuel directly consumed by the entity. 4In calculating energy consumption from fuels, the entity shall use higher heating values (HHV), also known as gross calorific values (GCV), which are directly measured or taken from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 5The entity shall apply conversion factors consistently for all data reported under this disclosure, such as the use of HHVs for fuel usage (including biofuels). SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |RAIL TRANSPORTATION |11\n\n[Page 12]\nAir Quality Topic Summary Rail operations emit several types of air pollutants regulated under national and international laws. These air pollutants can create significant and localised environmental and health impacts. For example, locomotive engines idling at rail yards may be a health concern for nearby human populations because HAPs such as benzene are known human carcinogens. Nitrogen oxides (NOx) are a major component of smog and acid rain. At the same time, fuel is a significant industry cost. Rail entities that implement fuel efficiency enhancements and manage emissions may witness reduced costs in both the short and longer term. Metrics TR-RA-120a.1. Air emissions of the following pollutants: (1) NO x (excluding N 2O) and (2) particulate matter (PM 10) 1The entity shall disclose its emissions of air pollutants, in metric tonnes per pollutant, released into the atmosphere. 1.1 The scope of the disclosure includes air pollutants associated with the entity ’s direct air emissions resulting from all the entity ’s activities and sources of emissions, which may include stationary or mobile sources, production facilities, office buildings and transportation fleets. 2 The entity shall disclose its emissions of (1) oxides of nitrogen (NO x), reported as NO x. 2.1 The scope of NO X includes NO and NO 2 but excludes N 2O. 3The entity shall disclose its emissions of (2) particulate matter 10 micrometres or less in diameter (PM 10), reported as PM 10. 3.1 PM 10 is defined as any airborne finely divided solid or liquid material with an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to a nominal 10 micrometres. 4The entity may discuss the calculation method for its emissions disclosure, such as whether data is from continuous emissions monitoring systems (CEMS), engineering calculations or mass balance calculations. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |RAIL TRANSPORTATION |12",
    "new_id": 752
  },
  {
    "id": 75977,
    "question": "When calculating the percentage of renewable energy consumed, which factor is both necessary and sufficient based on the definitions and requirements provided in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 21: Alcoholic Beverages?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The division of renewable energy consumption by total energy consumption, irrespective of how the energy was sourced or measured.",
      "B": "The inclusion of all energy sources that are replenished faster than their depletion rate, measured in gross calorific values (GCV).",
      "C": "The use of higher heating values (HHV) for biofuels classified under renewable energy sources.",
      "D": "The exclusive reliance on purchased grid electricity to determine the proportion of renewable energy usage.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "5",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol21.pdf",
    "source_text": "Energy Management Topic Summary Entities in the Alcoholic Beverages industry rely on both fuel and purchased electricity as critical inputs. Fossil fuel and electrical energy consumption can contribute to negative environmental impacts, including climate change and pollution. These impacts have the potential to affect the value of entities in this industry since greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions regulations and new incentives for energy efficiency and renewable energy could result in increased fossil fuels and conventional electricity price volatility, while making alternative sources more cost-competitive. Entities that manage for increased energy efficiency and use alternative energy sources may increase profitability by reducing both expenses and risks. Metrics FB-AB-130a.1. (1) Total energy consumed, (2) percentage grid electricity and (3) percentage renewable 1 The entity shall disclose (1) the total amount of energy it consumed as an aggregate figure, in gigajoules (GJ). 1.1 The scope of energy consumption includes energy from all sources, including energy purchased from external sources and energy produced by the entity itself (self-generated). For example, direct fuel usage, purchased electricity, and heating, cooling and steam energy are all included within the scope of energy consumption. 1.2 The scope of energy consumption includes only energy directly consumed by the entity during the reporting period. 1.3 In calculating energy consumption from fuels and biofuels, the entity shall use higher heating values (HHV), also known as gross calorific values (GCV), which are measured directly or taken from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2 The entity shall disclose (2) the percentage of energy it consumed that was supplied from grid electricity. 2.1 The percentage shall be calculated as purchased grid electricity consumption divided by total energy consumption. 3 The entity shall disclose (3) the percentage of energy it consumed that was renewable energy. 3.1 Renewable energy is defined as energy from sources that are replenished at a rate greater than or equal to their rate of depletion, such as geothermal, wind, solar, hydro and biomass. 3.2 The percentage shall be calculated as renewable energy consumption divided by total energy consumption.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 4 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 753
  },
  {
    "id": 75979,
    "question": "Under EM-MM-130a.1, what must an entity do to claim on-site generated renewable electricity as renewable energy, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 10: Metals & Mining?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Retain and retire (or cancel) the associated RECs or Guarantees of Origin on the entity’s behalf.",
      "A": "Sell the associated Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs) in an open market.",
      "C": "Generate the electricity within the reporting entity’s headquarters region.",
      "D": "Submit an annual declaration to the ISSB confirming renewable status.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "8",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol10.pdf",
    "source_text": "For any renewable electricity generated on-site, any RECs and GOs must be retained (not sold) and retired or cancelled on behalf of the entity in order for the entity to claim them as renewable energy.",
    "new_id": 754
  },
  {
    "id": 76051,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains the relationship between the communication of critical concerns and the advancement of the highest governance body's collective knowledge, as implied in GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The reporting of critical concerns and measures to advance collective knowledge are independent requirements, with no explicit connection suggested between them in the text.",
      "A": "The communication of critical concerns is primarily intended to enhance the highest governance body's understanding of sustainable development, serving as a direct mechanism for advancing their collective knowledge.",
      "B": "Critical concerns communicated to the highest governance body inherently lead to improved collective knowledge on business conduct but not necessarily on sustainable development.",
      "D": "The highest governance body's collective knowledge on sustainable development can only be advanced through external training programs, making the reporting of critical concerns irrelevant to this process.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "27-28",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 2_ General Disclosures 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Disclosure 2-16 Communication of critical concerns The organization shall:REQUIREMENTS describe whether and how critical concerns are communicated to the highest governance body ;a. report the total number and the nature of critical concerns that were communicated to the highest governance body during the reporting period .b. Critical concerns include concerns about the organization’s potential and actual negative impacts on stakeholders raised through grievance mechanisms and other processes. They also include concerns identified through other mechanisms about the organization’s business conduct in its operations and its business relationships . See guidance to Disclosure 2-25 and Disclosure 2-26 in this Standard for more information.GUIDANCE GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 27\n\n[Page 28]\nDisclosure 2-17 Collective knowledge of the highest governance body The organization shall:REQUIREMENTS report measures taken to advance the collective knowledge, skills, and experience of the highest governance body on sustainable development .a. GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 28",
    "new_id": 755
  },
  {
    "id": 76166,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes why an organization might engage in environmental remediation processes, according to GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021?",
    "options": {
      "D": "To address grievances raised by stakeholders connected to actual negative impacts on them.",
      "A": "To fulfill its responsibility for remediating all negative impacts directly linked to its operations, products, or services.",
      "B": "To comply with whistleblowing mechanisms that identify legal breaches within its business relationships.",
      "C": "To remove contaminants from soil as a standalone initiative unrelated to stakeholder concerns.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "40",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 2_ General Disclosures 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Disclosure 2-25 Processes to remediate negative impacts The organization shall:REQUIREMENTS describe its commitments to provide for or cooperate in the remediation of negative impacts that the organization identifies it has caused or contributed to;a. describe its approach to identify and address grievances , including the grievance mechanisms that the organization has established or participates in;b. describe other processes by which the organization provides for or cooperates in the remediation of negative impacts that it identifies it has caused or contributed to;c. describe how the stakeholders who are the intended users of the grievance mechanisms are involved in the design, review, operation, and improvement of these mechanisms;d. describe how the organization tracks the effectiveness of the grievance mechanisms and other remediation processes, and report examples of their effectiveness, including stakeholder feedback.e. This disclosure covers grievance mechanisms that the organization has established or participates in. Grievance mechanisms enable stakeholders to raise concerns about, and seek remedy for, the organization’s potential and actual negative impacts on them. This includes impacts on their human rights . This disclosure also covers other processes by which the organization provides for or cooperates in the remediation of negative impacts that it identifies it has caused or contributed to. The United Nations (UN) Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights [14] and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises [12] set out expectations for organizations to provide for or cooperate in the remediation, through legitimate processes, of negative impacts that they identify they have caused or contributed to. The organization is not responsible for the remediation of negative impacts directly linked to its operations, products, or services by its business relationships , where the organization has not contributed to the impacts. It can, however, play a role in the remediation. See Box 3 in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 for more information on causing, contributing, or being directly linked to negative impacts. These instruments also set out expectations for organizations to establish or participate in effective operational-level grievance mechanisms. Grievance mechanisms are distinct from whistleblowing mechanisms. Whistleblowing mechanisms enable individuals to raise concerns about wrongdoing or breaches of the law in the organization’s operations or business relationships, regardless of whether the individuals themselves are harmed or not. Whistleblowing mechanisms are reported under Disclosure 2- 26 in this Standard. This disclosure covers the operation of grievance mechanisms and other remediation processes. The actions taken to provide for or cooperate in the remediation of actual negative impacts for material topics are reported under 3-3-d-ii in GRI 3 . The disclosure is only relevant to environmental remediation processes (e.g., processes to remove contaminants from soil) when these are connected to impacts on stakeholders or grievances raised by stakeholders. However, the remedy provided to stakeholders through the mechanisms and processes covered by this disclosure may involve environmental remediation. The use of environmental remediation processes can be reported under 3-3-d-ii in GRI 3 . Guidance to 2-25-b Grievance mechanisms refer to any routinized, state-based or non-state-based, judicial or non- judicial processes through which stakeholders can raise grievances and seek remedy. Examples of state-based judicial and non-judicial grievance mechanisms include courts (forGUIDANCE GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 40",
    "new_id": 756
  },
  {
    "id": 76196,
    "question": "Which scenario would most likely lead to a significant change in reported pay disparity without altering the organization's actual compensation structure, according to GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021?",
    "options": {
      "A": "A decision to include part-time employees' full-time equivalent pay rates in the calculation.",
      "B": "An increase in the highest-paid individual's total compensation package.",
      "C": "A shift in methodology to exclude certain employee groups from Disclosure 2-7 reporting.",
      "D": "The introduction of additional types of compensation, such as bonuses or stock options.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "33",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 2_ General Disclosures 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "The difference in pay disparity reported over the years may be the result of a change in the organization’s compensation policy or the level of compensation for its highest-paid individual or employees, a change in calculation methodology (e.g., selection of the median annual total compensation, inclusions or exclusions) or an improvement in data collection processes. For this reason, the organization is required to report contextual information to help information users interpret the data and understand how it has been compiled. The organization should provide the following contextual information: Whether any employees reported under Disclosure 2-7 in this Standard have been excluded. • Whether full-time equivalent (FTE) pay rates are used for each part-time employee. • A list of the types of compensation included.• The title of the highest-paid individual.• GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 33",
    "new_id": 757
  },
  {
    "id": 76211,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the relationship between independence and diversity in the nomination and selection processes for the highest governance body, as described in GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Diversity and independence are treated as entirely separate criteria, with no overlap in how they influence the nomination process.",
      "A": "Independence is a subset of diversity considerations, ensuring members are free from external influence due to their varied backgrounds.",
      "C": "Independence is a necessary condition for diversity, as only independent members can contribute to diverse perspectives on the governance body.",
      "D": "Diversity directly enhances independence by reducing the likelihood of uniform thinking and external influence among governance members.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "20-21",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 2_ General Disclosures 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "3. Governance The disclosures in this section provide information about the organization’s governance structure, composition, knowledge, roles, and remuneration. The information reported under these disclosures is important for understanding how the management of the organization’s impacts on the economy, environment, and people, including impacts on their human rights , is integrated into the organization’s strategy and operations. It addresses how the governance bodies are set up and how well equipped they are to oversee the management of the organization’s impacts. It also facilitates an understanding of the role and the responsibilities of governance bodies with respect to these impacts. If the organization intends to publish a standalone sustainability report, it does not need to repeat information that it has already reported publicly elsewhere, such as on web pages or in its annual report. In such a case, the organization can report a required disclosure by providing a reference in the GRI content index as to where this information can be found (e.g., by providing a link to the web page or citing the page in the annual report where the information has been published). Disclosure 2-9 Governance structure and composition The organization shall:REQUIREMENTS describe its governance structure, including committees of the highest governance body ;a. list the committees of the highest governance body that are responsible for decision- making on and overseeing the management of the organization’s impacts on the economy, environment, and people;b. describe the composition of the highest governance body and its committees by: executive and non-executive members; i. independence; ii. tenure of members on the governance body; iii. number of other significant positions and commitments held by each member, and the nature of the commitments;iv. gender; v. under-represented social groups ; vi. competencies relevant to the impacts of the organization; vii. stakeholder representation. viii.c. Guidance to 2-9-c The organization can describe the composition of the highest governance body and its committees by additional indicators of diversity, such as age, ancestry and ethnic origin, citizenship, creed, disability, or any other indicators of diversity that are relevant for reporting. Guidance to 2-9-c-ii ‘Independence’ refers to conditions that enable the members of the highest governance body to exercise independent judgment free from any external influence or conflicts of interest . See reference [20] in the Bibliography for more information on independence criteria for governance bodies. Guidance to 2-9-c-iv A position or commitment held by a highest governance body member is significant when the time and attention it demands compromises the member’s ability to perform its duties in the organization. Significant positions can include cross-board memberships. Guidance to 2-9-c-vii Competencies relevant to the impacts of the organization include competencies relevant to impacts commonly associated with the organization’s sectors, products, and geographic locations.GUIDANCE GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 20\n\n[Page 21]\nDisclosure 2-10 Nomination and selection of the highest governance body The organization shall:REQUIREMENTS describe the nomination and selection processes for the highest governance body and its committees;a. describe the criteria used for nominating and selecting highest governance body members, including whether and how the following are taken into consideration: views of stakeholders (including shareholders); i. diversity; ii. independence; iii. competencies relevant to the impacts of the organization . iv.b. Guidance to 2-10-b-iii ‘Independence’ refers to conditions that enable the members of the highest governance body to exercise independent judgment free from any external influence or conflicts of interest . See reference [20] in the Bibliography for more information on independence criteria for governance bodies. Guidance to 2-10-b-iv Competencies relevant to the impacts of the organization include competencies relevant to impacts commonly associated with the organization’s sectors, products, and geographic locations.GUIDANCE GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 21",
    "new_id": 758
  },
  {
    "id": 76212,
    "question": "When determining significant instances of non-compliance, which factor is explicitly identified as a potential external benchmark while also requiring consideration of the severity of impact, according to GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Sector-specific external benchmarks and the severity of the resulting impact.",
      "A": "The geographic location where the instance occurred and whether it was repeated.",
      "B": "The type and context of non-compliance, including directives to cease unlawful activities.",
      "D": "The monetary value of fines incurred and restrictions imposed by regulatory authorities.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "44-45",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 2_ General Disclosures 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Disclosure 2-27 Compliance with laws and regulations The organization shall:REQUIREMENTS report the total number of significant instances of non-compliance with laws and regulations during the reporting period , and a breakdown of this total by: instances for which fines were incurred; i. instances for which non -monetary sanctions were incurred; ii.a. report the total number and the monetary value of fines for instances of non- compliance with laws and regulations that were paid during the reporting period, and a breakdown of this total by: fines for instances of non-compliance with laws and regulations that occurred in the current reporting period;i. fines for instances of non-compliance with laws and regulations that occurred in previous reporting periods;ii.b. describe the significant instances of non-compliance; c. describe how it has determined significant instances of non-compliance. d. This disclosure addresses non-compliance, or failure to comply with, laws and regulations that apply to the organization. Non-compliance with laws and regulations can give insight into the ability of management to ensure that the organization conforms to certain performance parameters. Laws and regulations can be issued by various bodies, including local, regional, and national governments; regulatory authorities; and public agencies. Laws and regulations include: This disclosure includes significant instances of non-compliance that resulted in administrative or judicial sanctions and fines that are being appealed during the reporting period. Non-monetary sanctions can include restrictions imposed by governments, regulatory authorities, or public agencies on the organization’s activities or operations, such as withdrawal of trading licenses or licenses to operate in highly regulated industries. They can also include directives to cease or remediate an unlawful activity. The organization can use information about fines that have been reported in its audited consolidated financial statements or in the financial information filed on public record, including fines that are being appealed and which may appear as balance sheet reserves in the financial statements. If there were no significant instances of non-compliance with laws and regulations or no fines were paid during the reporting period, a brief statement of this fact is sufficient to comply with the disclosure. Guidance to 2-27-c The description of significant instances of non-compliance can include the geographic location where the instance occurred, and the matter to which the instance relates, such as a tax fraud or a spill. The organization is required to report sufficient information for information users to understand the type and the context of significant instances of non-compliance. The organization can also explain whether the significant instances are repeated or recurring.GUIDANCE international declarations, conventions, and treaties;• national, subnational, regional, and local regulations;• binding voluntary agreements made with regulatory authorities and developed as a substitute for implementing a new regulation;• voluntary agreements (or covenants), if the organization directly joins the agreement, or if public agencies make the agreement applicable to organizations in their territory through legislation or regulation.• GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 44\n\n[Page 45]\nGuidance to 2-27-d When determining the significant instances of non-compliance, the organization can assess: the severity of the impact resulting from the instance; • external benchmarks used in its sector to determine significant instances of non- compliance.• GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 45",
    "new_id": 759
  },
  {
    "id": 76214,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the relationship between 'remedy/remediation' and 'severity', as described in GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Remedy aims to counteract harm, which includes addressing all three components of severity: scale, scope, and irremediable character.",
      "A": "Remedy is only applicable when the severity of an impact is determined by its irremediable character, excluding considerations of scale and scope.",
      "B": "Severity determines whether a remedy is possible, while remedy focuses on actions like apologies or compensation regardless of severity.",
      "C": "Severity is unrelated to remedy because punitive sanctions are exclusively used to address impacts classified under severity.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "54",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 2_ General Disclosures 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "remedy / remediation means to counteract or make good a negative impact or provision of remedy Source: United Nations (UN), The Corporate Responsibility to Respect Human Rights: An Interpretive Guide , 2012; modified Examples: apologies, financial or non-financial compensation, prevention of harm through injunctions or guarantees of non-repetition, punitive sanctions (whether criminal or administrative, such as fines), restitution, restoration, rehabilitation reporting period specific time period covered by the reported information Examples: fiscal year, calendar year senior executive high-ranking member of the management of the organization, such as the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) or an individual reporting directly to the CEO or the highest governance body severity (of an impact) The severity of an actual or potential negative impact is determined by its scale (i.e., how grave the impact is), scope (i.e., how widespread the impact is), and irremediable character (how hard it is to counteract or make good the resulting harm). Source: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), OECD Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Business Conduct , 2018; modified United Nations (UN), The Corporate Responsibility to Respect Human Rights: An Interpretive Guide , 2012; modified Note: See section 1 in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 for more information on ‘severity’. stakeholder individual or group that has an interest that is affected or could be affected by the organization’s activities Source: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), OECD Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Business Conduct , 2018; modified Examples: business partners , civil society organizations, consumers, customers, employees and other workers , governments, local communities , non-governmental organizations, shareholders and other investors, suppliers , trade unions, vulnerable groups Note: See section 2.4 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 for more information on ‘stakeholder’. supplier entity upstream from the organization (i.e., in the organization’s supply chain ), which provides a product or service that is used in the development of the organization’s own products or services Examples: brokers, consultants, contractors, distributors, franchisees, home workers , independent contractors, licensees, manufacturers, primary producers, sub- contractors, wholesalers Note: A supplier can have a direct business relationship with the organization (often referred to as a first-tier supplier) or an indirect business relationship. supply chain range of activities carried out by entities upstream from the organization, which provide products or services that are used in the development of the organization’s own products or services sustainable development / sustainability development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs Source: World Commission on Environment and Development, Our Common Future , 1987 GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 54",
    "new_id": 760
  },
  {
    "id": 76215,
    "question": "In cases where collective bargaining agreements do not directly cover an organization’s employees, which scenario would require the organization to report under 2-30-b, according to GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021?",
    "options": {
      "A": "When the employees’ terms of employment are influenced by collective bargaining agreements from other organizations or covering other employees.",
      "B": "When the employees’ working conditions are determined by industry benchmarks rather than any collective bargaining agreements.",
      "C": "When the organization has no business partners or affiliates that could influence its employees’ working conditions.",
      "D": "When the employees’ working conditions and terms of employment are solely determined by internal organizational policies unrelated to collective bargaining.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "50-51",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 2_ General Disclosures 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "The organization can also provide a breakdown of the percentage of employees covered by collective bargaining agreements by region, or provide comparisons with industry benchmarks. Guidance to 2-30-b There may be instances where collective bargaining agreements cover some or none of the organization’s employees. However, the working conditions and terms of employment of these employees may be influenced or determined by the organization based on other collective bargaining agreements, such as agreements that cover other employees or agreements from other organizations. If this is the case, the organization is required to report it under 2-30-b. If this is not the case, and the working conditions and terms of employment of these employees are not influenced or determined based on other collective bargaining agreements, a brief statement of this fact is sufficient to comply with this requirement. GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 50\n\n[Page 51]\nGlossary This glossary provides definitions for terms used in this Standard. The organization is required to apply these definitions when using the GRI Standards. The definitions included in this glossary may contain terms that are further defined in the complete GRI Standards Glossary . All defined terms are underlined. If a term is not defined in this glossary or in the complete GRI Standards Glossary , definitions that are commonly used and understood apply. business partner entity with which the organization has some form of direct and formal engagement for the purpose of meeting its business objectives Source: Shift and Mazars LLP, UN Guiding Principles Reporting Framework , 2015; modified Examples: affiliates, business-to-business customers, clients, first-tier suppliers , franchisees, joint venture partners, investee companies in which the organization has a shareholding position Note: Business partners do not include subsidiaries and affiliates that the organization controls. business relationships relationships that the organization has with business partners , with entities in its value chain including those beyond the first tier, and with any other entities directly linked to its operations, products, or services Source: United Nations (UN), Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework , 2011; modified Note: Examples of other entities directly linked to the organization’s operations, products, or services are a non-governmental organization with which the organization delivers support to a local community or state security forces that protect the organization’s facilities. child person under the age of 15 years, or under the age of completion of compulsory schooling, whichever is higher Note 1: Exceptions can occur in certain countries where economies and educational facilities are insufficiently developed, and a minimum age of 14 years applies. These countries of exception are specified by the International Labour Organization (ILO) in response to a special application by the country concerned and in consultation with representative organizations of employers and workers. Note 2: The ILO Minimum Age Convention, 1973, (No. 138), refers to both child labor and young workers. collective bargaining all negotiations that take place between one or more employers or employers' organizations, on the one hand, and one or more workers' organizations (e.g., trade unions), on the other, for determining working conditions and terms of employment or for regulating relations between employers and workers Source: International Labour Organization (ILO), Collective Bargaining Convention , 1981 (No. 154); modified conflict of interest situation where an individual is confronted with choosing between the requirements of their function in the organization and their other personal or professional interests or responsibilities due diligence GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 51",
    "new_id": 761
  },
  {
    "id": 76216,
    "question": "When an organization's policy commitments are limited to specific activities or business relationships, which of the following is a necessary condition for compliance with the reporting requirement, according to GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021?",
    "options": {
      "B": "The organization must specify which activities or business relationships the commitments apply to and clarify whether they are obligated or encouraged to comply.",
      "A": "The organization must ensure that all workers and governance body members sign the policy commitments annually.",
      "C": "The organization must translate the policy commitments into every language spoken by its workers and partners.",
      "D": "The organization must redesign its newsletters and meetings to focus exclusively on communicating these policy commitments.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "37",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 2_ General Disclosures 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Guidance to 2-23-e If the policy commitments apply to all of the organization’s activities and business relationships equally, a brief statement of this fact is sufficient to comply with the requirement. If the policy commitments apply to only some of the organization’s activities (e.g., they apply only to entities located in certain countries or to certain subsidiaries), the organization should report which activities the commitments apply to. It can also explain why the commitments are limited to these activities. If the policy commitments apply to only some of the organization’s business relationships, the organization should specify the types of business relationships the commitments apply to (e.g., distributors, franchisees, joint ventures, suppliers ). It can also explain why the commitments are limited to these business relationships. The organization should also explain whether the business relationships are obligated to abide by the policy commitments or are encouraged (but not obligated) to do so. Guidance to 2-23-f The organization can report: whether the policy commitments need to be read, agreed to, and regularly signed by all workers, business partners , and other relevant parties, such as governance body members;• the means through which it communicates the policy commitments (e.g., newsletters, formal or informal meetings, dedicated websites, contractual agreements);• how it identifies and removes potential barriers to the communication or dissemination of the policy commitments (e.g., by making them accessible and available in relevant languages).• GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 37",
    "new_id": 762
  },
  {
    "id": 76217,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why an organization must consult GRI 1 before using other standards within the GRI system, according to GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021?",
    "options": {
      "C": "GRI 1 outlines the foundational requirements for reporting in accordance with the GRI Standards, ensuring compliance with its framework.",
      "A": "GRI 1 provides disclosures for stakeholder engagement practices, which are prerequisites for understanding material topics.",
      "B": "GRI 1 lists sector-specific guidance that organizations need to identify their likely material topics.",
      "D": "GRI 1 contains detailed topic-specific disclosures that allow organizations to report on their economic, environmental, and social impacts.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "4-5",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 2_ General Disclosures 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Disclosure 2-27 Compliance with laws and regulations 44 Disclosure 2-28 Membership associations 46 5. Stakeholder engagement 47 Disclosure 2-29 Approach to stakeholder engagement 47 Disclosure 2-30 Collective bargaining agreements 49 Glossary 51 Bibliography 56 GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 4\n\n[Page 5]\nIntroduction GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 contains disclosures for organizations to provide information about their reporting practices; activities and workers; governance; strategy, policies, and practices; and stakeholder engagement. This information gives insight into the profile and scale of organizations and provides a context for understanding their impacts. The Standard is structured as follows: The rest of the Introduction section provides an overview of the system of GRI Standards and further information on using this Standard. System of GRI Standards This Standard is part of the GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards (GRI Standards). The GRI Standards enable an organization to report information about its most significant impacts on the economy, environment, and people, including impacts on their human rights , and how it manages these impacts. The GRI Standards are structured as a system of interrelated standards that are organized into three series: GRI Universal Standards, GRI Sector Standards, and GRI Topic Standards (see Figure 1 in this Standard). Universal Standards: GRI 1, GRI 2 and GRI 3 GRI 1: Foundation 2021 specifies the requirements that the organization must comply with to report in accordance with the GRI Standards. The organization begins using the GRI Standards by consulting GRI 1 . GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 contains disclosures that the organization uses to provide information about its reporting practices and other organizational details, such as its activities, governance, and policies. GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 provides guidance on how to determine material topics . It also contains disclosures that the organization uses to report information about its process of determining material topics, its list of material topics, and how it manages each topic. Sector Standards The Sector Standards provide information for organizations about their likely material topics. The organization uses the Sector Standards that apply to its sectors when determining its material topics and when determining what to report for each material topic. Topic Standards The Topic Standards contain disclosures that the organization uses to report information about its impacts in relation to particular topics. The organization uses the Topic Standards according to the list of material topics it has determined using GRI 3 .Section 1 contains five disclosures, which provide information about the organization, its sustainability reporting practices, and the entities included in its sustainability reporting.• Section 2 contains three disclosures, which provide information about the organization’s activities, employees, and other workers.• Section 3 contains thirteen disclosures, which provide information about the organization’s governance structure, composition, roles, and remuneration.• Section 4 contains seven disclosures, which provide information about the organization’s sustainable development strategy and its policies and practices for responsible business conduct.• Section 5 contains two disclosures, which provide information about the organization’s stakeholder engagement practices and how it engages in collective bargaining with employees.• The Glossary contains defined terms with a specific meaning when used in the GRI Standards. The terms are underlined in the text of the GRI Standards and linked to the definitions.• The Bibliography lists authoritative intergovernmental instruments and additional references used in developing this Standard, as well as resources that the organization can consult.• GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 5",
    "new_id": 763
  },
  {
    "id": 76218,
    "question": "Which of the following most accurately reflects a critical factor influencing the interpretation of annual total compensation ratios, as implied by GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The ratio can be significantly skewed by an organization's reliance on outsourced workers or part-time employees, which affects its interpretability.",
      "A": "The ratio is primarily indicative of economic fairness and equality within the organization.",
      "B": "The ratio directly measures the effectiveness of remuneration policies in motivating senior executives and other employees.",
      "C": "The ratio is unaffected by organizational size or sector, making it a universal benchmark for compensation practices.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "31-32",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 2_ General Disclosures 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Disclosure 2-20 Process to determine remuneration The organization shall:REQUIREMENTS describe the process for designing its remuneration policies and for determining remuneration, including: whether independent highest governance body members or an independent remuneration committee oversees the process for determining remuneration;i. how the views of stakeholders (including shareholders) regarding remuneration are sought and taken into consideration;ii. whether remuneration consultants are involved in determining remuneration and, if so, whether they are independent of the organization, its highest governance body and senior executives ;iii.a. report the results of votes of stakeholders (including shareholders) on remuneration policies and proposals, if applicable.b. Remuneration policies are established to ensure that the remuneration arrangements help recruit, motivate, and retain the highest governance body members, senior executives, and other employees. Remuneration policies further support the organization’s strategy and contribution to sustainable development and align with stakeholders' interests.GUIDANCE GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 31\n\n[Page 32]\nDisclosure 2-21 Annual total compensation ratio The organization shall:REQUIREMENTS report the ratio of the annual total compensation for the organization’s highest-paid individual to the median annual total compensation for all employees (excluding the highest-paid individual);a. report the ratio of the percentage increase in annual total compensation for the organization’s highest-paid individual to the median percentage increase in annual total compensation for all employees (excluding the highest-paid individual);b. report contextual information necessary to understand the data and how the data has been compiled.c. Guidance to 2-21-a and 2-21-b This disclosure covers all employees as reported under Disclosure 2-7 in this Standard. Annual total compensation includes salary, bonus, stock awards, option awards, non-equity incentive plan compensation, change in pension value, and nonqualified deferred compensation earnings provided over the course of a year. When calculating the ratio, the organization should, depending on the organization’s remuneration policies and availability of data, consider all of the following: The annual total compensation ratio can be calculated using the following formula: Annual total compensation for the organization's highest paid-individual _____________________________________________________________ Median annual total compensation for all of the organization's employees excluding the highest-paid individual The change in the annual total compensation ratio can be calculated using the following formula: Percentage increase in annual total compensation for the organization's highest-paid individual _____________________________________________________________ Median percentage increase in annual total compensation for all of the organization's employees excluding the highest-paid individual Guidance to 2-21-c Quantitative data, such as the annual total compensation ratio, may not be sufficient on its own to understand pay disparity and its drivers. For example, pay ratios can be influenced by the size of the organization (e.g., revenue, number of employees), its sector, its employment strategy (e.g., reliance on outsourced workers or part-time employees , a high degree of automation), or currency volatility.GUIDANCE Base salary, which is the sum of guaranteed, short-term, and non-variable cash compensation.• Total cash compensation, which is the sum of the base salary and cash allowances, bonuses, commissions, cash profit-sharing, and other forms of variable cash payments.• Direct compensation, which is the sum of total cash compensation and total fair value of all annual long-term incentives (e.g., stock option awards, restricted stock shares or units, performance stock shares or units, phantom stock shares, stock appreciation rights, and long-term cash awards).• GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 32",
    "new_id": 764
  },
  {
    "id": 76219,
    "question": "Which of the following best reflects a logical consequence of the organization's obligations under Disclosure 2-1, based on the interplay between requirements and guidance in GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021?",
    "options": {
      "A": "If an organization has already disclosed its countries of operation in audited financial statements, it fulfills the requirement by providing a reference to that disclosure.",
      "B": "The organization is required to provide its trading name if it differs from its legal name to ensure full compliance with the GRI Standards.",
      "C": "An organization must report both its global administrative center and all specific operational locations within countries to meet the requirement for headquarters and countries of operation.",
      "D": "The organization can choose to describe its nature of ownership as either public or private, depending on which characterization aligns better with its sustainability narrative.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "7-8",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 2_ General Disclosures 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Requirements, guidance and defined terms The following apply throughout the GRI Standards: Requirements are presented in bold font and indicated by the word 'shall'. An organization must comply with requirements to report in accordance with the GRI Standards. Requirements may be accompanied by guidance. Guidance includes background information, explanations, and examples to help the organization better understand the requirements. The organization is not required to comply with guidance. The Standards may also include recommendations. These are cases where a particular course of action is encouraged but not required. The word ‘should’ indicates a recommendation, and the word ‘can’ indicates a possibility or option. Defined terms are underlined in the text of the GRI Standards and linked to their definitions in the Glossary . The organization is required to apply the definitions in the Glossary. GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 7\n\n[Page 8]\n1. The organization and its reporting practices The disclosures in this section provide an overview of the organization, its sustainability reporting practices, and the entities included in its sustainability reporting. Disclosure 2-1 Organizational details The organization shall:REQUIREMENTS report its legal name; a. report its nature of ownership and legal form; b. report the location of its headquarters; c. report its countries of operation. d. Guidance to 2-1-a If the organization uses a commonly known trading name or business name that is different from its legal name, it should report this in addition to its legal name. Guidance to 2-1-b The nature of ownership and the legal form of the organization refers to whether it is publicly or privately owned, and whether it is an incorporated entity, a partnership, a sole proprietorship, or another type of entity such as a nonprofit, an association, or a charity. Guidance to 2-1-c Headquarters are an organization’s global administrative center, the place from which it is controlled or directed. Guidance to 2-1-d If the organization has reported its countries of operation elsewhere, such as in its audited consolidated financial statements or financial information filed on public record, the organization can provide a link or reference to this information. The organization can also report the regions or specific locations within countries (e.g., states, cities) where it has operations, if this provides contextual information for understanding the organization’s impacts . GUIDANCE GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 8",
    "new_id": 765
  },
  {
    "id": 76231,
    "question": "In the context of operational control, which scenario would most likely lead to a building being classified as an Indirectly Managed asset despite the landlord having some authority over environmental policies, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 36: Real Estate?",
    "options": {
      "B": "A single tenant has sole authority to implement operating policies but must consult the landlord on energy efficiency measures.",
      "A": "Both the landlord and tenant share equal authority to introduce and implement all operating and environmental policies.",
      "C": "The landlord retains the ability to enforce environmental policies, but the tenant exclusively manages day-to-day operations affecting energy use.",
      "D": "The landlord introduces environmental policies, but the tenant is responsible for implementing broader environmental measures unrelated to energy.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "14",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol36.pdf",
    "source_text": "9.1 Base Building is defined as the energy consumed in supplying central building services to lettable/leasable areas and common areas. 9.2 Tenant Space is defined as the lettable floor area (both vacant and let/ leased areas) that is, or can be, occupied by tenants. 9.3 Whole Building is defined as the energy used by tenants and base building services to lettable/leasable and common spaces. This should include all energy supplied to the building for the operation of the building and the tenant space. 9.4 Purchased by Landlord is defined as the energy purchased by the landlord but consumed by the tenant. This may include energy purchased by the landlord but used for vacant space. 9.5 Purchased by Tenant is defined as the energy purchased by the tenant. Typically, this is data outside the entity ’s immediate control. 9.6 Managed Assets and Indirectly Managed Assets are defined as follows: ‘This definition of Managed assets and the definition of Indirectly Managed assets are solely based on the landlord/tenant relationship. [Managed and Indirectly Managed Assets are] assets or buildings for which the landlord is determined to have ‘operational control ’ where operational control is defined as having the ability to introduce and implement operating and/or environmental policies and measures. In case both the landlord and tenant have the authority to introduce and implement any or all the policies mentioned above, the asset or building should be reported as a Managed asset. Where a single tenant has the sole authority to introduce and implement operating and/or environmental policies and measures, the tenant should be assumed to have operational control, so it should be considered to be an Indirectly Managed asset. ’ 10 The entity shall consider the 2018 GRESB Real Estate Assessment Reference Guide as a normative reference, thus any updates made year-on-year shall be considered updates to this guidance. IF-RE-130a.4. Percentage of eligible portfolio that (1) has an energy rating and (2) is certified to ENERGY STAR, by property sector 1 The entity shall disclose the percentage of the portfolio that has a valid or current energy rating, by gross floor area, where: 1.1 Gross floor area is defined as the total property square footage, measured between the principal exterior surfaces of the enclosing fixed walls of the building(s). 1.2 An energy rating is defined according to the 2018 GRESB Real Estate Assessment Reference Guide as a scheme that measures the energy performance of buildings, including schemes solely concerned with measuring energy efficiency performance as well as cases in which an energy rating is an element of a broader scheme measuring environmental performance.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 13",
    "new_id": 766
  },
  {
    "id": 76232,
    "question": "Which of the following scenarios accurately reflects the relationship between water withdrawal data coverage and the factors influencing asset water efficiency, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 36: Real Estate?",
    "options": {
      "C": "An entity achieves complete water withdrawal data coverage for all leasable floor areas where gross floor area is unavailable, meeting the disclosure requirements by substituting leasable floor area under the specified conditions.",
      "A": "An entity reports complete water withdrawal data coverage for 80% of its portfolio’s gross floor area, but this excludes regions with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress, which aligns with the requirement to prioritize such areas in disclosures.",
      "B": "A real estate owner implements water efficiency measures only in regions with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress, assuming that water withdrawal data coverage is irrelevant outside these regions.",
      "D": "A property manager excludes apartment complexes from water withdrawal data reporting because number of units can be used as a substitute metric, rendering floor area measurements unnecessary.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "18",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol36.pdf",
    "source_text": "common area water costs, though entities commonly allocate all, or a portion, of these costs to occupants. In these arrangements, water management through tenant demand and regulatory exposure continues to be important. Tenants may assess real estate asset water efficiency to control operating costs, mitigate environmental impacts of operations, and, often just as importantly, develop a reputation for resource conservation. Additionally, real estate owners may comply with water-related regulations even if water costs are the occupants ’ responsibility. Overall, entities that effectively manage asset water efficiency, even if they bear no direct water costs, may realise reduced operating costs and regulatory exposure, as well as increased tenant demand, rental rates and occupancy rates —all of which drive revenue and asset value appreciation. Long-term historic water expense increases and expectations of continued increases because of overconsumption and constrained supplies resulting from population growth and shifts, pollution and climate change show the importance of water management. Improving asset water efficiency is dependent upon the property type, water availability, target tenant market, local building codes, the ability to measure consumption and the existing building stock, among other factors. Metrics IF-RE-140a.1. Water withdrawal data coverage as a percentage of (1) total floor area and (2) floor area in regions with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress, by property sector 1 The entity shall disclose (1) the percentage of its portfolio, based on total gross floor area, with complete water withdrawal data coverage. 1.1 Gross floor area is defined as the total property area in square metres, measured between the principal exterior surfaces of the enclosing fixed walls of the building(s).' 1.1.1 Leasable floor area may be used in place of gross floor area if gross floor area is unavailable for the relevant area of the portfolio (for example, a building with an unknown gross floor but a known leasable floor area). 1.1.2 Number of units may be used in place of floor area in the Apartments and Lodging/Resorts property sectors. 1.2 Floor area is considered to have complete water withdrawal data coverage when the entity obtains water withdrawal data (amounts withdrawn) for the relevant floor area during the reporting period, regardless of when such data was obtained. 1.3 The percentage shall be calculated as the portfolio gross floor area with complete water withdrawal data coverage divided by the total portfolio gross floor area for which water is used. 1.4 The scope of water withdrawals is aligned with the 2018 GRESB Real Estate Assessment Reference Guide, and it includes water that was withdrawn from all sources.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 17",
    "new_id": 767
  },
  {
    "id": 76234,
    "question": "Which of the following most accurately reflects a necessary condition for an entity to calculate the percentage of its portfolio located in regions classified as High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 36: Real Estate?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The calculation requires complete water withdrawal data coverage for all regions classified as High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress.",
      "A": "The entity must rely solely on tenant-reported water withdrawal data, regardless of geographical market distinctions.",
      "B": "The entity needs to exclude regions with incomplete water withdrawal data coverage from both the numerator and denominator of the calculation.",
      "C": "Geographical markets with enabling laws and policies are the only areas where the calculation can be performed.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "19",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol36.pdf",
    "source_text": "1.4.1 Water sources include surface water (including water from wetlands, rivers, lakes and oceans), groundwater, rainwater collected directly and stored by the entity, and water and wastewater obtained from municipal water supplies, water utilities, or other entities. 2 The entity shall disclose (2) the percentage of its portfolio, based on gross floor area, located in regions classified as High (40 –80%) or Extremely High (>80%) Baseline Water Stress with complete water withdrawal data coverage. 2.1 High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress shall be determined by the World Resources Institute ’s (WRI) Water Risk Atlas tool, Aqueduct. 2.2 The percentage shall be calculated as the portfolio gross floor area located in regions classified as High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress and that have complete water withdrawal data coverage, divided by the total portfolio gross floor area for which water is used in regions with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress. 3 The entity shall disclose (1) water withdrawal data coverage and (2) the percentage of water withdrawal data coverage in regions with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress, separately for each property type in its portfolio if properties are classified into sectors aligned with the FTSE EPRA Nareit Global Real Estate Index property sector classification. 4 The entity may describe the variations in water withdrawal data coverage, including the factors that influence it. 4.1 Variations in water withdrawal data coverage may occur based on distinctions, which may include: 4.1.1 Base Building, Tenant Space and Whole Building 4.1.2 Water Purchased by the Landlord and water Purchased by Tenants 4.1.3 Managed Assets and Indirectly Managed Assets 4.1.4 Geographical markets 4.2 Relevant factors that influence water withdrawal data coverage may include: 4.2.1 Geographical markets and the applicable enabling or inhibiting laws, regulations and policies within such markets, including those policies of utilities 4.2.2 Geographical markets and the applicability of risks related to water scarcity (and related current or future regulations) 4.2.3 Administrative or logistical barriers to obtaining water withdrawal data (for example, lack of integration of utilities ’ data reporting systems) 4.2.4 Tenant demands around the privacy or proprietary nature of water withdrawal dataIFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 18 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 768
  },
  {
    "id": 76366,
    "question": "Which of the following most accurately reflects a condition under which a safety-related defect complaint would be excluded from the entity’s disclosure requirements, as outlined in the Automobiles – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The complaint was received directly by the entity but pertains to a non-safety-related issue affecting vehicle performance.",
      "B": "The complaint involves a defect that poses a risk to vehicle safety but is related to aftermarket modifications not originating from the manufacturer.",
      "C": "The complaint was investigated by a jurisdictional authority during the screening stage but deemed unrelated to any actual safety risk.",
      "D": "The complaint was submitted by a consumer who later withdrew it before any investigation could take place.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "9-10",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Automobiles.pdf",
    "source_text": "TR-AU-250a.2. (1) Number of safety-related defect complaints, (2) percentage investigated 1 The entity shall disclose (1) the total number of safety-related defect complaints. 1.1 A safety-related defect is a problem that exists in a vehicle or an item of vehicle equipment that (a) poses a risk to vehicle safety and (b) may exist in a group of vehicles of the same design or manufacture, or in an item of equipment of the same type and manufacture. 1.2 The scope of the disclosure includes safety-related defect complaints received by the entity, or by the applicable jurisdictional legal or regulatory authority. 2 The entity shall disclose (2) the percentage of safety-related defect complaints that were investigated. 2.1 Investigated complaints include any complaint investigated by the applicable jurisdictional legal or regulatory authority, including complaints in any of these stages of the investigative process: 2.1.1 screening, which is a preliminary review of consumer complaints and other information related to alleged defects to determine whether an investigation should be opened; 2.1.2 petition analysis, which is an analysis of any petitions calling for defect investigations or reviews of safety-related recalls; 2.1.3 investigation, which is the investigation of alleged safety defects; and 2.1.4 recall management, which is the investigation of the effectiveness of safety recalls. 2.2 The percentage shall be calculated as the number of its safety-related defect complaints investigated divided by the total number of its safety-related defect complaints. TR-AU-250a.3. Number of vehicles recalled 1The entity shall disclose the total number of its vehicles subject to voluntary or involuntary recalls it issued during the reporting period. 1.1 Voluntary recalls are those initiated by the entity to remove products from the market for safety-related concerns. 1.2 Involuntary recalls are those requested or mandated by applicable jurisdictional legal or regulatory authorities when (i) a vehicle or item of vehicle-related equipment does not comply with governmental vehicle safety regulations, or (ii) when a safety-related defect in vehicle or vehicle-related equipment is identified. 2 The entity may disclose the percentage of recalls that were (a) voluntary and (b) involuntary. Note to TR-AU-250a.3 1The entity shall discuss notable recalls such as those that affected a significant number of vehicles of one model or those related to serious injuries or fatalities. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |AUTOMOBILES |9\n\n[Page 10]\n1.1 A recall may be considered notable if it is mentioned in periodic jurisdictional recall reports. 2 For such recalls, the entity may provide: 2.1 corrective actions; 2.2 description and cause of the recall issue; 2.3 the total number of vehicles recalled; 2.4 the cost to remedy the issue; 2.5 whether the recall was voluntary or involuntary; and 2.6 any other significant outcomes (for example, legal proceedings or fatalities). SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |AUTOMOBILES |10",
    "new_id": 769
  },
  {
    "id": 76373,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes the relationship between advanced powertrain technologies and renewable fuels, as discussed in the Automobiles – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Advanced powertrain technologies and renewable fuels are distinct but complementary strategies, with the former focusing on vehicle components and the latter on fuel sources that can be replenished.",
      "A": "Advanced powertrain technologies are considered a subset of renewable fuels because they both aim to reduce emissions.",
      "C": "Renewable fuels are prioritized over advanced powertrain technologies since they are explicitly mentioned as being capable of operating on ecological cycles.",
      "D": "The text implies that renewable fuels will eventually replace advanced powertrain technologies due to their ecological advantages.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "15-16",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Automobiles.pdf",
    "source_text": "2Relevant aspects of the strategy include improvements to existing vehicles and technologies, the introduction of new technologies, research and development efforts into advanced technologies, and partnerships with peers, academic institutions or customers. 3Relevant technologies may include those related to materials design and engineering, advanced powertrains, renewable fuels, energy storage and batteries, aerodynamic design, fuel injection systems, particulate filters, and products and fuels that otherwise result in reduced emissions. 3.1 Advanced powertrain technologies include vehicles and vehicle components that are electric, hybrid electric, plug-in hybrid, dual-fuel and zero-emissions (for example, fuel cell). 3.2 Renewable fuels and energy technologies are those that operate on sources capable of being replenished in a short time through ecological cycles, including biomass (including ethanol, first-generation biofuels and advanced biofuels). 3.3 Products that result in reduced emissions include any vehicle or technology that achieves a significant reduction in fuel consumption. 3.4 Fuels that result in reduced emissions include biodiesel, ethanol, natural gas, propane and hydrogen. 3.5 Internal combustion engines include those equipped with technology (for example, selective catalytic reduction) to reduce nitrogen oxide emissions. 3.6 Particulate filters (for example, wall-flow filter or partial-flow filter) include those that reduce emissions (including carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons and particulate matter). 3.6.1 If relevant, the entity shall discuss the technologies it is prioritising to improve the fuel economy and reduce emissions of its vehicles, such as the specific type of fuel systems it is developing (for example, hybrid, electric or fuel cell). 4The entity shall discuss the factors influencing fuel economy and emissions efforts, such as meeting customer demand or meeting regulatory requirements of the markets it operates in or plans to operate in. 4.1 Relevant programmes and initiatives may include: 4.1.1 California Low-Emission Vehicle Program – LEV III 4.1.2 China VI emission standard 4.1.3 Euro 6 standards for light duty vehicles 4.1.4 US Clean Air Act 4.1.5 US Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards 5The entity shall discuss whether it is complying with fuel economy and use-phase regulatory obligations, whether such existing regulations require future improvements, progress towards meeting such regulations and strategies to maintain compliance with emerging regulations. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |AUTOMOBILES |15\n\n[Page 16]\n6 The scope of disclosure includes all vehicles subject to national and local vehicle standards. 7The entity may discuss the benchmarks used to measure improvements in fuel economy and emissions reductions, including targets for fuel economy improvements and emissions reductions. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |AUTOMOBILES |16",
    "new_id": 770
  },
  {
    "id": 76374,
    "question": "Which of the following most accurately reflects a necessary condition for an event to qualify as a work stoppage under the entity's disclosure requirements in the Automobiles – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The event must involve 1,000 or more workers and persist for at least one full shift.",
      "A": "The event must involve at least 500 workers and result in measurable operational delays.",
      "B": "The event must be caused by a formal labor dispute and last longer than two consecutive work shifts.",
      "D": "The event must include both a strike and a lockout occurring simultaneously.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "12-13",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Automobiles.pdf",
    "source_text": "TR-AU-310a.2. (1) Number of work stoppages and (2) total days idle 1The entity shall disclose (1) the number of work stoppages involving 1,000 or more workers lasting one full shift or longer. 1.1 The scope of work stoppages includes strikes and lockouts. 1.1.1 A strike is defined as a temporary stoppage of work by a group of employees (not necessarily union members) to express a grievance or enforce a demand. 1.1.2 A lockout is defined as a temporary withholding or denial of employment during a labour dispute to enforce terms of employment upon a group of employees. 2 The entity shall disclose (2) the total days idle because of work stoppages. 2.1‘Days idle ’ is defined as the aggregate number of workdays lost because of work stoppages. 2.2 Total days idle shall be calculated as the sum of the products of the number of workers involved in each work stoppage and the number of days each respective work stoppage was in effect. Note to TR-AU-310a.2 1The entity shall describe the reason for each work stoppage (as stated by labour), the effect on operations and any corrective actions taken as a result. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |AUTOMOBILES |12\n\n[Page 13]\nFuel Economy & Use-phase Emissions Topic Summary Motor vehicle fossil fuel combustion accounts for a significant share of the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions contributing to global climate change. Engine exhaust also generates local air pollutants such as nitrogen oxides (NO x), volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and particulate matter (PM), which can threaten human health and the environment. In this context, vehicle emissions increasingly concern consumers and regulators around the world. Although use-phase emissions are downstream from auto manufacturers, regulations often focus on auto manufacturers to reduce these emissions, such as through fuel economy standards. More stringent emissions standards and changing consumer demands are driving electric vehicle and hybrid market expansion, as well as for high fuel-efficiency conventional vehicles. Moreover, manufacturers are designing innovative vehicles made with lighter-weight materials to improve fuel efficiency. Entities that meet current fuel-efficiency and emissions standards and continue to innovate to meet or exceed future regulatory standards in various markets may strengthen their competitive position and expand their market share, while mitigating the risk of reduced demand for conventional vehicles. Metrics TR-AU-410a.1. Sales-weighted average passenger fleet fuel economy, by region 1The entity shall disclose the average fuel economy of its passenger and light-duty vehicle fleet, weighted for the footprint of vehicles sold, by geographical region. 1.1 The average fuel economy shall be calculated by model year as required for regulatory purposes. 1.2 In the absence of regulatory guidance on calculating a fleet average, the entity shall calculate performance based on the fuel economy of vehicles sold during the reporting period weighted by sales volume. 1.3 The calculation shall be made on a fleet-average basis regardless of whether regulations are based on vehicle weight. 2The entity shall disclose the percentage by geographic region. 2.1 Geographical regions are defined as the regions for which the entity conducts segment financial reporting and which are subject to fleet fuel economy, fuel consumption or emissions standards. 3 Disclosure may be provided in various units for each geographical region, which may include: 3.1 Grams of carbon dioxide per kilometre (gCO 2/km) for (1) passenger cars and (2) light commercial vehicles sold in the European Union 3.2 Litres of petrol per kilometre (L/km) for passenger vehicles sold in Japan SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |AUTOMOBILES |13",
    "new_id": 771
  },
  {
    "id": 76388,
    "question": "When calculating rates of high-consequence work-related injuries, which factor must be excluded to ensure compliance with the reporting requirements, as outlined in GRI 403: Occupational Health and Safety 2018?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Fatalities as a result of work-related injury.",
      "A": "Injuries resulting from commuting incidents where transport was organized by the organization.",
      "B": "Recordable work-related injuries that did not result in fatalities.",
      "C": "All types of work-related hazards identified during the reporting period.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "21",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 403_ Occupational Health and Safety 2018.pdf",
    "source_text": "Disclosure 403-9 Work-related injuries The reporting organization shall report the following information: Compilation requirements Rate of fatalities as a result of work-related injury=Number of fatalities as a result of work-related injury ______________________ Number of hours worked x [200,000 or 1,000,000] REQUIREMENTS For all employees : The number and rate of fatalities as a result of work-related injury ; i. The number and rate of high-consequence work-related injuries (excluding fatalities);ii. The number and rate of recordable work-related injuries ; iii. The main types of work-related injury; iv. The number of hours worked. v.a. For all workers who are not employees but whose work and/or workplace is controlled by the organization: The number and rate of fatalities as a result of work-related injury; i. The number and rate of high-consequence work-related injuries (excluding fatalities);ii. The number and rate of recordable work-related injuries; iii. The main types of work-related injury; iv. The number of hours worked. v.b. The work-related hazards that pose a risk of high-consequence injury, including: how these hazards have been determined; i. which of these hazards have caused or contributed to high-consequence injuries during the reporting period;ii. actions taken or underway to eliminate these hazards and minimize risks using the hierarchy of controls .iii.c. Any actions taken or underway to eliminate other work-related hazards and minimize risks using the hierarchy of controls.d. Whether the rates have been calculated based on 200,000 or 1,000,000 hours worked. e. Whether and, if so, why any workers have been excluded from this disclosure, including the types of worker excluded.f. Any contextual information necessary to understand how the data have been compiled, such as any standards, methodologies, and assumptions used.g. When compiling the information specified in Disclosure 403-9, the reporting organization shall:2.1 exclude fatalities in the calculation of the number and rate of high- consequence work-related injuries;2.1.1 include fatalities as a result of work-related injury in the calculation of the number and rate of recordable work-related injuries;2.1.2 include injuries as a result of commuting incidents only where the transport has been organized by the organization;2.1.3 calculate the rates based on either 200,000 or 1,000,000 hours worked, using the following formulas:2.1.4 GRI 403: Occupational Health and Safety 2018 21",
    "new_id": 772
  },
  {
    "id": 76408,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes why an organization might exclude certain workers, activities, or workplaces from its occupational health and safety management system, according to GRI 403: Occupational Health and Safety 2018?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Exclusions may occur due to the absence of legal requirements for those specific workers, activities, or workplaces.",
      "B": "Exclusions are permitted if the organization lacks sufficient occupational health and safety professionals.",
      "C": "Exclusions are justified when continual improvement processes cannot be applied to certain areas.",
      "D": "Exclusions can be made if explicitly stated standards or guidelines do not apply to those workers, activities, or workplaces.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "10",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 403_ Occupational Health and Safety 2018.pdf",
    "source_text": "Disclosure 403-1 Occupational health and safety management system The reporting organization shall report the following information for employees and for workers who are not employees but whose work and/or workplace is controlled by the organization:REQUIREMENTS A statement of whether an occupational health and safety management system has been implemented, including whether: the system has been implemented because of legal requirements and, if so, a list of the requirements;i. the system has been implemented based on recognized risk management and/or management system standards/guidelines and, if so, a list of the standards/guidelines.ii.a. A description of the scope of workers, activities, and workplaces covered by the occupational health and safety management system, and an explanation of whether and, if so, why any workers, activities, or workplaces are not covered.b. Guidance for Disclosure 403-1 Disclosure 403-1 requires the reporting organization to list any legal requirements it has followed in implementing the occupational health and safety management system. Recognized standards/guidelines for occupational health and safety management systems include international, national, and industry-specific standards. When reporting on the occupational health and safety management system, the organization can also describe:GUIDANCE the type of occupational health and safety professionals responsible for the management system, and whether these individuals are employed by the organization or engaged as consultants;• how the continual improvement of the management system is achieved, i.e., the iterative process of enhancing the management system to achieve improvements in overall occupational health and safety performance. 2• 2International Labour Organization (ILO), Guidelines on Occupational Safety and Health Management Systems, ILO-OSH , 2001. GRI 403: Occupational Health and Safety 2018 10",
    "new_id": 773
  },
  {
    "id": 76426,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the implicit relationship between hazard identification processes and the protection of vulnerable workers, as described in GRI 403: Occupational Health and Safety 2018?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Hazard identification processes are designed to remove obstacles for vulnerable workers by adapting training and information delivery methods, such as offering multilingual resources or accommodating disabilities.",
      "A": "The organization ensures equal treatment for all workers by mandating that hazard identification processes are conducted exclusively in the primary language of the workplace, regardless of individual needs.",
      "C": "The hierarchy of controls is applied uniformly across all worker groups, ensuring that no additional steps are taken to address risks faced by workers with specific vulnerabilities like language barriers or impairments.",
      "D": "Vulnerable workers are encouraged to independently manage their own safety risks without relying on adapted hazard identification processes provided by the organization.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "11",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 403_ Occupational Health and Safety 2018.pdf",
    "source_text": "Disclosure 403-2 Hazard identification, risk assessment, and incident investigation The reporting organization shall report the following information for employees and for workers who are not employees but whose work and/or workplace is controlled by the organization:REQUIREMENTS A description of the processes used to identify work-related hazards and assess risks on a routine and non-routine basis, and to apply the hierarchy of controls in order to eliminate hazards and minimize risks, including: how the organization ensures the quality of these processes, including the competency of persons who carry them out;i. how the results of these processes are used to evaluate and continually improve the occupational health and safety management system .ii.a. A description of the processes for workers to report work-related hazards and hazardous situations, and an explanation of how workers are protected against reprisals.b. A description of the policies and processes for workers to remove themselves from work situations that they believe could cause injury or ill health, and an explanation of how workers are protected against reprisals.c. A description of the processes used to investigate work-related incidents , including the processes to identify hazards and assess risks relating to the incidents, to determine corrective actions using the hierarchy of controls, and to determine improvements needed in the occupational health and safety management system.d. Guidance for Disclosure 403-2-a When describing the processes used to identify hazards and assess risks on a routine and non-routine basis, and to apply the hierarchy of controls, the reporting organization can: Guidance for Disclosures 403-2-b and 403-2-c Protecting workers against reprisals involves putting policies and processes in place that provide them with protection against intimidation, threats, or acts that could have a negative impact on their employment or work engagement, including termination, demotion, loss of compensation, discipline, and any other unfavorable treatment. Workers might face reprisals on account of their decision to either remove themselves from work situations that they believe could cause injury or ill health, or for reporting hazards or hazardous situations to their workers’ representatives, to their employer, or to regulatory authorities. Disclosure 403-2-c covers the right of workers to refuse or stop unsafe or unhealthy work. Workers have the right to remove themselves from work situations that they believe could cause them or another person injury or ill health.GUIDANCE specify whether these processes are based on legal requirements and/or recognized standards/guidelines;• describe the frequency and scope of processes undertaken on a routine basis;• describe the triggers for processes undertaken on a non-routine basis, such as changes in operating procedures or equipment; incident investigations; worker complaints or referrals; changes in workers or workflow; results of surveillance of work environment and worker health, including exposure monitoring (e.g., exposure to noise, vibration, dust);• explain how obstacles to the implementation of these processes are removed for workers who might be more vulnerable to the risk of work-related injury or ill health, such as workers facing language barriers or having visual or hearing impairments (e.g., by providing occupational health and safety training and information in a language easily understood by workers).• GRI 403: Occupational Health and Safety 2018 11",
    "new_id": 774
  },
  {
    "id": 76427,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between voluntary health promotion services and an organization's employment decisions, as outlined in GRI 403: Occupational Health and Safety 2018?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Organizations must ensure that participation in voluntary health programs does not influence decisions regarding employment or engagement of workers.",
      "A": "Voluntary health promotion programs are designed to replace occupational health and safety systems as they cover a broader range of health topics.",
      "B": "Participation in voluntary health services can be used as a criterion for promotions or other favorable treatment, provided the data is anonymized.",
      "D": "Health data from voluntary programs may be used to mitigate risks directly linked to business relationships, as long as worker privacy is maintained.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "17-18",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 403_ Occupational Health and Safety 2018.pdf",
    "source_text": "personal targets, and if incentives are provided, these are not associated with the organization’s decisions regarding employment or engagement of workers. Voluntary health promotion services and programs complement but cannot be a substitute for occupational health and safety services, programs and systems that prevent harm and protect workers from work-related injuries and ill health. Voluntary health promotion and occupational health and safety may be managed jointly by the organization, as part of an overall approach to ensuring the health and safety of workers. When describing how it facilitates workers’ access to voluntary health promotion services and programs, the organization can explain whether it allows workers to make use of these during paid working hours. The organization can also report if these services and programs are available for family members of workers. When describing its voluntary health promotion services and programs, the organization can also report: Guidance for clauses 1.5.1 and 1.5.2 Non-occupational health services and programs are expected to respect workers’ right to privacy. Organizations are expected not to use workers' participation in such services and programs, or the health data derived therefrom, as criteria for their decisions regarding the employment or engagement of workers, including termination, demotion, promotion or offering of prospects, compensation, or any other favorable or unfavorable treatment. See reference [6] in the Bibliography . References See references [1], [14], and [15] in the Bibliography .how the topics covered in these services and programs are selected, including how workers are engaged in the selection of topics;• the extent to which these services and programs include proven effective interventions (see reference [19] in the Bibliography );• the metrics used to evaluate the effectiveness of these services and programs;• the approaches used to raise awareness about these services and programs and encourage participation.• GRI 403: Occupational Health and Safety 2018 17\n\n[Page 18]\nDisclosure 403-7 Prevention and mitigation of occupational health and safety impacts directly linked by business relationships The reporting organization shall report the following information:REQUIREMENTS A description of the organization’s approach to preventing or mitigating significant negative occupational health and safety impacts that are directly linked to its operations, products, or services by its business relationships, and the related hazards and risks .a. Background In cases where an organization has no control over both the work and workplace, it still has a responsibility to make efforts, including exercising any leverage it might have, to prevent and mitigate negative occupational health and safety impacts that are directly linked to its operations, products, or services by its business relationships. For more guidance, see the Scope of ‘workers’ in this Standard section. References See reference [13] in the Bibliography .GUIDANCE GRI 403: Occupational Health and Safety 2018 18",
    "new_id": 775
  },
  {
    "id": 76428,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes why personal protective equipment (PPE) is considered the least effective measure in the hierarchy of controls, according to GRI 403: Occupational Health and Safety 2018?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Because PPE is only used when collective measures are insufficient and does not address the root cause of hazards.",
      "A": "Because PPE requires constant maintenance, which undermines its reliability as a safety measure.",
      "B": "Because PPE increases workers' exposure to high-consequence injuries due to improper use.",
      "C": "Because PPE is designed to be temporary and replaced by more permanent solutions over time.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "28",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 403_ Occupational Health and Safety 2018.pdf",
    "source_text": "employee individual who is in an employment relationship with the organization according to national law or practice exposure quantity of time spent at or the nature of contact with certain environments that possess various degrees and kinds of hazard , or proximity to a condition that might cause injury or ill health (e.g., chemicals, radiation, high pressure, noise, fire, explosives) formal agreement written document signed by all relevant parties declaring a mutual intention to abide by what is stipulated in the document Examples: a local collective bargaining agreement, a national or international framework agreement formal joint management–worker health and safety committee committee composed of management and worker representatives , whose function is integrated into an organizational structure, and which operates according to agreed written policies, procedures, and rules, and helps facilitate worker participation and consultation on matters of occupational health and safety full-time employee employee whose working hours per week, month, or year are defined according to national law or practice regarding working time health promotion process of enabling people to increase control over and improve their health Source: World Health Organization (WHO), Ottawa Charter for Health Promotion , 1986 Note: The terms ‘health promotion’, ‘wellbeing’, and ‘wellness’ are often used interchangeably. hierarchy of controls systematic approach to enhance occupational health and safety, eliminate hazards , and minimize risks Note 1: The hierarchy of controls seeks to protect workers by ranking the ways in which hazards can be controlled. Each control in the hierarchy is considered less effective than the one before it. The priority is to eliminate the hazard, which is the most effective way to control it. Note 2: The International Labour Organization (ILO) Guidelines on Occupational Safety and Health Management Systems , 2001 and ISO 45001:2018 list the following preventive and protective measures in the following order of priority: high-consequence work-related injury work-related injury that results in a fatality or in an injury from which the worker cannot, does not, or is not expected to recover fully to pre-injury health status within six months high-potential work-related incident work-related incident with a high probability of causing a high-consequence injuryE F H eliminate the hazard/risk;• substitute the hazard/risk with less hazardous processes, operations, materials, or equipment;• control the hazard/risk at source, through the use of engineering controls or organizational measures;• minimize the hazard/risk by the design of safe work systems, which include administrative control measures;• where residual hazards/risks cannot be controlled by collective measures, provide for appropriate personal protective equipment, including clothing, at no cost, and implement measures to ensure its use and maintenance.• GRI 403: Occupational Health and Safety 2018 28",
    "new_id": 776
  },
  {
    "id": 76429,
    "question": "Which scenario would most likely require an organization to provide a reason for omitting data on work-related ill health under the guidelines described in GRI 403: Occupational Health and Safety 2018?",
    "options": {
      "A": "National privacy regulations prevent the collection of workers' exposure data to IARC Group 1 carcinogens.",
      "B": "The organization identifies that all detected cases of long-latency diseases are due to exposures outside its employment period.",
      "C": "An organization exclusively follows the ILO code of practice for recording occupational diseases without exception.",
      "D": "A worker develops a short-latency illness caused by exposure to hazards unrelated to the organization’s operations.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "26",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 403_ Occupational Health and Safety 2018.pdf",
    "source_text": "of work-related ill health is not due to exposure whilst working for the organization, it can explain this in its reported information. This disclosure covers both short-latency and long-latency work-related ill health. Latency refers to the time period between exposure and the onset of ill health. Many cases of long-latency work-related ill health go undetected; if detected, they might not necessarily be due to exposures with one employer. For example, a worker might be exposed to asbestos while working for different employers over time, or might suffer from a long-latency disease that turns fatal many years after the worker has left the organization. For this reason, data on work-related ill health are to be complemented with information on work-related hazards . In some situations, an organization might not be able to collect or publicly disclose data on work-related ill health. The following are examples of these situations: In these situations, the organization is required to provide a reason for omission of these data as set out in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 . See Requirement 6 in GRI 1 for requirements on reasons for omission. Cases of ill health involving members of the public as a result of a work-related incident are not included in this disclosure, but the organization can report this information separately. An example of such an incident is when a chemical substance spill causes ill health among members of a nearby community. Guidance for Disclosure 403-10-c This disclosure includes exposures to the 'International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) Group 1’ (carcinogenic to humans), ‘IARC Group 2A’ (probably carcinogenic to humans), and ‘IARC Group 2B’ (possibly carcinogenic to humans) agents. See references [17] and [18] in the Bibliography . See Guidance for Disclosure for 403-9-c for more information on reporting on hazards. Guidance for Disclosure 403-10-d Types of worker can be based on criteria such as full-time , part-time , non-guaranteed hours , permanent or temporary basis, type or degree of control (e.g., control of work or workplace, sole or shared control), and location, among others. Guidance for Disclosure 403-10-e If the organization follows the ILO code of practice on Recording and notification of occupational accidents and diseases , it can state this in response to Disclosure 403-10-e. If the organization does not follow the ILO code of practice, it can indicate which system of rules it applies in recording and reporting work-related ill health and its relationship to the ILO code of practice. Guidance for clause 2.4.1 If the data on work-related ill health are driven primarily by certain types of ill health or disease (e.g., respiratory diseases, skin diseases) or incident (e.g., exposure to bacteria or viruses), the organization can provide a breakdown of this information. See also Guidance for clauses 2.2.1 and 2.2.2 . References See references [5], [10], and [16] in the Bibliography .National or regional regulations, contractual obligations, health insurance provisions, and other legal requirements related to the privacy of workers’ health-related information, might prevent organizations from collecting, maintaining, and publicly reporting these data.• The nature of information on workers’ exposure to psychosocial factors, largely based on self-disclosure and in many instances protected under healthcare privacy regulations, might limit organizations in disclosing this information.• GRI 403: Occupational Health and Safety 2018 26",
    "new_id": 777
  },
  {
    "id": 76554,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the distinction between 'recovery operation' and 'recycling', as described in GRI 11: Oil and Gas Sector 2021, while considering the implications for waste management?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Recovery operations prepare waste to replace new products without altering their form, whereas recycling transforms waste into new materials.",
      "A": "Recovery operations exclusively involve energy recovery, whereas recycling focuses on reprocessing materials into new products.",
      "C": "Recovery operations and recycling are interchangeable terms under the Basel Convention, differing only in regional application.",
      "D": "Recovery operations include converting waste into energy, while recycling is limited to preparing waste for reuse without changing its composition.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "69",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 11_ Oil and Gas Sector 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "geographic area that is designated, regulated, or managed to achieve specific conservation objectives recovery operation wherein products, components of products, or materials that have become waste are prepared to fulfill a purpose in place of new products, components, or materials that would otherwise have been used for that purpose Source: United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal , 1989; modified Examples: preparation for reuse , recycling Note: In the context of waste reporting, recovery operations do not include energy recovery. recycling reprocessing of products or components of products that have become waste, to make new materials Sources: United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal , 1989; modified remedy / remediation means to counteract or make good a negative impact or provision of remedy Source: United Nations (UN), The Corporate Responsibility to Respect Human Rights: An Interpretive Guide , 2012; modified Examples: apologies, financial or non-financial compensation, prevention of harm through injunctions or guarantees of non-repetition, punitive sanctions (whether criminal or administrative, such as fines), restitution, restoration, rehabilitation remuneration basic salary plus additional amounts paid to a worker Note: Examples of additional amounts paid to a worker can include those based on years of service, bonuses including cash and equity such as stocks and shares, benefit payments, overtime, time owed, and any additional allowances, such as transportation, living and childcare allowances. renewable energy source energy source that is capable of being replenished in a short time through ecological cycles or agricultural processes Examples: biomass, geothermal, hydro, solar, wind reporting period specific time period covered by the reported information Examples: fiscal year, calendar year scope of GHG emissions classification of the operational boundaries where greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions occur Note 1: Scope classifies whether GHG emissions are created by the organization itself, or are created by other related organizations, for example electricity suppliers or logistics companies. Note 2: There are three classifications of Scope: Scope 1, Scope 2 and Scope 3. Note 3: The classification of Scope derives from the World Resources Institute (WRI) and World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD), GHG Protocol Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard, Revised Edition, 2004. GRI 11: Oil and Gas Sector 2021 69",
    "new_id": 778
  },
  {
    "id": 76722,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes why the oil and gas sector's approach to contract transparency is considered an additional sector disclosure, according to GRI 11: Oil and Gas Sector 2021?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Because it integrates requirements from external standards like the EITI Standard 2019 to address specific transparency needs of the sector.",
      "A": "Because it exclusively focuses on listing beneficial owners without addressing corruption risks in the supply chain.",
      "B": "Because it mandates public publication of all contracts and licenses, with no exceptions or conditions.",
      "D": "Because it requires whistleblowing mechanisms as the sole means to manage corruption in supplier relationships.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "56",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 11_ Oil and Gas Sector 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Reporting on anti-corruption If the organization has determined anti-corruption to be a material topic , this sub-section lists the disclosures identified as relevant for reporting on the topic by the oil and gas sector. STANDARD DISCLOSURE SECTOR STANDARD REF. NO. Management of the topic GRI 3: Material Topics 2021Disclosure 3-3 Management of material topics Additional sector recommendations11.20.1 Topic Standard disclosures GRI 205: Anti- corruption 2016Disclosure 205-1 Operations assessed for risks related to corruption 11.20.2 Disclosure 205-2 Communication and training about anti-corruption policies and procedures11.20.3 Disclosure 205-3 Confirmed incidents of corruption and actions taken 11.20.4 Additional sector disclosures Describe the approach to contract transparency, including: 11.20.5 List the organization’s beneficial owners and explain how the organization identifies the beneficial owners of business partners , including joint ventures and suppliers .11.20.6 References and resources GRI 205: Anti-corruption 2016 lists authoritative intergovernmental instruments and additional references relevant to reporting on this topic. The additional authoritative instruments and references used in developing this topic, as well as resources that may be helpful for reporting on anti-corruption by the oil and gas sector are listed in the Bibliography .Describe how potential impacts of corruption or risks of corruption are managed in the organization’s supply chain .• Describe the whistleblowing and other mechanisms in place for individuals to raise concerns about corruption.• whether contracts and licenses are made publicly and, if so, where they are published;• if contracts or licenses are not publicly available, the reason for this and actions taken to make them public in the future.14• 15 14 This additional sector disclosure is based on Requirement 2.4. Contracts in the EITI Standard 2019 . Definitions for contracts and licenses can be found in the EITI Standard 2019 [366]. 15 This additional sector disclosure is based on Requirement 2.5. Beneficial ownership c., d., and f. in the EITI Standard 2019 [366]. GRI 11: Oil and Gas Sector 2021 56",
    "new_id": 779
  },
  {
    "id": 76723,
    "question": "Which of the following scenarios would most directly challenge an organization's ability to conduct due diligence, as described in GRI 11: Oil and Gas Sector 2021?",
    "options": {
      "D": "An employee accepts a gift that creates moral pressure, leading to decisions favoring private gain over organizational integrity.",
      "A": "An organization identifies all its greenhouse gas emissions but fails to implement measures for reducing Scope 1 emissions.",
      "B": "A community development program inadvertently increases economic inequality by focusing solely on job creation without addressing social impacts.",
      "C": "A company’s waste management strategy prioritizes disposal operations over recovery, resulting in lost opportunities for resource reuse.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "64",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 11_ Oil and Gas Sector 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Source: International Labour Organization (ILO), Collective Bargaining Convention , 1981 (No. 154); modified community development program plan that details actions to minimize, mitigate, or compensate for adverse social and/or economic impacts , and/or to identify opportunities or actions to enhance positive impacts of a project on the community conflict of interest situation where an individual is confronted with choosing between the requirements of their function in the organization and their other personal or professional interests or responsibilities corruption ‘abuse of entrusted power for private gain’, which can be instigated by individuals or organizations Source: Transparency International, Business Principles for Countering Bribery , 2011 Note: Corruption includes practices such as bribery, facilitation payments, fraud, extortion, collusion, and money laundering. It also includes an offer or receipt of any gift, loan, fee, reward, or other advantage to or from any person as an inducement to do something that is dishonest, illegal, or a breach of trust in the conduct of the enterprise’s business. This can include cash or in-kind benefits, such as free goods, gifts, and holidays, or special personal services provided for the purpose of an improper advantage, or that can result in moral pressure to receive such an advantage. direct (Scope 1) GHG emissions greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from sources that are owned or controlled by the organization Examples: CO2 emissions from fuel consumption Note: A GHG source is any physical unit or process that releases GHG into the atmosphere. discrimination act and result of treating persons unequally by imposing unequal burdens or denying benefits instead of treating each person fairly on the basis of individual merit Note: Discrimination can also include harassment, defined as a course of comments or actions that are unwelcome, or should reasonably be known to be unwelcome, to the person towards whom they are addressed. disposal any operation which is not recovery , even where the operation has as a secondary consequence the recovery of energy Source: European Union (EU), Waste Framework Directive , 2008 (Directive 2008/98/EC) Note: Disposal is the end-of-life management of discarded products, materials, and resources in a sink or through a chemical or thermal transformation that makes these products, materials, and resources unavailable for further use. due diligence process to identify, prevent, mitigate , and account for how the organization addresses its actual and potential negative impacts Source: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises , 2011; modified United Nations (UN), Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework , 2011; modified Note: See section 2.3 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 for more information on ‘due diligence’. GRI 11: Oil and Gas Sector 2021 64",
    "new_id": 780
  },
  {
    "id": 76725,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why an organization might choose to apply a threshold equivalent to that established for the European Union when reporting project-level payments to governments, according to GRI 11: Oil and Gas Sector 2021?",
    "options": {
      "A": "To align with international standards only when no relevant threshold has been set by the country's EITI multi-stakeholder group.",
      "B": "Because the European Union mandates this threshold for all oil and gas companies globally.",
      "C": "To ensure compliance with GRI 201: Economic Performance 2016 requirements for direct economic value reporting.",
      "D": "Because the threshold is necessary for disclosing taxes and revenues under Requirement 4.7 of the EITI Standard 2019.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "58-59",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 11_ Oil and Gas Sector 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Reporting on payments to governments If the organization has determined payments to governments to be a material topic , this sub-section lists the disclosures identified as relevant for reporting on the topic by the oil and gas sector. STANDARD DISCLOSURE SECTOR STANDARD REF. NO. Management of the topic GRI 3: Material Topics 2021Disclosure 3-3 Management of material topics 11.21.1 Topic Standard disclosures GRI 201: Economic Performance 2016Disclosure 201-1 Direct economic value generated and distributed 11.21.2 Disclosure 201-4 Financial assistance received from government Additional sector recommendations For state-owned organizations (SOE):11.21.3 GRI 207: Tax 2019Disclosure 207-1 Approach to tax 11.21.4 Disclosure 207-2 Tax governance, control, and risk management 11.21.5 Disclosure 207-3 Stakeholder engagement and management of concerns related to tax11.21.6 Disclosure 207-4 Country-by-country reporting Additional sector recommendations11.21.7 Additional sector disclosures For oil and gas purchased from the state, or from third parties appointed by the state to sell on their behalf, report:11.21.8 Report the financial relationship between the government and the SOE.17• Report a breakdown of the payments to governments levied at the project-level, by project and the following revenue streams, if applicable: The host government’s production entitlement;- National state-owned company production;- Royalties;- Dividends;- Bonuses (e.g., signature, discovery, and production bonuses);- License fees, rental fees, entry fees; and other considerations for licenses or concessions;- Any other significant payments and material benefits to government.18-• Report the value of any thresholds that have been applied and any other contextual information necessary to understand how the project-level payments to governments reported have been compiled.19• volumes and types of oil and gas purchased;• full names of the buying entity and the recipient of the payment;• payments made for the purchase.20• 17 This additional sector recommendation is based on Requirement 2.6 State participation in the EITI Standard 2019 [387]. 18 This additional sector recommendation is based on Requirement 4.1 Comprehensive disclosure of taxes and revenues and Requirement 4.7. Level of disaggregation in the EITI Standard 2019 . A definition for project can be found in the EITI Standard 2019 [387]. 19 The EITI Standard 2019 specifies that in countries implementing the EITI, the multi-stakeholder group for the country agree which payments and revenues are material, including appropriate thresholds [387]. The organization can use the relevant threshold set by the EITI multi-stakeholder group. If there is no relevant threshold set, the organization can use a threshold equivalent to that established for the European Union, which specifies that ‘Payments, whether a single payment or a series of related payments, below EUR 100,000 within the reporting period can be excluded’ [380]. 20 This additional sector disclosure is based on Requirement 4.2 Sale of the state’s share of production or other revenues collected in kind in the EITI Standard 2019 [387] and EITI Reporting Guidelines for companies buying oil, gas and minerals from governments [385]. GRI 11: Oil and Gas Sector 2021 58\n\n[Page 59]\nReferences and resources GRI 201: Economic Performance 2016 and GRI 207: Tax 2019 list authoritative intergovernmental instruments and additional references relevant to reporting on this topic. The additional authoritative instruments and references used in developing this topic, as well as resources that may be helpful for reporting on payments to governments by the oil and gas sector are listed in the Bibliography . GRI 11: Oil and Gas Sector 2021 59",
    "new_id": 781
  },
  {
    "id": 76726,
    "question": "What is the most significant implication of failing to disclose beneficial ownership structures in the oil and gas sector, as inferred from GRI 11: Oil and Gas Sector 2021?",
    "options": {
      "B": "It creates opportunities for corruption, tax avoidance, and conflicts of interest by obscuring who benefits from financial transactions.",
      "A": "It primarily undermines the ability of organizations to assess risks related to corruption within their supply chains.",
      "C": "It prevents governments from negotiating fair terms for sharing risks and rewards in extraction projects.",
      "D": "It limits public oversight of contracts, thereby reducing accountability for negotiated terms and obligations.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "55-56",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 11_ Oil and Gas Sector 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Box 7. Transparency about contracts and ownership structures Publication of government contracts is a growing practice. It is endorsed by organizations such as the United Nations, the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the International Finance Corporation (IFC), the International Bar Association, and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Contracts governing the extraction of oil and gas resources are commonly devised by organizations in the sector and governments on behalf of citizens or local communities without public oversight. Fair terms for sharing risks and rewarding benefits , including those related to a just transition, are particularly relevant because of the long-term time horizons and widespread impacts of projects. Contract transparency helps local communities hold governments and organizations accountable for their negotiated terms and obligations. It also reduces information asymmetries between governments and oil and gas organizations and helps level the playing field in negotiations. Lack of transparency about ownership structures can make it difficult to determine who benefits from financial transactions in the oil and gas sector. Beneficial ownership transparency has been identified as a significant opportunity to deter conflicts of interest , corruption, and tax avoidance and evasion. See references [ 365] and [ 369] in the Bibliography. GRI 11: Oil and Gas Sector 2021 55\n\n[Page 56]\nReporting on anti-corruption If the organization has determined anti-corruption to be a material topic , this sub-section lists the disclosures identified as relevant for reporting on the topic by the oil and gas sector. STANDARD DISCLOSURE SECTOR STANDARD REF. NO. Management of the topic GRI 3: Material Topics 2021Disclosure 3-3 Management of material topics Additional sector recommendations11.20.1 Topic Standard disclosures GRI 205: Anti- corruption 2016Disclosure 205-1 Operations assessed for risks related to corruption 11.20.2 Disclosure 205-2 Communication and training about anti-corruption policies and procedures11.20.3 Disclosure 205-3 Confirmed incidents of corruption and actions taken 11.20.4 Additional sector disclosures Describe the approach to contract transparency, including: 11.20.5 List the organization’s beneficial owners and explain how the organization identifies the beneficial owners of business partners , including joint ventures and suppliers .11.20.6 References and resources GRI 205: Anti-corruption 2016 lists authoritative intergovernmental instruments and additional references relevant to reporting on this topic. The additional authoritative instruments and references used in developing this topic, as well as resources that may be helpful for reporting on anti-corruption by the oil and gas sector are listed in the Bibliography .Describe how potential impacts of corruption or risks of corruption are managed in the organization’s supply chain .• Describe the whistleblowing and other mechanisms in place for individuals to raise concerns about corruption.• whether contracts and licenses are made publicly and, if so, where they are published;• if contracts or licenses are not publicly available, the reason for this and actions taken to make them public in the future.14• 15 14 This additional sector disclosure is based on Requirement 2.4. Contracts in the EITI Standard 2019 . Definitions for contracts and licenses can be found in the EITI Standard 2019 [366]. 15 This additional sector disclosure is based on Requirement 2.5. Beneficial ownership c., d., and f. in the EITI Standard 2019 [366]. GRI 11: Oil and Gas Sector 2021 56",
    "new_id": 782
  },
  {
    "id": 76727,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why addressing discriminatory practices in the oil and gas sector requires understanding specific regional contexts, as discussed in GRI 11: Oil and Gas Sector 2021?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Because different locations may present unique barriers or biases that disproportionately affect specific groups, necessitating tailored approaches.",
      "A": "Because local communities often lack access to the necessary skills and education required for employment in the sector.",
      "B": "Because discrimination is limited to certain regions where cultural biases are more entrenched than in others.",
      "D": "Because international laws mandate region-specific strategies for promoting diversity and inclusion.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "36-37",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 11_ Oil and Gas Sector 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Topic 11.11 Non-discrimination and equal opportunity Freedom from discrimination is a human right and a fundamental right at work. Discrimination can impose unequal burdens on individuals or deny fair opportunities on the basis of individual merit. This topic covers impacts from discrimination and practices related to diversity, inclusion, and equal opportunity. The conditions, locations, necessary skills, and types of work associated with the oil and gas sector can be a barrier for entry, hinder employee diversity, and result in discrimination . Discriminatory practices can impede access to jobs and career development, as well as lead to inequalities in treatment, remuneration , and benefits . Documented cases of discrimination in the oil and gas sector concern race, color, sex, gender, disability, religion, national extraction, and worker status. For example, jobseekers from local communities may be excluded from the hiring process because of a recruitment system bias that favors a dominant ethnic group or utilizes migrant workers. Compared to some migrant workers, local workers may receive significantly lower pay for equal work. The sector's widespread use of contract workers, often with differing terms of employment, can also be conducive to discrimination. The oil and gas sector is characterized by a significant gender imbalance. In many countries, the percentage of women working in this sector is significantly lower than the percentage of women working overall nationwide. Women are also significantly underrepresented in senior management positions. One cause of this imbalance may be that fewer women graduate with degrees pertinent to the sector, such as in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Other barriers for women and primary caregivers include fly-in fly-out (FIFO) work arrangements, long hours, and limited parental leave . Social or cultural customs, beliefs, and biases can also limit women’s access to jobs in this sector or prevent them from taking on specific roles. In addition, some resource-rich countries have laws that prevent women from working in hazardous or arduous occupations. Understanding how specific groups may be subject to discrimination across different locations where organizations in the oil and gas sector operate can help organizations effectively address discriminatory practices. Other measures, such as providing specific training to workers on preventing discrimination can help address impacts related to discrimination and create a respectful workplace. GRI 11: Oil and Gas Sector 2021 36\n\n[Page 37]\nReporting on non-discrimination and equal opportunity If the organization has determined non-discrimination and equal opportunity to be a material topic , this sub-section lists the disclosures identified as relevant for reporting on the topic by the oil and gas sector . STANDARD DISCLOSURE SECTOR STANDARD REF. NO. Management of the topic GRI 3: Material Topics 2021Disclosure 3-3 Management of material topics 11.11.1 Topic Standard disclosures GRI 202: Market Presence 2016Disclosure 202-2 Proportion of senior management hired from the local community11.11.2 GRI 401: Employment 2016Disclosure 401-3 Parental leave 11.11.3 GRI 404: Training and Education 2016Disclosure 404-1 Average hours of training per year per employee 11.11.4 GRI 405: Diversity and Equal Opportunity 2016Disclosure 405-1 Diversity of governance bodies and employees 11.11.5 Disclosure 405-2 Ratio of basic salary and remuneration 11.11.6 GRI 406: Non- discrimination 2016Disclosure 406-1 Incidents of discrimination and corrective actions taken 11.11.7 References and resources GRI 202: Market Presence 2016 , GRI 401: Employment 2016 , GRI 404: Training and Education 2016 , GRI 405: Diversity and Equal Opportunity 2016 , and GRI 406: Non-discrimination 2016 list authoritative intergovernmental instruments relevant to reporting on this topic. The additional authoritative instruments and references used in developing this topic, as well as resources that may be helpful for reporting on non-discrimination and equal opportunity by the oil and gas sector are listed in the Bibliography . GRI 11: Oil and Gas Sector 2021 37",
    "new_id": 783
  },
  {
    "id": 76728,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the implicit relationship between the reporting requirements for closure and rehabilitation plans and the engagement of workers in advance of operational changes, as described in GRI 11: Oil and Gas Sector 2021?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The requirement to describe engagement with workers implies that managing labor relations is integral to effective closure and rehabilitation planning.",
      "A": "Reporting on closure and rehabilitation is only necessary when there are no decommissioned structures left in place, as this minimizes labor-management conflicts.",
      "B": "The approach to engaging workers in advance of operational changes is intended to ensure that all sites with rehabilitation plans are already closed or in the process of being closed.",
      "C": "Financial provisions for closure and rehabilitation are directly tied to upgrading employee skills, rendering worker engagement unnecessary.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "29",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 11_ Oil and Gas Sector 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Reporting on closure and rehabilitation If the organization has determined closure and rehabilitation to be a material topic , this sub-section lists the disclosures identified as relevant for reporting on the topic by the oil and gas sector. STANDARD DISCLOSURE SECTOR STANDARD REF. NO. Management of the topic GRI 3: Material Topics 2021Disclosure 3-3 Management of material topics 11.7.1 Topic Standard disclosures GRI 402: Labor/Management Relations 2016Disclosure 402-1 Minimum notice periods regarding operational changes Additional sector recommendations11.7.2 GRI 404: Training and Education 2016Disclosure 404-2 Programs for upgrading employee skills and transition assistance programs11.7.3 Additional sector disclosures List the operational sites that: 11.7.4 List the decommissioned structures left in place and describe the rationale for leaving them in place. 11.7.5 Report the total monetary value of financial provisions for closure and rehabilitation made by the organization, including post-closure monitoring and aftercare for operational sites.11.7.6 References and resources GRI 402: Labor/Management Relations 2016 and GRI 404: Training and Education 2016 list authoritative intergovernmental instruments relevant to reporting on this topic. The additional authoritative instruments and references used in developing this topic, as well as resources that may be helpful for reporting on closure and rehabilitation by the oil and gas sector are listed in the Bibliography .Describe the approach to engaging workers in advance of significant operational changes .• have closure and rehabilitation plans in place;• have been closed;• are in the process of being closed.• GRI 11: Oil and Gas Sector 2021 29",
    "new_id": 784
  },
  {
    "id": 76729,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the relationship between 'material topics' and the broader concept of 'impact', as described in GRI 11: Oil and Gas Sector 2021?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Material topics represent the most significant impacts on the economy, environment, and people, including human rights, which can indicate the organization’s overall contribution to sustainable development.",
      "B": "Material topics are exclusively defined by their potential to generate reversible impacts, distinguishing them from other types of organizational effects.",
      "C": "Material topics encompass only those impacts that are both negative and long-term, aligning with the organization’s contribution to sustainable development.",
      "D": "Material topics are limited to impacts arising from infrastructure facilities built for public service, excluding broader economic or environmental considerations.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "67",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 11_ Oil and Gas Sector 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Source: United Nations (UN), Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework , 2011; modified Note: See Guidance to 2-23-b-i in GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 for more information on ‘human rights’. impact effect the organization has or could have on the economy, environment, and people, including on their human rights , which in turn can indicate its contribution (negative or positive) to sustainable development Note 1: Impacts can be actual or potential, negative or positive, short-term or long-term, intended or unintended, and reversible or irreversible. Note 2: See section 2.1 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 for more information on ‘impact’. indigenous peoples Indigenous Peoples are generally identified as: Source: International Labour Organization (ILO), Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention , 1989 (No. 169) infrastructure facilities built primarily to provide a public service or good rather than a commercial purpose, and from which the organization does not seek to gain direct economic benefit Examples: hospitals, roads, schools, water supply facilities local community individuals or groups of individuals living or working in areas that are affected or that could be affected by the organization’s activities Note: The local community can range from those living adjacent to the organization’s operations to those living at a distance. local supplier organization or person that provides a product or service to the reporting organization, and that is based in the same geographic market as the reporting organization (that is, no transnational payments are made to a local supplier) Note: The geographic definition of ‘local’ can include the community surrounding operations, a region within a country or a country. material topics topics that represent the organization’s most significant impacts on the economy, environment, and people, including impacts on their human rights Note: See section 2.2 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 and section 1 in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 for more information on ‘material topics’. mitigation action(s) taken to reduce the extent of a negative impact Source: United Nations (UN), The Corporate Responsibility to Respect Human Rights: An Interpretive Guide , 2012; modifiedtribal peoples in independent countries whose social, cultural and economic conditions distinguish them from other sections of the national community, and whose status is regulated wholly or partially by their own customs or traditions or by special laws or regulations;• peoples in independent countries who are regarded as indigenous on account of their descent from the populations which inhabited the country, or a geographical region to which the country belongs, at the time of conquest or colonization or the establishment of present state boundaries and who, irrespective of their legal status, retain some or all of their own social, economic, cultural and political institutions.• GRI 11: Oil and Gas Sector 2021 67",
    "new_id": 785
  },
  {
    "id": 76730,
    "question": "Which statement accurately captures the relationship between the transition to a low-carbon economy and its broader socio-economic implications, as discussed in GRI 11: Oil and Gas Sector 2021?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Regions heavily dependent on oil and gas revenues may face significant economic challenges unless proactive measures, such as reskilling programs and alternative investments, are implemented.",
      "A": "The transition will primarily benefit workers in the oil and gas sector by creating immediate opportunities for redeployment into renewable energy projects.",
      "C": "Governments are expected to fully absorb the financial burden of stranded assets, ensuring minimal disruption to local communities during the transition.",
      "D": "The decline in oil and gas demand is unlikely to affect employment levels due to the rapid expansion of lower-carbon industries compensating for job losses.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "16",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 11_ Oil and Gas Sector 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Topic 11.2 Climate adaptation, resilience, and transition Climate adaptation, resilience, and transition refer to how an organization adjusts to current and anticipated climate change-related risks, as well as how it contributes to the ability of societies and economies to withstand impacts from climate change. This topic covers an organization’s strategy in relation to the transition to a low- carbon economy and the impacts of that transition on workers and local communities. Signatories of the Paris Agreement have committed to keeping global warming ‘well below 2°C’ [ 58], yet fossil fuel reserves that are currently available globally far exceed the maximum amount that can be consumed while remaining within this limit [ 78]. This means organizations in the oil and gas sector need to establish targets for carbon emissions; modify their business models; and invest in renewable energy, technologies to remove CO from the atmosphere [ 68], and nature-based solutions to mitigate climate change, such as reforestation, afforestation, coastal and wetland restoration. Transitioning to a low-carbon economy requires organizations to set emissions targets that are consistent with the goal of limiting global warming to well below 2°C under the Paris Agreement. Actions to reduce emissions linked to the process of extracting and distributing oil and gas, which are direct (Scope 1) and energy indirect (Scope 2) GHG emissions , offer important and immediate opportunities for the sector to contribute to reducing global GHG emissions. The sector also faces expectations to address other indirect Scope 3 emissions related to the use of oil and gas products. Actions to reduce these emissions can include, for example, diversification into lower carbon businesses. Transitioning to a low-carbon economy also creates uncertainty about the future demand for oil and gas. The International Energy Agency (IEA) estimates that based on current policies, demand for oil will level off around 2030 while, in some regions, demand for gas will begin decreasing by 2040 [ 68]. In a scenario that sees the energy transition accelerate to achieve net-zero GHG emissions by 2050, demand for oil could drop by almost 75% between 2020 and 2050 and demand for gas could peak before 2030 [67]. A decrease in the demand for oil and gas will translate into lower utilization of existing production facilities and decreased development of reserves. Depending on the speed of this process, some fields and facilities may need to be re-evaluated or even written-off prematurely, becoming stranded assets. This will affect oil and gas organizations financially and generate significant impacts for workers, governments and other stakeholders. The transition may affect employment, government revenues, and economic development in regions where the sector operates. More frequent closures are less likely to be counterbalanced by openings, as has been the case in the past. Workers may face other potential impacts related to employability, reskilling, and desirable re-employment opportunities. Closure of operations without adequate provisions for decommissioning and rehabilitation may also result in an economic burden for governments and local communities (see also topic 11.7 Closure and rehabilitation ), particularly in countries where oil and gas production provides a large percentage of revenues. To achieve a just transition to a low-carbon economy, the different dependency levels of workers, local communities, and national economies on the oil and gas sector needs to be recognized, and quality jobs for those affected created [79]. Examples of actions that organizations may take to contribute to a just transition include providing adequate advance notice of closures; collaborating with governments and unions; advocating for climate consistent policy (see also topic 11.22 Public policy ); retraining, reskilling, and redeploying workers; and making alternative investments in the affected communities. Meaningful, early consultations with stakeholders and local communities have also been identified as crucial to achieving a just transition (see also topic 11.7 Closure and rehabilitation ).2 3 3IEA’s Net‐zero by 2050 scenario is designed to show what is needed by various actors by when, for the world to achieve net ‐zero energy-related and industrial process CO emissions by 2050, however it is just one possible pathway to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050 [67].2 GRI 11: Oil and Gas Sector",
    "new_id": 786
  },
  {
    "id": 76731,
    "question": "Which scenario best illustrates a situation where an organization in the oil and gas sector fails to adequately address the complexity of compensating local communities for lost access to natural resources, as discussed in GRI 11: Oil and Gas Sector 2021?",
    "options": {
      "C": "An organization provides monetary compensation that reflects only the market value of crops cultivated on the land but ignores non-material losses such as cultural or recreational opportunities.",
      "A": "An organization consults all community members, including women, ensuring free, prior, and informed consent before initiating resettlement.",
      "B": "An organization relocates a community while providing equivalent land and assets, ensuring no economic displacement occurs.",
      "D": "An organization avoids any resettlement by redesigning its project to minimize land use, even at a higher operational cost.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "46",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 11_ Oil and Gas Sector 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Topic 11.16 Land and resource rights Land and resource rights encompass the rights to use, manage and control land, fisheries, forests, and other natural resources. An organization’s impacts on the availability and accessibility of these can affect local communities and other users. This topic covers impacts from an organization’s use of land and natural resources on human rights and tenure rights, including from resettlement of local communities. Oil and gas activities require access to land for prospecting, exploration, extraction, construction, waste storage and disposal, processing, transportation, and distribution of products. This can sometimes lead to displacement of other land users, restricted access to resources, and involuntary resettlement of local communities . Impacts from land use vary according to methods of extraction, resource location, the processing required, and transportation methods. For example, onshore oil and gas pipelines can have a large footprint due to their length and safety buffer zones. Unclear rules regarding tenure rights to access, use, and control land, often lead to disputes, economic and social tensions, and conflict. Insufficient consultation with, and inadequate compensation to affected communities can also exacerbate tensions and conflict. For example, the relationship between mineral rights and land rights might be unclear; formal statutory tenure rules might overlap or conflict with traditional customary rules; legitimate rights may not be recognized or enforced; or people may lack formal documentation of their rights to land. Involuntary resettlement of local communities can involve physical displacement (e.g., relocation or shelter loss) and economic displacement (e.g., loss or access to assets), having impacts on people’s livelihoods and human rights . In such cases, organizations in the oil and gas sector may provide local communities with monetary compensation or land that is equivalent to the lost assets. However, determining the value of local communities’ access to the natural environment is complex. It includes consideration of income-generating activities, human health, and non-material aspects of quality of life, such as the loss of cultural or recreational opportunities. The amount of compensation provided may therefore not be equivalent to the loss borne. In some cases, customary titleholders to the land may not be compensated at all or only for crops that they were cultivating on the land but not for the land itself. Community members resisting resettlement may also face threats and intimidation, violent, repressive, or life- threatening removal from lands (see also topic 11.18 Conflict and security ). Addressing impacts on land and resource rights typically requires extensive and meaningful engagement between organizations in the oil and gas sector and local communities, including vulnerable groups . In cases of ineffective community consultation or in the absence of free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC), impacts on resettling communities or existing problems within a community can be exacerbated by an inadequate resettlement process or lack of transparency (see also topic 11.15 Local communities and topic 11.17 Rights of indigenous peoples ). Community consultations may also fail to include all affected members. Women, for example, are often excluded from decision-making processes related to the development a new project. GRI 11: Oil and Gas Sector 2021 46",
    "new_id": 787
  },
  {
    "id": 76732,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why transparency in first trade sales involving state-owned enterprises (SOEs) is critical for ensuring public trust and maximizing economic contributions, as outlined in GRI 11: Oil and Gas Sector 2021?",
    "options": {
      "D": "It ensures that financial transactions related to commodity trading can be cross-checked against contractual terms to prevent misallocation of revenues.",
      "A": "It allows stakeholders to monitor whether SOEs are prioritizing local employment over foreign investments.",
      "B": "It guarantees that taxes collected from oil and gas activities will automatically increase due to improved reporting mechanisms.",
      "C": "It provides governments with a legal framework to nationalize all extractive industries, thereby eliminating private sector involvement.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "57",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 11_ Oil and Gas Sector 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Topic 11.21 Payments to governments Lack of transparency about payments to governments can contribute to inefficient management of public funds, illicit financial flows, and corruption. This topic covers impacts from an organization's practices related to payments to governments and the organization’s approach to transparency of such payments. Organizations in the oil and gas sector deal with a large number of complex financial transactions and make a variety of payments to governments. These include commodity trading revenues, exploration and production licensing fees, taxes and royalties, signature, discovery and production bonuses. Transparency of payments to governments can help distinguish the economic importance of the oil and gas sector to countries, enable public debate, and inform government decision-making. It can also provide insights into the terms of contracts, increase government accountability, and strengthen revenue collection and management. Insufficient transparency of these payments, on the other hand, can impede detection of misallocation of revenues and corruption . Taxes, royalties, and other payments from organizations in the oil and gas sector are an important source of investment and revenue for local communities , countries, and regions (see topic 11.14 Economic impacts ). However, aggressive tax practices or tax non-compliance can lead to diminished tax revenues in countries where the organizations operate. This can be particularly damaging for developing countries that may lack or have high needs for public revenue. The sector also receives substantial subsidies from governments in many countries, which are of great interest to stakeholders , such as investors or civil society. When disclosing information on payments to governments, organizations in the oil and gas sector often report aggregate payments at an organizational level. However, this can provide limited insight into payments made in each country or related to a project. Reporting country-level and project-level payments enables comparison of the payments made to those stipulated in fiscal, legal, and contractual terms, as well as to assess the financial contribution of oil and gas activities to host countries and communities. It can also enable governments to address tax avoidance and evasion, correct information asymmetry and level the playing field for governments when negotiating contracts. Box 8. State-owned enterprises A state-owned enterprise (SOE) is, according to the Extractives Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI), ‘a wholly or majority government-owned company that is engaged in extractive activities on behalf of the government’ (see reference [ 386] in the Bibliography). SOEs often have special status, which can involve financial advantages and preferential treatment. SOEs often sell shares of the produced resource to buyers, including commodity trading companies. This first trade is an important revenue stream for countries and can involve a high volume of financial transactions. However, data on these transactions is often scarce or inaccessible. The first trade can be subject to trade mispricing in the form of under-invoicing of exports or over-invoicing of imports to obtain financial gain. Other risks may result from selecting buyers and allocation of sales contracts (which can involve bribery and conflicts of interest ) and moving income to a state treasury, potentially causing misallocation of revenues or generating public mistrust of revenue management (see also topic 11.20 Anti-corruption ). Transparency in the operations and objectives of SOEs is crucial for monitoring their performance and maximizing their economic and social contributions.16 16 First trade is defined by the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative as “the sale of the state’s share of production by government and state- owned enterprises” [384]. GRI 11: Oil and Gas Sector 2021 57",
    "new_id": 788
  },
  {
    "id": 76734,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why addressing forced labor in the oil and gas sector poses significant challenges, particularly concerning accountability and operational complexity, as described in GRI 11: Oil and Gas Sector 2021?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Complex supply chains, coupled with layers of management and external crewing companies, obscure accountability and hinder effective detection of forced labor.",
      "B": "The sector's reliance on state-owned enterprises ensures compliance with international human rights standards, minimizing risks of forced labor.",
      "C": "Forced labor is primarily an issue in hospitality services rather than in core activities like extraction or transportation, making it easier to isolate and address.",
      "D": "Legislation requiring public reporting has eliminated the occurrence of forced labor by imposing strict penalties on non-compliant organizations.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "38",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 11_ Oil and Gas Sector 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Topic 11.12 Forced labor and modern slavery Forced labor is defined as all work or service which is exacted from any person under the menace of penalty and for which a person has not offered themselves voluntarily. Freedom from forced labor is a human right and a fundamental right at work. This topic covers an organization’s approach to identifying and addressing forced labor and modern slavery. As part of a global effort, several governments have issued legislation requiring public reporting on addressing traditional and emerging practices of forced labor , including modern slavery. Such legislation applies to many organizations in the oil and gas sector. The large number of suppliers that organizations in the oil and gas sector interact with may include those operating in countries with low rates of enforcement of human rights and those lacking the capacity to prevent and mitigate negative human rights impacts within their own supply chains. Through their supply chains , oil and gas organizations may therefore be involved with violations of human rights and other instances of exploitation. Oil and gas organizations may also be involved with incidences of forced labor and modern slavery as a result of their joint ventures and other business relationships , including those with state-owned enterprises in countries where international human rights violations are documented. Conducting due diligence within the large and complex supply chains that commonly exist in the sector may also pose difficulties for detecting and addressing incidents of forced labor and modern slavery. Documented cases have shown forced labor and modern slavery in the supply of services to oil fields and offshore platforms, such as in catering, cleaning, construction, maintenance, and waste management, as well as in marine and land transportation activities. For example, a higher risk of human rights violations may be found aboard ships registered in countries other than the country of the ship’s beneficial owner. In such cases, layers of management and the use of external crewing companies can obscure accountability for ensuring respect of human rights. In other situations, inadequate arrangements by the employer to cover flight costs or facilitate border-crossing requirements at the end of a contract period have left ship workers stranded onboard and vulnerable to exploitation. Offshore oil and gas workers can also be at higher risk of forced labor due to the isolation of extraction sites, making it challenging for organizations in the sector to reinforce measures countering exploitation. Migrant workers can also face higher risks of modern slavery when dealing with third-party employment agencies, such as those who have been found to overcharge workers for visas and flights or to demand recruitment costs be paid by employees rather than employers. Box 5. Impacts on children’s rights The risk of child labor in the oil and gas sector arises mainly through an organization’s business relationships and complex supply chains. Child labor may occur in activities that service the oil and gas sector or its workers (e.g., child labor in hospitality services or in specific sector activities, such as the manufacturing). Suppliers may operate in countries with minimum working ages that are below the minimum age set by the International Labour Organization. Other impacts on children’s rights and well-being can result from the proximity of an oil or gas project to local communities ( topic 11.15 ). These impacts can include sexual violence, environmental impacts, or impacts resulting from land use and resettlement. Parents’ working conditions, including irregular working hours, long shifts, and fly-in fly-out (FIFO) arrangements, can also have impacts on children (see also topic 11.10 Employment practices ). Child labor is addressed in GRI 408: Child Labor 2016 . GRI 11: Oil and Gas Sector 2021 38",
    "new_id": 789
  },
  {
    "id": 76736,
    "question": "Which of the following most accurately reflects the implicit relationship between the Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights (2000) and subsequent guidance documents addressing conflict and security in extractive industries, as outlined in GRI 11: Oil and Gas Sector 2021?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Later guidance documents, like those by IOGP and ICMM, expanded upon the Voluntary Principles to provide more specific operational tools for companies.",
      "A": "The Voluntary Principles were directly incorporated into legally binding frameworks, such as the OHCHR’s Basic Principles on the Use of Force.",
      "C": "The Voluntary Principles replaced earlier efforts by organizations like the UN and EU to address land and natural resource conflicts.",
      "D": "Subsequent publications, including those by UNEP and IHRB, focused exclusively on environmental concerns rather than human rights or security issues.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "89",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 11_ Oil and Gas Sector 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Topic 11.18 Conflict and security Authoritative instruments: Additional references: Resources:European Union and United Nations Interagency Framework Team for Preventive Action, Toolkit and Guidance for Preventing and Managing Land and Natural Resources Conflict: Extractive Industries and Conflict , 2012.339. Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCR), Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials , 1990.340. Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCR), Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials , 1979.341. Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights, Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights , 2000. 342. Institute for Human Rights and Business (IHRB), From Red to Green Flags: The Corporate Responsibility to Respect Human Rights in High-Risk Countries , 2011.343. Geneva Centre for the Democratic Control of Armed Forces (DCAF), International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), Addressing Security and Human Rights Challenges in Complex Environments: Toolkit , 3rd ed., 2015.344. Global Compact Network Canada, Auditing Implementation of Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights , 2016.345. International Alert, Human rights due diligence in conflict-affected settings: Guidance for extractive industries , 2018.346. International Association of Oil & Gas Producers (IOGP), Conducting security risk assessments (SRA) in dynamic threat environments , 2016.347. International Association of Oil & Gas Producers (IOGP), Integrating security in major projects – principles and guidelines , 2014.348. International Association of Oil & Gas Producers (IOGP), Security management system – Processes and concepts in security management , 2014.349. International Council on Mining & Metals (ICMM), International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), International Finance Corporation (IFC), and International Petroleum Industry Environmental Conservation Association (IPIECA), Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights: Implementation Guidance Tools , 2011.350. International Petroleum Industry Environmental Conservation Association (IPIECA), Guide to Operating in Areas of Conflict , 2008.351. K. Neu and D. Avant, Overview of the relationship between PMSCs and extractive industry companies from the Private Security Events Database , 2019.352. Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), Call for submissions: the relationship between private military and security companies and extractive industry companies from a human rights perspective in law and practice , 2019.353. Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCR), Private military and security companies in extractive industries – impact on human rights , 2017.354. United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), From Conflict to Peacebuilding: The Role of Natural Resources and the Environment , 2009.355. United Nations Environment Programme Financial Initiative (UNEP FI), Human Rights Guidance Tool for the Financial Sector, Oil and Gas , unepfi.org/humanrightstoolkit/oil.php , accessed on 31 May 2020.356. International Alert, Human rights due diligence in conflict-affected settings: Guidance for extractive industries, 2018.357. International Council on Mining & Metals (ICMM), International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), International Finance Corporation (IFC), and International Petroleum Industry Environmental Conservation Association (IPIECA), Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights: Implementation Guidance Tools, 2011.358. GRI 11: Oil and Gas Sector 2021 89",
    "new_id": 790
  },
  {
    "id": 76738,
    "question": "Which scenario best illustrates a due diligence process that aligns with the described framework for addressing actual and potential negative impacts, as outlined in GRI 11: Oil and Gas Sector 2021?",
    "options": {
      "C": "A company identifies potential discriminatory practices within its hiring process and implements training programs, while also tracking outcomes to prevent future issues.",
      "A": "An organization conducts an internal audit to ensure compliance with environmental laws but does not engage with external stakeholders to assess broader societal effects.",
      "B": "A corporation avoids reporting on any negative impacts by focusing solely on promoting its charitable contributions to local communities.",
      "D": "A firm delegates responsibility for mitigating negative impacts entirely to third-party contractors without monitoring or verifying their actions.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "64",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 11_ Oil and Gas Sector 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Source: International Labour Organization (ILO), Collective Bargaining Convention , 1981 (No. 154); modified community development program plan that details actions to minimize, mitigate, or compensate for adverse social and/or economic impacts , and/or to identify opportunities or actions to enhance positive impacts of a project on the community conflict of interest situation where an individual is confronted with choosing between the requirements of their function in the organization and their other personal or professional interests or responsibilities corruption ‘abuse of entrusted power for private gain’, which can be instigated by individuals or organizations Source: Transparency International, Business Principles for Countering Bribery , 2011 Note: Corruption includes practices such as bribery, facilitation payments, fraud, extortion, collusion, and money laundering. It also includes an offer or receipt of any gift, loan, fee, reward, or other advantage to or from any person as an inducement to do something that is dishonest, illegal, or a breach of trust in the conduct of the enterprise’s business. This can include cash or in-kind benefits, such as free goods, gifts, and holidays, or special personal services provided for the purpose of an improper advantage, or that can result in moral pressure to receive such an advantage. direct (Scope 1) GHG emissions greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from sources that are owned or controlled by the organization Examples: CO2 emissions from fuel consumption Note: A GHG source is any physical unit or process that releases GHG into the atmosphere. discrimination act and result of treating persons unequally by imposing unequal burdens or denying benefits instead of treating each person fairly on the basis of individual merit Note: Discrimination can also include harassment, defined as a course of comments or actions that are unwelcome, or should reasonably be known to be unwelcome, to the person towards whom they are addressed. disposal any operation which is not recovery , even where the operation has as a secondary consequence the recovery of energy Source: European Union (EU), Waste Framework Directive , 2008 (Directive 2008/98/EC) Note: Disposal is the end-of-life management of discarded products, materials, and resources in a sink or through a chemical or thermal transformation that makes these products, materials, and resources unavailable for further use. due diligence process to identify, prevent, mitigate , and account for how the organization addresses its actual and potential negative impacts Source: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises , 2011; modified United Nations (UN), Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework , 2011; modified Note: See section 2.3 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 for more information on ‘due diligence’. GRI 11: Oil and Gas Sector 2021 64",
    "new_id": 791
  },
  {
    "id": 76783,
    "question": "Which of the following scenarios would lead to a violation of the rules for calculating percentages of gross global Scope 1 GHG emissions as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 32: Electric Utilities & Power Generators?",
    "options": {
      "D": "An entity accounts for emissions subject to both the California Cap-and-Trade and EU ETS systems separately in its calculation of emissions covered by limiting regulations.",
      "A": "An entity excludes emissions covered under voluntary trading systems when calculating the percentage of emissions subject to reporting-based regulations.",
      "B": "An entity includes emissions covered under a carbon tax system but excludes those covered only by a mandatory public disclosure rule when calculating emissions-limiting regulation coverage.",
      "C": "An entity calculates the percentage of emissions covered by reporting-based regulations without excluding emissions also regulated by limiting mechanisms.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "8",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol32.pdf",
    "source_text": "2.3 GHG emissions data shall be consolidated and disclosed according to the approach with which the entity consolidates its financial reporting data, which generally is aligned with the ‘financial control ’ approach defined by the GHG Protocol, and the approach published by the Climate Disclosure Standards Board (CDSB) that is described in REQ-07, ‘Organisational boundary ’, of the CDSB Framework for reporting environmental and social information . 3 The entity shall disclose (2) the percentage of its gross global Scope 1 GHG emissions covered under an emissions-limiting regulation or programme intended to limit or reduce emissions directly, such as cap-and-trade schemes, carbon tax/fee systems, and other emissions control (for example, command-and-control approach) and permit-based mechanisms. 3.1 Examples of emissions-limiting regulations include: 3.1.1 California Cap-and-Trade (California Global Warming Solutions Act) 3.1.2 European Union Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS) 3.1.3 Quebec Cap-and-Trade (Quebec Environment Quality Act) 3.2 The percentage shall be calculated as the total amount of gross global Scope 1 GHG emissions (CO 2-e) covered under emissions-limiting regulations divided by the total amount of gross global Scope 1 GHG emissions (CO 2-e). 3.2.1 For emissions subject to more than one emissions-limiting regulation, the entity shall not account for those emissions more than once. 3.3 The scope of emissions-limiting regulations excludes emissions covered under voluntary emissions-limiting regulations (for example, voluntary trading systems), as well as reporting-based regulations. 4 The entity shall disclose (3) the percentage of its gross global Scope 1 GHG emissions that are covered under emissions reporting-based regulations. 4.1 Emissions reporting-based regulations are defined as regulations that demand the disclosure of GHG emissions data to regulators and/or the public, but for which there is no limit, cost, target, or controls on the amount of emissions generated. 4.2 The percentage shall be calculated as the total amount of gross global Scope 1 GHG emissions (CO 2-e) that are covered under emissions reporting- based regulations divided by the total amount of gross global Scope 1 GHG emissions (CO 2-e). 4.2.1 For emissions that are subject to more than one emissions reporting-based regulation, the entity shall not account for those emissions more than once. 4.3 The scope of emissions reporting-based regulations does not exclude emissions covered under emissions-limiting regulations.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 7",
    "new_id": 792
  },
  {
    "id": 76804,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between water consumption, withdrawal disclosures, and their implications for regulatory compliance, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 32: Electric Utilities & Power Generators?",
    "options": {
      "A": "An entity must disclose both total water withdrawn and total water consumed, including specific percentages for regions with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress, to address potential regulatory and ecological concerns.",
      "B": "Entities are required to prioritize investments in efficient water-usage systems only in regions classified as having Low or Medium Baseline Water Stress.",
      "C": "The disclosure of water consumed in regions with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress is optional if the entity can prove its operations do not significantly impact biodiversity.",
      "D": "Water obtained from municipal supplies compliant with drinking water regulations is exempt from being classified as freshwater under all circumstances.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "12",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol32.pdf",
    "source_text": "especially in regions with high baseline water stress. Furthermore, entities must manage the growing number of regulations related to the significant biodiversity impacts that such large withdrawals may cause. To mitigate these risks, entities can invest both in more efficient water-usage systems for plants, and place strategic priority on assessing long-term water availability, as well as water-related biodiversity risks, when siting new power plants. Metrics IF-EU-140a.1. (1) Total water withdrawn, (2) total water consumed; percentage of each in regions with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress 1 The entity shall disclose the amount of water, in thousands of cubic metres, withdrawn from all sources. 1.1 Water sources include surface water (including water from wetlands, rivers, lakes and oceans), groundwater, rainwater collected directly and stored by the entity, and water and wastewater obtained from municipal water supplies, water utilities or other entities. 2 The entity may disclose portions of its supply by source if, for example, significant portions of withdrawals are from non-freshwater sources. 2.1 Fresh water may be defined according to the local laws and regulations where the entity operates. If no legal definition exists, fresh water shall be considered to be water that has less than 1,000 parts per million of dissolved solids. 2.2 Water obtained from a water utility in compliance with jurisdictional drinking water regulations can be assumed to meet the definition of fresh water. 3 The entity shall disclose the amount of water, in thousands of cubic metres, consumed in its operations. 3.1 Water consumption is defined as: 3.1.1 Water that evaporates during withdrawal, use and discharge 3.1.2 Water that is directly or indirectly incorporated into the entity ’s product or service 3.1.3 Water that does not otherwise return to the same catchment area from which it was withdrawn, such as water returned to another catchment area or the sea 4 The entity shall analyse all its operations for water risks and identify activities that withdraw and consume water in locations with High (40 –80%) or Extremely High (>80%) Baseline Water Stress as classified by the World Resources Institute ’s (WRI) Water Risk Atlas tool, Aqueduct. 5 The entity shall disclose water withdrawn in locations with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress as a percentage of the total water withdrawn. 6 The entity shall disclose water consumed in locations with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress as a percentage of the total water consumed.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 11",
    "new_id": 793
  },
  {
    "id": 76806,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between the calculation of T_MED and its implications for identifying major event days, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 32: Electric Utilities & Power Generators?",
    "options": {
      "B": "The replacement of zero SAIDI values with the lowest non-zero value in the dataset is a procedural step to enable logarithmic calculations, which directly impacts the precision of T_MED.",
      "A": "T_MED is calculated using a fixed threshold value derived from the highest daily SAIDI over five years, ensuring consistent identification of major event days.",
      "C": "Major event days are determined by comparing daily SAIDI values to T_MED, which is computed as e^(α+β), where α represents the median and β the variance of the logarithms of daily SAIDI values.",
      "D": "The calculation of T_MED relies solely on the standard deviation of raw daily SAIDI values, making it robust against variations in data distribution.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "21-22",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol32.pdf",
    "source_text": "Metrics IF-EU-550a.1. Number of incidents of non-compliance with physical or cybersecurity standards or regulations 1 The entity shall disclose the total number of instances of non-compliance with physical or cybersecurity standards or regulations applicable to electricity infrastructure owned or operated by the entity. 1.1 The scope of physical or cybersecurity standards or regulations includes mandatory, enforceable standards and regulations intended to mitigate physical or cybersecurity risks related to the reliability or resiliency of electricity infrastructure, including the electricity grid. 1.1.1 The entity may disclose instances of non-compliance with voluntary physical or cybersecurity standards or regulations. IF-EU-550a.2. (1) System Average Interruption Duration Index (SAIDI), (2) System Average Interruption Frequency Index (SAIFI), and (3) Customer Average Interruption Duration Index (CAIDI), inclusive of major event days 1 The entity shall disclose its (1) System Average Interruption Duration Index (SAIDI), in minutes. 1.1 The SAIDI is defined as the total duration of an interruption for the average customer during the period under reporting. 1.2 The entity shall calculate its SAIDI as the total number of customers interrupted multiplied by the duration of interruptions (restoration time) divided by the total number of customers served, written as ∑(ri × N i) / N T 1.2.1∑ = Summation function 1.2.2 r i = Restoration time, in minutes 1.2.3 N i = Total number of customers interrupted 1.2.4 N T = Total number of customers served 2 The entity shall disclose its (2) System Average Interruption Frequency Index (SAIFI). 2.1 SAIFI is defined as the average number of times that a system customer experiences an outage during the period under reporting. 2.2 The entity shall calculate its SAIFI as the total number of customers interrupted divided by the total number of customers served, written as ∑ (Ni ) / N T 2.2.1∑ = Summation function 2.2.2 Ni= Total number of customers interrupted 2.2.3 NT = Total number of customers servedIFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 20 © IFRS Foundation\n\n[Page 22]\n3 The entity shall disclose its (3) Customer Average Interruption Duration Index (CAIDI). 3.1 The CAIDI is defined as the average amount of time required to restore service once an outage has occurred. 3.2 The entity shall calculate its CAIDI as the total number of customers interrupted multiplied by the duration of interruptions (restoration time in minutes) divided by the sum of the number of customers interrupted, written as ∑(Ni × ri) / ∑(Ni) 3.2.1∑ = Summation function 3.2.2 r i = Restoration time, in minutes 3.2.3 N i = Total number of customers interrupted 4 The entity shall disclose its SAIDI, SAIFI and CAIDI inclusive of major event days, where: 4.1 Major event days are defined, according to IEEE Std 1366, as days in which the daily SAIDI exceeds a threshold value, T MED, where T MED is calculated as follows: 4.1.1 The entity should collect values of daily SAIDI for five sequential years, ending on the last day of the last complete reporting period. If fewer than five years of historical data are available, use all the available historical data. 4.1.2 If any day in the data set has a value of zero for SAIDI, replace it with the lowest non-zero SAIDI value in the data set —this permits taking the logarithm of every day. 4.1.3 Take the natural logarithm (ln) of each daily SAIDI value in the data set. 4.1.4 Find α (Alpha), the average of the logarithms (also known as the logaverage) of the data set. 4.1.5 Find β (Beta), the standard deviation of the logarithms (also known as the log-average) of the data set. 4.1.6 Compute the major event day threshold, T MED, using the equation: TMED = e(α+β) . 4.1.7 Any day with daily SAIDI greater than the threshold value T MED that occurs during the subsequent reporting period is a major event day. Note to IF-EU-550a.2 1 The entity shall discuss notable service disruptions such as those that affected a significant number of customers, or disruptions of extended duration. 2 For such disruptions, the entity should provide:IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 21",
    "new_id": 794
  },
  {
    "id": 76813,
    "question": "Which scenario best illustrates a case where the concept of 'disposal' as defined in the GRI Standards Glossary is NOT applicable?",
    "options": {
      "C": "A company incinerates waste materials, recovering energy as a secondary consequence.",
      "A": "An organization chemically transforms discarded products, rendering them permanently unusable for further processes.",
      "B": "A factory reduces its energy consumption by outsourcing production activities to another facility.",
      "D": "A business discharges untreated wastewater into a river without any recovery of resources.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "7",
    "ref_doc": "GRI Standards Glossary 2022.pdf",
    "source_text": "disposal any operation which is not recovery , even where the operation has as a secondary consequence the recovery of energy Source: European Union (EU), Waste Framework Directive , 2008 (Directive 2008/98/EC) Note: Disposal is the end-of-life management of discarded products, materials, and resources in a sink or through a chemical or thermal transformation that makes these products, materials, and resources unavailable for further use. due diligence process to identify, prevent, mitigate , and account for how the organization addresses its actual and potential negative impacts Source: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises , 2011; modified United Nations (UN), Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework , 2011; modified Note: See section 2.3 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 for more information on ‘due diligence’. effluent treated or untreated wastewater that is discharged Source: Alliance for Water Stewardship (AWS), AWS International Water Stewardship Standard, Version 1.0 , 2014 employee individual who is in an employment relationship with the organization according to national law or practice employee category breakdown of employees by level (such as senior management, middle management) and function (such as technical, administrative, production) Note: This information is derived from the organization’s own human resources system. employee turnover employees who leave the organization voluntarily or due to dismissal, retirement, or death in service energy indirect (Scope 2) GHG emissions greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions that result from the generation of purchased or acquired electricity, heating, cooling, and steam consumed by the organization energy reduction amount of energy no longer used or needed to carry out the same processes or tasks Note: Energy reduction does not include overall reduction in energy consumption from reducing production capacity or outsourcing organizational activities. entry level wage full-time wage in the lowest employment category Note: Intern or apprentice wages are not considered entry level wages. GRI Standards Glossary 7",
    "new_id": 795
  },
  {
    "id": 76816,
    "question": "Which scenario most accurately reflects the criteria for determining whether an injury or illness is work-related based on the nuanced conditions outlined in the GRI Standards Glossary?",
    "options": {
      "D": "A worker develops a mental illness after prolonged exposure to workplace harassment, supported by a licensed healthcare professional's opinion confirming its work-relatedness.",
      "A": "A worker experiences a seizure due to epilepsy while at their workplace, and it is unrelated to their job duties.",
      "B": "A worker suffers a heart attack at home while preparing for a work-related virtual meeting, with no prior notification or medical evidence linking it to work stress.",
      "C": "A worker has a car accident during their daily commute to the office, despite driving being unrelated to their job responsibilities.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "22-23",
    "ref_doc": "GRI Standards Glossary 2022.pdf",
    "source_text": "work-related incident occurrence arising out of or in the course of work that could or does result in injury or ill health Source: International Organization for Standardization. ISO 45001:2018. Occupational health and safety management systems — Requirements with guidance for use. Geneva: ISO, 2018; modified Definitions that are based on or come from the ISO 14046:2014 and ISO 45001:2018 standards are reproduced with the permission of the International Organization for Standardization, ISO. Copyright remains with ISO. Note 1: Incidents might be due to, for example, electrical problems, explosion, fire; overflow, overturning, leakage, flow; breakage, bursting, splitting; loss of control, slipping, stumbling and falling; body movement without stress; body movement under/with stress; shock, fright; workplace violence or harassment (e.g., sexual harassment). Note 2: An incident that results in injury or ill health is often referred to as an ‘accident’. An incident that has the potential to result in injury or ill health but where none occurs is often referred to as a ‘ close call', ‘near-miss’, or ‘near-hit’. work-related injury or ill health negative impacts on health arising from exposure to hazards at work Source: International Labour Organization (ILO), Guidelines on Occupational Safety and Health Management Systems, ILO-OSH 2001 , 2001; modified Note 1: ‘Ill health’ indicates damage to health and includes diseases, illnesses, and disorders. The terms ‘disease’, ‘illness’, and ‘disorder’ are often used interchangeably and refer to conditions with specific symptoms and diagnoses. Note 2: Work-related injuries and ill health are those that arise from exposure to hazards at work. Other types of incident can occur that are not connected with the work itself. For example, the following incidents are not considered to be work related: Note 3: Traveling for work: Injuries and ill health that occur while a worker is traveling are work related if, at the time of the injury or ill health, the worker was engaged in work activities ‘in the interest of the employer’. Examples of such activities include traveling to and from customer contacts; conducting job tasks; and entertaining or being entertained to transact, discuss, or promote business (at the direction of the employer). Working at home: Injuries and ill health that occur when working at home are work related if the injury or ill health occurs while the worker is performing work at home, and the injury or ill health is directly related to the performance of work rather than the general home environment or setting. Mental illness: A mental illness is considered to be work related if it has been notified voluntarily by the worker and is supported by an opinion from a licensed healthcare professional with appropriate training and experience stating that the illness is work related. For more guidance on determining ‘work-relatedness’, see the United States Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Determination of work-relatedness 1904.5 , https://www.osha.gov/pls/ oshaweb/owadisp.show_document? p_table=STANDARDS&p_id=9636 , accessed on 1 June 2018. Note 4: The terms ‘occupational’ and ‘work-related’ are often used interchangeably.a worker suffers a heart attack while at work that is unconnected with work;• a worker driving to or from work is injured in a car accident (where driving is not part of the work, and where the transport has not been organized by the employer);• a worker with epilepsy has a seizure at work that is unconnected with work.• GRI Standards Glossary 22\n\n[Page 23]\nPO Box 10039 1001 EA Amsterdam The Netherlands www.globalreporting.org",
    "new_id": 796
  },
  {
    "id": 76822,
    "question": "Which situation would most likely require an organization to report under Disclosure 304-2 but not necessarily under Disclosure 304-3, according to GRI 304: Biodiversity 2016?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The organization's supply chain introduces invasive species into a sensitive ecosystem, causing irreversible ecological damage over a decade.",
      "B": "The organization actively restores a degraded wetland habitat affected by its operations and verifies success through independent professionals.",
      "C": "The organization protects a formally designated biodiversity hotspot near its operational site by partnering with external conservation groups.",
      "D": "The organization converts a large area of forested land into agricultural use, leading to permanent loss of native species and disruption of groundwater levels.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "9-10",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 304_ Biodiversity 2016.pdf",
    "source_text": "Disclosure 304-2 Significant impacts of activities, products and services on biodiversity The reporting organization shall report the following information:REQUIREMENTS Nature of significant direct and indirect impacts on biodiversity with reference to one or more of the following: Construction or use of manufacturing plants, mines, and transport infrastructure; i. Pollution (introduction of substances that do not naturally occur in the habitat from point and non-point sources);ii. Introduction of invasive species, pests, and pathogens; iii. Reduction of species; iv. Habitat conversion; v. Changes in ecological processes outside the natural range of variation (such as salinity or changes in groundwater level).vi.a. Significant direct and indirect positive and negative impacts with reference to the following: Species affected; i. Extent of areas impacted; ii. Duration of impacts; iii. Reversibility or irreversibility of the impacts. iv.b. Guidance for Disclosure 304-2 Indirect impacts on biodiversity can include impacts in the supply chain. Areas of impact are not limited to areas that are formally protected and include consideration of impacts on buffer zones, as well as formally designated areas of special importance or sensitivity. Background This disclosure provides the background for understanding (and developing) an organization’s strategy to mitigate significant direct and indirect impacts on biodiversity. By presenting structured and qualitative information, the disclosure enables comparison of the relative size, scale, and nature of impacts over time and across organizations.GUIDANCE GRI 304: Biodiversity 2016 9\n\n[Page 10]\nDisclosure 304-3 Habitats protected or restored The reporting organization shall report the following information:REQUIREMENTS Size and location of all habitat areas protected or restored , and whether the success of the restoration measure was or is approved by independent external professionals.a. Whether partnerships exist with third parties to protect or restore habitat areas distinct from where the organization has overseen and implemented restoration or protection measures.b. Status of each area based on its condition at the close of the reporting period. c. Standards, methodologies, and assumptions used. d. RECOMMENDATIONSWhen compiling the information specified in Disclosure 304-3, the reporting organization should align the information presented in this disclosure with regulatory or license requirements for the protection or restoration of habitats, if applicable.2.2 Guidance for Disclosure 304-3 This disclosure addresses the extent of an organization’s prevention and remediation activities with respect to its impacts on biodiversity. This disclosure refers to areas where remediation has been completed or where the area is actively protected. Areas where operations are still active can be counted if they conform to the definitions of ‘ area restored ’ or ‘area protected ’.GUIDANCE GRI 304: Biodiversity 2016 10",
    "new_id": 797
  },
  {
    "id": 77067,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes the relationship between emissions reporting-based regulations and emissions-limiting regulations as it pertains to double-counting, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 38: Waste Management?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Double-counting is explicitly prohibited under both types of regulations when emissions are subject to overlapping requirements.",
      "A": "Emissions reporting-based regulations allow for double-counting, while emissions-limiting regulations strictly prohibit it.",
      "C": "Emissions reporting-based regulations exclude emissions covered by emissions-limiting regulations, thus avoiding any potential for double-counting.",
      "D": "Double-counting is not addressed in emissions reporting-based regulations but is explicitly disallowed in emissions-limiting regulations.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "7",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol38.pdf",
    "source_text": "3.1.2 European Union Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS) 3.1.3 Quebec Cap-and-Trade (Quebec Environment Quality Act) 3.2 The percentage shall be calculated as the total amount of gross global Scope 1 GHG emissions (CO 2-e) covered under emissions-limiting regulations divided by the total amount of gross global Scope 1 GHG emissions (CO 2-e). 3.2.1 For emissions subject to more than one emissions-limiting regulation, the entity shall not account for those emissions more than once. 3.3 The scope of emissions-limiting regulations excludes emissions covered under voluntary emissions-limiting regulations (for example, voluntary trading systems), as well as reporting-based regulations. 4 The entity shall disclose (3) the percentage of its gross global Scope 1 GHG emissions covered under emissions reporting-based regulations. 4.1 Emissions reporting-based regulations are defined as regulations that demand the disclosure of GHG emissions data to regulators or the public, but for which no limit, cost, target or controls on the amount of emissions generated exists. 4.2 The percentage shall be calculated as the total amount of gross global Scope 1 GHG emissions (CO 2-e) covered under emissions reporting-based regulations divided by the total amount of gross global Scope 1 GHG emissions (CO 2-e). 4.2.1 For emissions subject to more than one emissions reporting-based regulation, the entity shall not account for those emissions more than once. 4.3 The scope of emissions reporting-based regulations does not exclude emissions covered under emissions-limiting regulations. 5 The entity may discuss any change in its emissions from the previous reporting period, including whether the change was because of emissions reductions, divestment, acquisition, mergers, changes in output or changes in calculation methodology. 6 In the case that current reporting of GHG emissions to the CDP or other entity (for example, a national regulatory disclosure programme) differs in terms of the scope and consolidation approach used, the entity may disclose those emissions. However, primary disclosure shall be according to the guidelines described above. 7 The entity may discuss the calculation methodology for its emissions disclosure, such as if data are from continuous emissions monitoring systems (CEMS), engineering calculations or mass balance calculations.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 6 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 798
  },
  {
    "id": 77070,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why an entity must ensure that Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs) and Guarantees of Origin (GOs) are explicitly retained or replaced in agreements for renewable PPAs and green power products, according to the Industrial Machinery & Goods – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "To enable the entity to claim the energy as renewable by preventing double-counting of environmental attributes.",
      "A": "To comply with third-party certification standards for biomass materials.",
      "B": "To align with jurisdictional criteria for defining recordable incidents in workforce safety.",
      "D": "To ensure consistent application of conversion factors such as higher heating values (HHVs).",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "8-9",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Industrial Machinery & Goods.pdf",
    "source_text": "3.3.1 For any renewable electricity generated on site, any RECs and GOs shall be retained (not sold) and retired or cancelled on behalf of the entity for the entity to claim them as renewable energy. 3.3.2 For renewable PPAs and green power products, the agreement shall explicitly include and convey that RECs and GOs be retained or replaced and retired or cancelled on behalf of the entity for the entity to claim them as renewable energy. 3.3.3 The renewable portion of the electricity grid mix outside of the control or influence of the entity is excluded from the scope of renewable energy. 3.4 For the purposes of this disclosure, the scope of renewable energy from biomass sources is limited to materials certified to a third-party standard (for example, Forest Stewardship Council, Sustainable Forest Initiative, Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification or American Tree Farm System), materials considered eligible sources of supply according to the Green-e Framework for Renewable Energy Certification, Version 1.0 (2017) or Green-e regional standards, or materials eligible for an applicable jurisdictional renewable portfolio standard. 4The entity shall apply conversion factors consistently for all data reported under this disclosure, such as the use of HHVs for fuel usage (including biofuels) and conversion of kilowatt hours (kWh) to GJ (for energy data including electricity from solar or wind energy). SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |INDUSTRIAL MACHINERY & GOODS |8\n\n[Page 9]\nWorkforce Health & Safety Topic Summary Employees in industrial machinery manufacturing facilities face health and safety risks from exposure to heavy machinery, moving equipment and electrical hazards, among others. Creating an effective safety culture is critical to mitigate safety incidents proactively, which may result in reduced healthcare costs, litigation and work disruption. By implementing strong safety protocols, including incident reporting and investigation, and promoting a culture of safety, entities can minimise safety-related expenses and potentially improve productivity in the long term. Metrics RT-IG-320a.1. (1) Total recordable incident rate (TRIR), (2) fatality rate, and (3) near miss frequency rate (NMFR) for (a) direct employees and (b) contract employees 1 The entity shall disclose (1) its total recordable incident rate (TRIR) for work-related injuries and illnesses. 1.1 An injury or illness is considered a recordable incident if it results in death, days away from work, restricted work or transfer to another job, medical treatment beyond first aid, or loss of consciousness. Additionally, a significant injury or illness diagnosed by a physician or other licensed health care professional is considered a recordable incident, even if it does not result in death, days away from work, restricted work or job transfer, medical treatment beyond first aid, or loss of consciousness. 1.1.1 First aid is defined as emergency care or treatment for an ill or injured person before regular medical aid can be provided. 1.1.2 The entity may use applicable jurisdictional criteria for definitions of a recordable incident and a non-recordable such as first aid. The entity shall disclose the legal, regulatory or industry framework used as the source for these criteria and definitions. 2The entity shall disclose (2) its fatality rate for work-related fatalities. 3The entity shall disclose (3) its near miss frequency rate (NMFR) for work-related near misses. 3.1 A near miss is defined as an unplanned or uncontrolled event or chain of events that has not resulted in a recordable injury, illness, physical damage, or environmental damage, but had the potential to do so in other circumstances. 3.2 The entity may disclose its process for classifying, identifying and reporting near misses. 4All disclosed rates shall be calculated as: (statistic count x 200,000) / total number of hours worked by all employees in the year reported. 4.1 The ‘200,000’ in the rate calculation represents the total number of hours 100 full-time workers working 40 hours per week for 50 weeks per year can provide annually. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |INDUSTRIAL MACHINERY & GOODS |9",
    "new_id": 799
  },
  {
    "id": 77071,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the rationale behind allowing entities to withhold the specific identity of a critical material when disclosing risks and mitigation strategies, as described in the Industrial Machinery & Goods – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "To ensure entities can maintain confidentiality while still addressing operational risks and mitigation efforts associated with supply restrictions.",
      "A": "To avoid providing competitors with insights into proprietary technologies or processes reliant on those materials.",
      "B": "Because the disclosure of such materials could lead to reputational harm unrelated to competitive dynamics.",
      "C": "Due to regulatory requirements that mandate the protection of all supplier-related information as confidential.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "14-15",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Industrial Machinery & Goods.pdf",
    "source_text": "Materials Sourcing Topic Summary Industrial machinery entities are exposed to supply chain risks when critical materials are used in products. Entities in the industry manufacture products using critical materials with few or no available substitutes, many of which are sourced in only a few countries, which may be subject to geopolitical uncertainty. Entities in this industry also face competition because of increasing global demand for these materials from other sectors, which may result in price increases and supply risks. Entities that limit the use of critical materials by using alternatives, as well as securing supply, may mitigate financial effects stemming from supply disruptions and volatile input prices. Metrics RT-IG-440a.1. Description of the management of risks associated with the use of critical materials 1The entity shall describe how it manages the risks associated with the use of critical materials in its products, including physical limits on availability and access, changes in price, and regulatory and reputational risks, in which: 1.1 a critical material is defined as a material both essential in use and subject to the risk of supply restriction; and 1.2 examples of critical materials may include: 1.2.1 antimony, cobalt, fluorspar, gallium, germanium, graphite, indium, magnesium, niobium, tantalum and tungsten; 1.2.2 platinum group metals (platinum, palladium, iridium, rhodium, ruthenium and osmium); and 1.2.3 rare earth elements, which include yttrium, scandium, lanthanum and the lanthanides (cerium, praseodymium, neodymium, promethium, samarium, europium, gadolinium, terbium, dysprosium, holmium, erbium, thulium, ytterbium and lutetium). 2The entity shall identify the critical materials that present a significant risk to its operations, the type of risks they represent and the strategies the entity uses to mitigate the risks. 2.1 Relevant strategies may include diversification of suppliers, stockpiling of materials, development or procurement of alternative and substitute materials, and investments in recycling technology for critical materials. 3All disclosure shall be sufficient such that it is specific to the risks the entity faces, but that disclosure itself would not compromise the entity ’s ability to maintain confidential information. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |INDUSTRIAL MACHINERY & GOODS |14\n\n[Page 15]\n3.1 For example, if an entity determines not to identify a specific critical material that presents a significant risk to its operations because of the competitive harm that could result from the disclosure, the entity shall disclose the existence of such risks, the type of risks and the strategies used to mitigate the risks, but the entity is not required to disclose the relevant critical material. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |INDUSTRIAL MACHINERY & GOODS |15",
    "new_id": 800
  },
  {
    "id": 77074,
    "question": "Which scenario would violate the entity's requirements for disclosing gender representation under TC-SI-330a.3, as outlined in the Software & IT Services – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The entity uses ISCO Sub-Major Group 11 to define executive management without explicitly stating the classification standard used.",
      "B": "The entity categorizes employees as women, men, or not disclosed but adds a footnote explaining that 'not disclosed' includes non-binary identities.",
      "C": "The entity calculates gender representation percentages for technical employees by excluding those who selected 'not disclosed' from the total count.",
      "D": "The entity discloses gender representation percentages for all employee categories but combines executive and non-executive management into a single group.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "22",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Software & IT Services.pdf",
    "source_text": "TC-SI-330a.3. Percentage of (1) gender and (2) diversity group representation for (a) executive management, (b) non-executive management, (c) technical employees, and (d) all other employees 1The entity shall disclose (1) the percentage of gender representation among its employees for (a) executive management, (b) non-executive management, (c) technical employees and (d) all other employees. 1.1 The entity shall categorise the gender of its employees as women, men or not disclosed. 1.1.1 The entity may disclose additional categories of gender identity or expression. 1.2 The entity shall use these employee categories: (a) executive management, (b) non-executive management, (c) technical employees and (d) all other employees. 1.3 Executive management is defined as chief executives and senior officials who formulate and review the entity’s policies, and plan, direct, coordinate and evaluate the overall activities of the entity with the support of other managers. 1.3.1 The entity may refer to the International Standard Classification of Occupations (ISCO) Sub-Major Group 11 or an applicable jurisdictional occupation classification system for a definition of executive management. In such cases, the entity shall disclose the occupation classification standard used to classify executive management. 1.4 Non-executive management is defined as those who plan, direct, coordinate and evaluate the activities of the entity, or of organisational units within it, and formulate and review its policies, rules and regulations, other than executive management. 1.4.1 The entity may refer to the ISCO Major Group 1 (excluding Sub-Major Group 11) or an applicable jurisdictional occupational classification system for a definition of non-executive management. In such cases, the entity shall disclose the occupation classification standard used to classify non- executive management. 1.5 Technical employees are defined as employees who perform highly skilled or highly qualified work generally categorised in the computing, mathematical, architectural, and engineering occupations. 1.5.1 The entity may refer to the ISCO Sub-Major Groups 21 and 25 or an applicable jurisdictional occupation classification system for a definition of technical employees. In such cases, the entity shall disclose the occupation classification system used to classify technical employees. 1.6 All other employees are defined as those employees who are not classified as executive management, non- executive management or technical employees. 1.7 The entity shall calculate the percentage of gender representation for each employee category as the number of employees in each gender category divided by the total number of employees in the respective employee category. 2The entity shall disclose (2) the percentage of diversity group representation among its employees for (a) executive management, (b) non-executive management, (c) technical staff and (d) all other employees. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |SOFTWARE & IT SERVICES |22",
    "new_id": 801
  },
  {
    "id": 77076,
    "question": "Which scenario would likely be excluded from the disclosure requirements for data breaches, based on the provided definitions and conditions in the Software & IT Services – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "A breach resulting in the accidental deletion of internal operational logs, which has no impact on business performance or prospects.",
      "A": "A breach involving unauthorized access to encrypted customer payment data that poses no risk of decryption or misuse.",
      "C": "A breach where personal data of a single high-profile individual is accessed, leading to reputational damage for the entity.",
      "D": "A breach exposing non-personal metadata that indirectly identifies individuals when combined with external datasets.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "17",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Software & IT Services.pdf",
    "source_text": "Data Security Topic Summary Software & IT Services entities are targets of growing data security threats from cyberattacks, which puts their own data and their customers ’ data at risk. Inadequate prevention, detection and remediation of data security threats may influence customer acquisition and retention and result in decreased market share and reduced demand for the entity’s products. In addition to reputational damage and increased customer turnover, data breaches also may result in increased expenses, commonly associated with remediation efforts such as identity protection offerings and employee training on data protection. Meanwhile, new and emerging data security standards and regulations may affect operating expenses through increased compliance costs. Additionally, entities in this industry may be well- positioned to capture revenue opportunities by providing secure software and services to meet the demand for ensuring data is kept secure. Metrics TC-SI-230a.1. (1) Number of data breaches, (2) percentage that are personal data breaches, (3) number of users affected 1The entity shall disclose (1) the total number of data breaches identified during the reporting period. 1.1 A data breach is defined as an unauthorised occurrence on, or conducted through, an entity ’s information systems that jeopardises the confidentiality, integrity or availability of an entity ’s information systems or any information contained therein. 1.1.1 Information systems are defined as information resources, owned or used by the entity, including physical or virtual infrastructure controlled by such information resources, or components thereof, organised for the collection, processing, maintenance, use, sharing, dissemination or disposition of an entity ’s information to maintain or support operations. 1.2 The scope of the disclosure excludes occurrences in which an entity has reasonable and supportable belief that the occurrence (i) does not pose a risk of damage to the entity ’s business performance or prospects and (ii) does not pose a risk of economic or social disadvantage to individuals. 2The entity shall disclose (2) the percentage of data breaches that were personal data breaches. 2.1 A personal data breach is defined as a data breach resulting in the accidental or unauthorised destruction, loss, alteration, disclosure of or access to personal data transmitted, stored or otherwise processed. 2.2 Personal data is defined as any information that relates to an identified or identifiable living individual. Various pieces of information, which collected together can lead to the identification of a particular person, also constitute personal data. 2.2.1 The entity may define personal data based on applicable jurisdictional laws or regulations. In such cases, the entity shall disclose the applicable jurisdictional standard or definition used. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |SOFTWARE & IT SERVICES |17",
    "new_id": 802
  },
  {
    "id": 77080,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the reason why an entity might delay disclosure of a data breach, and how this interacts with their broader obligations under the described standards in the Software & IT Services – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Disclosure can be delayed when immediate notification could impede a criminal investigation, provided such delay does not conflict with the obligation to address risks specific to the entity’s operations.",
      "A": "An entity may delay disclosure if doing so is deemed necessary by a law enforcement agency, but only after ensuring that all affected users are informed via alternative secure channels.",
      "B": "The entity is required to delay disclosure whenever encryption keys are compromised, regardless of any potential impact on criminal investigations.",
      "D": "Delaying disclosure is permitted indefinitely as long as third-party cybersecurity standards have been fully implemented across all operations.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "18-19",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Software & IT Services.pdf",
    "source_text": "2.3 The scope of the disclosure shall include incidents during which encrypted data was acquired with an encryption key that also was acquired, as well as whether a reasonable belief exists that encrypted data could be converted readily to plaintext. 2.3.1 Encryption is defined as the process of transforming plaintext into ciphertext. 3 The entity shall disclose (3) the total number of unique users affected by personal data breaches. 3.1 Accounts that the entity cannot verify as belonging to the same user shall be disclosed separately. 4The entity may delay disclosure if a law enforcement agency has determined that notification impedes a criminal investigation and may be delayed until the law enforcement agency determines that such notification does not compromise the investigation. Note to TC-SI-230a.1 1The entity shall describe any corrective actions taken in response to data breaches, such as changes in operations, management, processes, products, business partners, training or technology. 2All disclosure shall be sufficient such that it is specific to the risks the entity faces, but disclosure itself would not compromise the entity ’s ability to maintain data privacy and security. 3The entity may disclose its policy for disclosing data breaches to affected users in a timely manner. TC-SI-230a.2. Description of approach to identifying and addressing data security risks, including use of third-party cybersecurity standards 1The entity shall describe its approach to identifying information system vulnerabilities that may pose a data security risk. 1.1 Vulnerability is defined as a weakness in an information system, implementation, system security procedure or internal control that could be exploited. 1.2 Data security risk is defined as the risk of any circumstance or event with the potential to affect organisational operations (including mission, functions, image or reputation), assets, individuals, or other organisations or governments through an information system via unauthorised access, destruction, disclosure, modification of information or denial of service. 2The entity shall describe its approach to managing identified data security risks and vulnerabilities, which may include operational procedures, management processes, structure of products, selection of business partners, employee training and use of technology. 3 The entity shall describe its use of third-party cybersecurity risk management standards. 3.1 Third-party cybersecurity risk management standards are defined as standards, frameworks or guidance developed by a third party with the explicit purpose of aiding entities in identifying cybersecurity threats, or preventing, or remediating or responding to cybersecurity incidents. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |SOFTWARE & IT SERVICES |18\n\n[Page 19]\n3.2 Examples of third-party cybersecurity risk management standards include: 3.2.1 the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants ’ (AICPA) Service Organisation Controls (SOC) for Cybersecurity; 3.2.2 ISACA ’s COBIT 5; 3.2.3 the ISO/IEC 27000-series; and 3.2.4 the National Institute of Standards and Technology ’s (NIST) Framework for Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity , 2018. 3.3 The disclosure shall include: 3.3.1 identification of the specific cybersecurity risk management standards implemented or otherwise in use; 3.3.2 description of the extent of its use of cybersecurity risk management standards, such as by applicable operations, business unit, geography, product or information system; 3.3.3 the role of cybersecurity risk management standards in the entity ’s overall approach to identifying vulnerabilities in its information systems and addressing data security risks and vulnerabilities; 3.3.4 whether third-party verification of the use of cybersecurity risk management standards is conducted, including independent examinations or audits; and 3.3.5 activities and initiatives related to increasing the use of cybersecurity risk management standards, even if such standards are not currently in use. 4The entity may discuss observed trends in type, frequency and origination of attacks on its data security and information systems. 5All disclosure shall be sufficient such that it is specific to the risks the entity faces but disclosure itself would not compromise the entity ’s ability to maintain data privacy and security. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |SOFTWARE & IT SERVICES |19",
    "new_id": 803
  },
  {
    "id": 77082,
    "question": "Which inference accurately reflects the relationship between legal proceedings and systemic risks in the context of cloud computing, as described in the Software & IT Services – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Corrective actions implemented after legal proceedings are directly aimed at mitigating systemic risks such as programming errors or server downtime.",
      "A": "Legal proceedings primarily arise from systemic risks caused by service disruptions, which are disclosed through metrics like total customer downtime.",
      "B": "Systemic risks in cloud computing increase the likelihood of legal proceedings due to performance issues that fall below the threshold of service disruptions.",
      "C": "Entities focus on disclosing performance issues and service disruptions to address legal compliance rather than to mitigate systemic risks.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "26-27",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Software & IT Services.pdf",
    "source_text": "1The entity shall briefly describe the nature (for example, judgement or order issued after trial, settlement, guilty plea, deferred prosecution agreement or non-prosecution agreement) and context (for example, price fixing, patent misuse or antitrust) of all monetary losses resulting from legal proceedings. 2The entity shall describe any corrective actions implemented in response to the legal proceedings. This may include specific changes in operations, management, processes, products, business partners, training or technology. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |SOFTWARE & IT SERVICES |26\n\n[Page 27]\nManaging Systemic Risks from Technology Disruptions Topic Summary With trends towards increased cloud computing and Software as a Service (SaaS), software and IT service providers must ensure they have robust infrastructure and policies in place to minimise disruptions to their services. Disruptions such as programming errors or server downtime may generate systemic risks, because computing and data storage functions move from individual entity servers in various industries to data centres of cloud-computing service providers. The risks are increased particularly if the affected customers are in sensitive sectors, such as financial institutions or utilities, which are considered critical national infrastructure. Entities ’ investments in improving the reliability and quality of their IT infrastructure and services may attract and retain customers, thereby creating revenue and opportunities in new markets. Metrics TC-SI-550a.1. Number of (1) performance issues and (2) service disruptions; (3) total customer downtime 1The entity shall disclose (1) the number of performance issues in software and information technology (IT) services provided to customers. 1.1 Performance issues are defined as any planned or unplanned downtime causing an interruption, of more than 10 minutes but less than or equal to 30 minutes, in the provision of cloud-based services to customers. 1.2 Performance issues may include those caused by technical failures, programming errors, cyber-attacks, weather events or natural disasters at hosting facilities. 2The entity shall disclose (2) the number of service disruptions in software and IT services provided to customers. 2.1 Service disruptions are defined as any planned or unplanned downtime causing an interruption of more than 30 minutes in provision of cloud-based services to customers. 2.2 Service disruptions may include those caused by technical failures, programming errors, cyber-attacks, weather events or natural disasters at hosting facilities. 3The entity shall disclose (3) the total customer downtime related to performance issues and service disruptions in software and IT services provided to customers. 3.1 Total customer downtime is defined as the interruption duration of each service disruption multiplied by the number of software and IT services licences affected, reported in licence-days. For context, the entity shall indicate the licensing basis (for example, number of seats, number of CPU cores, number of cloud subscriptions) and whether the licences are consumption-based or capacity-based. Note to TC-SI-550a.1 SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |SOFTWARE & IT SERVICES |27",
    "new_id": 804
  },
  {
    "id": 77144,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between the use of scenario analysis and the tagging principles outlined in the taxonomy, as described in the IFRS Taxonomy: IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy 2024 – IFRS S1 General Requirements for Disclosure of Sustainability-related Financial Information and IFRS S2 Climate-related Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The use of scenario analysis is only tagged when it directly informs risk identification, avoiding duplication with broader risk management processes.",
      "B": "Scenario analysis is tagged separately to ensure comparability, as it represents a distinct categorical element.",
      "C": "Scenario analysis is not explicitly tagged because its integration into risk management is considered self-evident within the taxonomy structure.",
      "D": "All mentions of scenario analysis are tagged twice: once for subparagraphs and once for broader paragraph requirements.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "36",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS Taxonomy.pdf",
    "source_text": "Therefore, the ISSB created the elements in Table C2 to reflect the disclosure requirements set out in Table C1. Table C2—Illustration of detail of narrative elements Element label44ET45Reference Processes and related policies to identify, assess, prioritise and monitor risks TB IFRS S1.44(a), IFRS S2.25(a)46 Inputs and parameters used in process to identify, prioritise and monitor risks TB IFRS S1.44(a)(i), IFRS S2.25(a)(i) Whether and how scenario analysis used to inform identification of risks TB IFRS S1.44(a)(ii), IFRS S2.25(a)(ii) Entity uses scenario analysis to inform identification of risks B IFRS S1.44(a)(ii) ... Processes used to identify, assess, prioritise and monitor opportunities TB IFRS S1.44(b), IFRS S2.25(b) Extent to which and how processes for identifying, assessing, prioritising and monitoring risks and opportunities are integrated into or inform overall risk manage- ment processTB IFRS S1.44(c), IFRS S2.25(c) Other disclosures about risk management TB IFRS S1.43, IFRS S2.24 Illustration of tagging using elements in the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy and the resulting tagged data The example in paragraphs C10 –C12 illustrates how an entity would tag a climate-related disclosure using the taxonomy elements, and the resulting tagged information users of general purpose financial reports would be able to extract. The example emphasises that by using the taxonomy elements: (a) information generally would not be tagged twice, for example, using elements reflecting requirements in subparagraphs and elements reflecting requirements in paragraphs (as discussed in paragraph C6); and (b) information that could be readily compared between entities and over time would be separately tagged using categorical elements (as discussed in paragraph C5(c)). To illustrate the points in paragraph C8 , consider an example of an excerpt of a climate-related disclosure that an entity might produce (the text is provided only for illustration of tagging using the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy). Figure C1—Example of an excerpt of a climate-related disclosure Risk management ... Sustainability-related risks We identify sustainability-related risks considering their strategic importance to the entity’s business model and value chain over the short, medium and long term. To understand these risks further, we evaluate .... We use scenario analysis to support our risk assessments. We assess the resilience of our business model and value chain against a wide range of scenarios, including .... …C7 C8 C9 44 Indents are used to show a parent–child relationship between elements in a hierarchical taxonomy structure. 45 ‘ET’ refers to ‘element type’. Element type ‘TB’ refers to ‘text block’, ‘B’ refers to ‘Boolean’ (‘true’ or ‘false’). 46 The references to paragraphs in IFRS S2 reflect ‘corresponding requirements’ in IFRS S1 and IFRS S2 (see Appendix D).IFRS S USTAINABILITY DISCLOSURE TAXONOMY APRIL 2024 © IFRS Foundation 35",
    "new_id": 805
  },
  {
    "id": 77175,
    "question": "Which scenario best illustrates the ISSB's intended use of categorical and narrative elements when an entity does not disclose a specific sustainability-related change, as described in the IFRS Taxonomy: IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy 2024 – IFRS S1 General Requirements for Disclosure of Sustainability-related Financial Information and IFRS S2 Climate-related Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "B": "The entity omits tagging the categorical element entirely and provides no narrative disclosure, as no change occurred.",
      "A": "The entity tags 'false' for the categorical element and provides no narrative disclosure, as no change occurred.",
      "C": "The entity omits tagging the categorical element entirely but includes a detailed narrative explaining why no change was made.",
      "D": "The entity tags 'true' for the categorical element and includes a narrative disclosure to clarify the absence of changes.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "20",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS Taxonomy.pdf",
    "source_text": "The ISSB notes that categorical elements, like other elements in the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy, can be used more than once for tagging to convey more than one fact when combined with appropriate axes. For example, the element ‘Time horizon(s) over which effects of risk or opportunity could reasonably be expected to occur’ can be used with an axis allowing repetition by (entity-specific, individual or groups of) ‘Risks and opportunities’, if necessary. Appendix E provides an illustration of how to tag information using categorical elements, including this element. The IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy includes 47 categorical elements (31 Boolean elements and 16 extensible enumerations). Appendix H provides a list of all categorical elements. Additional features—related narrative elements and guidance The ISSB usually created categorical elements for disclosures that include related contextual information. The ISSB created narrative elements to tag these explanations because users of general purpose financial reports are expected to search for, analyse and use such information separately from other disclosed information in order to understand the context of the categorical element. The ISSB usually provided categorical elements in a hierarchical taxonomy structure, with narrative elements as the parents of categorical elements. This hierarchical structure will: (a) capture narrative information in a categorical format to simplify analysis (using the child categorical element); and (b) allow entities to tag any related contextual information (using the parent narrative element). For example, paragraph 44(a)(ii) of IFRS S1 requires an entity to disclose information about ‘whether and how the entity uses scenario analysis to inform its identification of risks’. To reflect this requirement in the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy, the ISSB created the categorical element ‘Entity uses scenario analysis to inform its identification of risks’, which allows an entity to select either the answer ‘true’ or the answer ‘false’. The ISSB also created an accompanying narrative element ‘Whether and how scenario analysis used to inform identification of risks’, which allows the entity to tag the text of the related contextual information disclosed. The ISSB expects that entities will only use categorical elements to tag information that is disclosed. For example: (a) an entity that discloses it has ‘changed the processes it uses to identify, assess, prioritise and monitor sustainability-related risks compared with the previous reporting period’ applying paragraph 44(a)(iv) of IFRS S1 would be expected to include ‘true’ for the related categorical element in its digital report;22 and (b) an entity that does not disclose that it has not ‘changed the processes it uses to identify, assess, prioritise and monitor sustainability-related risks compared with the previous reporting period’ would not be expected to include ‘false’ for the related categorical element in its digital report. The benefits of categorical elements will be realised only if entities consistently use categorical elements to tag narrative information. Therefore, the ISSB provided guidance to facilitate consistent use of the categorical elements and the related narrative elements by adding a guidance label to the categorical elements: ‘When using this element, the entity should also use the parent narrative element to capture the related narrative disclosure if provided in the sustainability-related financial disclosures.’. Appendix C provides: (a) examples of the disclosure requirements in IFRS S1 related to risk management and the resulting elements (and rejected elements), including categorical elements. (b) an example of an excerpt of a climate-related disclosure, showing how an entity would tag it using elements in the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy and the resulting tagged information users of general purpose financial reports would be able to extract. This example also illustrates the multiple tagging the ISSB intended to limit using the approach in the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy.42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 22The ISSB included the Boolean element ‘Entity changed processes to identify, assess, prioritise and monitor risks compared with previous reporting period’ in the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy to reflect the requirement in paragraph 44(a)(vi) of IFRS S1.IFRS S USTAINABILITY DISCLOSURE TAXONOMY APRIL 2024 © I",
    "new_id": 806
  },
  {
    "id": 77269,
    "question": "What is the primary reason the ISSB rejected the hierarchical structure approach despite its potential to enhance comparability of digital information across sustainability-related disclosure standards, as described in the IFRS Taxonomy: IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy 2024 – IFRS S1 General Requirements for Disclosure of Sustainability-related Financial Information and IFRS S2 Climate-related Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Regulators might require entities to use varying levels of elements, resulting in inconsistent digital information.",
      "A": "The hierarchical structure would lead to fragmented tagged information that lacks sufficient context at lower levels.",
      "B": "Tagging systems are too new and untested to handle the complexity introduced by a hierarchical structure.",
      "D": "Elements at paragraph level were deemed insufficiently detailed, while lower-level elements lacked standalone utility.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "66-67",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS Taxonomy.pdf",
    "source_text": "...continued Proposed IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy Feedback ISSB’s response •Furthermore, using this approach would not help users of general purpose financial reports make appropriate comparisons of digital information provided in accordance with IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards with digital information provided in accordance with other sustainabil- ity-related disclosure standards. Some of the require- ments in other sustainability-related disclosure standards might be comparable only at a more detailed level—for example, the specific disclosure requirements in paragraph 44(a)(i) of IFRS S1 for disclosure of inputs and parameters used in the processes and related policies to identify, prioritise and monitor risks (paragraph C5(d)). •The ISSB considered but rejected an alternative approach of creating elements for all levels of require- ments in the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards (provided in a hierarchical structure) (Approach 2). •If the ISSB applied this approach, the ISSB would create elements to reflect all levels of requirements related to narrative information. Elements would be provided in a hierarchical structure, often reflecting paragraphs, subparagraphs and possibly several lower levels of subparagraphs of the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standard. •Using this approach might help users of general purpose financial reports make appropriate comparisons of digital information provided in accordance with IFRS Sustaina- bility Disclosure Standards with digital information provided in accordance with other sustainability-related disclosure standards. As discussed in Approach 1, elements reflecting requirements at the more detailed level might be most comparable between taxonomies reflecting various sustainability-related disclosure standards. continued...IFRS S USTAINABILITY DISCLOSURE TAXONOMY APRIL 2024 © IFRS Foundation 65\n\n[Page 67]\n...continued Proposed IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy Feedback ISSB’s response •The ISSB rejected this approach because a hierarchical structure increases the complexity of tagging for an entity using more than one element, especially for information that might be structured in various ways to provide useful information. A hierarchical structure also might not provide consistent information in a digital format because regulators might require an entity to use various levels of elements for tagging information and an entity might not use all elements from the hierarchy appropriately (paragraph 29). •Furthermore, elements at paragraph level were often assessed as not providing enough detail to be useful and elements at lower levels than subparagraphs were often expected not to provide enough context to be useful because the resulting tagged information might be fragmented and, therefore, less likely to be understanda- ble in isolation (paragraph 17). •Some tagging systems might be able to help an entity navigate the complexity of tagging information by organis- ing elements in a hierarchical structure—for example, by automatically applying an element reflecting a paragraph each time the entity uses elements reflecting related subparagraphs. However, these systems are relatively new and might require testing before they are used more widely and they will be unlikely to eliminate all excess effort. The ISSB will monitor developments in this area and consider possible amendments to the IFRS Sustaina- bility Disclosure Taxonomy (including higher-level elements) as tagging systems develop (paragraph 33).IFRS S USTAINABILITY DISCLOSURE TAXONOMY APRIL 2024 © IFRS Foundation 66",
    "new_id": 807
  },
  {
    "id": 77281,
    "question": "What is the primary reason the ISSB rejected the inclusion of an additional element reflecting paragraph 43 of IFRS S1 in the taxonomy, as described in the IFRS Taxonomy: IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy 2024 – IFRS S1 General Requirements for Disclosure of Sustainability-related Financial Information and IFRS S2 Climate-related Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "D": "To prevent the introduction of another hierarchical level that would complicate tagging requirements.",
      "A": "To ensure that preparers could tag all information using a single element rather than multiple elements.",
      "B": "To avoid creating redundancy with elements already reflecting subparagraphs such as 44(a) and its subpoints.",
      "C": "To align the taxonomy structure strictly with the requirements of IFRS S2 instead of IFRS S1.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "38",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS Taxonomy.pdf",
    "source_text": "Illustration of multiple tagging resulting from the hierarchical structure As discussed in paragraph C6 , the ISSB aims to limit the extent of hierarchical structure in the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy to reduce the complexity of tagging the same information using more than one element. As an example, the ISSB decided against creating an element to reflect the overall objective for risk management described in paragraph 43 of IFRS S1. Including elements in the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy that reflect paragraph 43 and paragraphs 44(a)—(c) of IFRS S1 would create a hierarchical structure, which would result in the need to tag information using one element reflecting a paragraph and one of the elements reflecting the related subparagraphs (see Table C5, Table C6 and Figure C3). The requirements at a lower level of the Standard—for example, a subparagraph—generally meet the requirements at the paragraph level, hence elements reflecting both requirements are applicable for tagging. The illustrative set of taxonomy elements in Table C5 includes an additional element reflecting paragraph 43 of IFRS S1. The additional element was rejected by the ISSB because it would create another level of hierarchy within the structure described in paragraph C13. Table C5—Illustrative taxonomy elements relating to risk management reflecting the hierarchical structure with an additional element reflecting the requirement in paragraph 43 of IFRS S1 Element label and reference ET48 Processes to identify, assess, prioritise and monitor risks and opportunities (IFRS S1.43, IFRS S2.24)TB Processes and related policies to identify, assess, prioritise and monitor risks (IFRS S1.44(a), IFRS S2.25(a))TB Whether and how scenario analysis used to inform its identification of risks (IFRS S1.44(a)(ii), IFRS S2.25(a)(ii))TB Entity uses scenario analysis to inform identification of risks (IFRS S1.44(a)(ii)) B Other disclosures about risk management (IFRS S1.43, IFRS S2.24) TB The preparer would have applied the elements in Table C5 to tag the report in Figure C1, as shown in Figure C3. All information is tagged using at least two elements, including an element reflecting paragraph 43 of IFRS S1. Figure C3—Illustration of tagging Risk management ... Sustainability-related risks We identify sustainability-related risks considering their strategic importance to the entity’s business model and value chain over the short, medium and long term. To understand these risks further, we evaluate .... We use scenario analysis to support our risk assessments. We assess the resilience of our business model and value chain against a wide range of scenarios, including .... …C13 C14 C15 48 ‘ET’ refers to ‘element type’. Element type ‘TB’ refers to ‘text block’, ‘B’ refers to ‘Boolean’ (‘true’ or ‘false’).IFRS S USTAINABILITY DISCLOSURE TAXONOMY APRIL 2024 © IFRS Foundation 37",
    "new_id": 808
  },
  {
    "id": 77294,
    "question": "When an entity integrates disclosures for sustainability-related risks and opportunities without separating them, which of the following is implied about its use of dimensional axes in tagging information, as described in the IFRS Taxonomy: IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy 2024 – IFRS S1 General Requirements for Disclosure of Sustainability-related Financial Information and IFRS S2 Climate-related Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The entity is not expected to use an axis due to the integrated nature of the disclosures.",
      "B": "The entity must always use an axis to ensure comparability across different risks and opportunities.",
      "C": "The entity is required to create separate axes for each type of sustainability-related risk or opportunity.",
      "D": "The entity should tag climate-related risks separately but may omit axes for other risks.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "21",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS Taxonomy.pdf",
    "source_text": "Reflecting the relationship between IFRS S1 and IFRS S2 Corresponding requirements in IFRS S1 and IFRS S2 Background Both IFRS S1 and IFRS S2 include requirements structured around the core content of governance, strategy, risk management, and metrics and targets. IFRS S1 includes general requirements for the disclosure of sustainability- related financial information, whereas IFRS S2: (a) includes the disclosure requirements which are also in IFRS S1 that are relevant to climate-related risks and opportunities (referred to as ‘corresponding requirements’); and (b) requires specific disclosures applicable to climate-related risks and opportunities. Paragraphs 56 –62 discuss how the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy reflects requirements in IFRS S1 and IFRS S2, focusing on the corresponding requirements. IFRS S1 and IFRS S2 both require an entity to provide information about its sustainability-related risks and opportunities (including climate-related risks and opportunities) that could reasonably be expected to affect the entity’s prospects. In providing such information, an entity is required to identify the sustainability-related risks to which it is exposed and the sustainability-related opportunities available to it, based on the facts and circumstances specific to the entity. This is reflected in the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy, which uses an axis in a dimensional structure to help users of general purpose financial reports understand entity-specific elements used to tag information about an entity’s sustainability-related risks and opportunities ( paragraphs 79–88 and Appendix I). Furthermore: (a) for the corresponding requirements in IFRS S1 and IFRS S2, an entity is required to provide information about sustainability-related risks and opportunities (including climate-related risks and opportunities); and (b) for the specific disclosure requirements in IFRS S2, an entity is required to provide information about climate-related risks and opportunities.23 Paragraphs 63 –68 discuss how the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy helps users of general purpose financial reports to identify which sustainability-related risks and opportunities relate to climate, or potentially other sustainability-related topics. Corresponding requirements Corresponding requirements are set out in both IFRS S1 and IFRS S2 to help an entity provide disclosures that are consistent and comparable for all sustainability-related risks and opportunities the entity reports on. For example, the corresponding requirements related to governance and risk management in IFRS S1 are closely aligned with those in IFRS S2 (paragraphs BC32 and BC71 in Basis for Conclusions on IFRS S2 Climate-related Disclosures). Examples of corresponding requirements in IFRS S1 and IFRS S2 include: (a) paragraph 33(a) of IFRS S1, which requires an entity to disclose information about ‘how the entity has responded to, and plans to respond to, sustainability-related [emphasis added] risks and opportunities in its strategy and decision-making’; and (b) paragraph 14(a) of IFRS S2, which requires an entity to disclose information about ‘how the entity has responded to, and plans to respond to, climate-related [emphasis added] risks and opportunities in its strategy and decision-making, including …’.50 51 52 53 54 55 23An entity may provide some or all of this information as integrated disclosures (paragraph 7 and paragraph 26 of IFRS S2). If an entity prepares disclosures on an integrated basis and does not provide separate information for each sustainability-related risk and opportunity, the entity is not expected to use an axis in a dimensional structure.IFRS S USTAINABILITY DISCLOSURE TAXONOMY APRIL 2024 © IFRS Foundation 20",
    "new_id": 809
  },
  {
    "id": 77296,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why entity-specific tagging of risks and opportunities might hinder users' ability to compare sustainability-related disclosures between entities, as outlined in the IFRS Taxonomy: IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy 2024 – IFRS S1 General Requirements for Disclosure of Sustainability-related Financial Information and IFRS S2 Climate-related Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Because users may struggle to identify which disclosures relate to climate topics when entities use unique tagging structures.",
      "A": "Because entity-specific elements prevent the extraction of any digital information about climate-related topics.",
      "C": "Because all sustainability-related risks are inherently incomparable across different business models.",
      "D": "Because the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy does not support dimensional taxonomy structures for tagging.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "45",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS Taxonomy.pdf",
    "source_text": "Tagging Figure E1 using the elements in Table E1 would result in the data in Table E2. Table E2—Illustration of tagged information Element Water quality regulation [member]Flooding [member] Value Description of risk or opportunity (IFRS S1.30(a), IFRS S2.10(a))Water quality regulation Stricter water quality regulation might require us to replace some equipment used in our water treatment plants.Flooding Flooding might disrupt the availa- bility of our water treatment plants. We identify flooding as a climate- related physical risk. Topic(s) of risk or opportunity (IFRS S1.30(a), IFRS S2.10(a))- Climate topic Category of climate-related risk (IFRS S2.10(b))- Physical risk Time horizon(s) over which effects of risk or opportunity could reasonably be expected to occur (IFRS S1.30(b), IFRS S2.10(c))We expect the effect of this risk to occur in the short term.We expect the effect of this risk to occur in the short term, growing in severity in the medium term. Time horizon(s) over which effects of risk or opportunity could reasonably be expected to occur (IFRS S1.30(b), IFRS S2.10(c))Short term Short term Medium term Current and anticipated effects of risks and opportunities on business model and value chain (IFRS S1.32(a), IFRS S2.13(a))We assess that water quality regulation risk can affect particu- lar parts of our business model because ....We assess that disruption caused by flooding can affect particular parts of our business model because .... As illustrated in Table E2, a dimensional taxonomy structure allows users of general purpose financial reports to extract information for each risk and opportunity (for example, information related to water quality regulation separately from information related to flooding) in a digital format. However, risks and opportunities are defined by an entity (and tagged using entity-specific elements) which might affect users of general purpose financial reports’ efficient analysis and comparison of this information between entities. As discussed in paragraph E1, the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy includes elements for tagging information about sustainability-related risks and opportunities described as relating to a sustainability-related topic (or topics), for example, a climate-related topic. As illustrated in Table E2 , those elements allow users of general purpose financial reports to extract in a digital format information about: (a) which topics the sustainability-related risks and opportunities relate to, which helps users of general purpose financial reports to understand sustainability-related risks and opportunities identified by an entity. For example, users of general purpose financial reports would be able to identify efficiently in a digital format that the ‘Flooding’ risk identified by an entity is a climate-related risk. (b) which disclosures are related to climate and other sustainability-related topics, thus facilitating users of general purpose financial reports’ analysis of those disclosures. For example, users of general purpose financial reports will be able to identify information about current and anticipated effects of climate- related risks and opportunities on the entity’s business model and value chain applying the requirement in paragraph 13(a) of IFRS S2 based on explicit information in a digital format about which risks and opportunities relate to climate, as explained in paragraph E9(a). (c) sustainability-related topics, which could serve as a common basis for comparing sustainability-related risks and opportunities between entities. This could also help users of general purpose financial reports to compare information about entities’ climate-related risks and opportunities that meets those requirements of the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards and other sustainability-related disclosure standards that are aligned with IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards.E7 E8 E9IFRS S USTAINABILITY DISCLOSURE TAXONOMY APRIL 2024 © IFRS Foundation 44",
    "new_id": 810
  },
  {
    "id": 77297,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the relationship between interoperability in sustainability-related disclosure standards and the design of the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy, as described in the IFRS Taxonomy: IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy 2024 – IFRS S1 General Requirements for Disclosure of Sustainability-related Financial Information and IFRS S2 Climate-related Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The taxonomy facilitates digital comparisons by aligning with both IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards and other aligned sustainability-related disclosure standards.",
      "A": "The taxonomy is designed to replace jurisdictional requirements by creating a single global standard for digital reporting.",
      "B": "Interoperability is achieved solely through bilateral engagements with major entities like the European Union, making other mechanisms redundant.",
      "D": "The primary purpose of the taxonomy is to enforce uniformity across all jurisdictions without accommodating regional variations or initiatives.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "74",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS Taxonomy.pdf",
    "source_text": "...continued Proposed IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy Feedback ISSB’s response Facilitating digital reporting of sustainability-related financial disclosures globally—Interoperability with jurisdictional requirements and other sustainability-related disclosure standards The ISSB aims to deliver a global baseline of sustainability- related financial disclosures that are interoperable with jurisdictional initiatives and other sustainability-related report- ing frameworks to meet the needs of capital markets, includ- ing through: •ISSB decisions to advance interoperability—during its October 2022 meeting, the ISSB discussed several matters that are important to achieving greater interoper- ability between the global baseline and jurisdictional requirements; •dialogue with jurisdictions, taking the form of: • meetings of the Jurisdictional Working Group—in April 2022 the ISSB announced the formation of a working group of jurisdictional representatives to discuss enhanced compatibility between the ISSB’s exposure drafts and jurisdictional initiatives on sustainability disclosures; • meetings of the Sustainability Standards Advisory Forum (SSAF)—the IFRS Foundation established the SSAF as a mechanism for formal engagement on standard-setting between the ISSB and jurisdictional representatives, including those from emerging markets; and • bilateral engagement with the European Union—the ISSB has engaged in detailed bilateral discussions with the European Commission and EFRAG as standard-setting has advanced; and•Some respondents supported the ISSB’s collaboration with jurisdictions and other sustainability standard-setters to facilitate interoperability between sustainability-related disclosure standards as a starting point for interoperability between the related taxonomies. •Many stakeholders emphasised the importance of intero- perability with other taxonomies. Many entities, investors, regulators and standard-setters reiterated the importance of interoperability with the forthcoming ESRS XBRL Taxonomy.•The ISSB is committed to continuing to collaborate with stakeholders to understand how digital reporting can be used to support the interoperability of the IFRS Sustaina- bility Disclosure Standards with jurisdictional require- ments and other sustainability-related disclosure standards. •The ISSB observes that the interoperability between sustainability-related disclosure taxonomies relies on the respective sustainability-related disclosure standards being interoperable and an understanding of the intero- perability between the sustainability-related disclosure standards. •The IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy is designed to help users of general purpose financial reports make appropriate digital comparisons of sustainability-related financial information prepared in accordance with IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards and in accordance with other sustainability-related disclosure standards that are aligned with IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards. Consequently, the ISSB added: • elements that reflect aligned requirements related to narrative information (see ‘Narrative disclosures’ section of this table); • element types that reflect cross-industry metrics in IFRS S2 (see ‘Metrics and targets’ section of this table); and continued...IFRS S USTAINABILITY DISCLOSURE TAXONOMY APRIL 2024 © IFRS Foundation 73",
    "new_id": 811
  },
  {
    "id": 77298,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why the ISSB structured the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy to align closely with the IFRS Accounting Taxonomy, as outlined in the IFRS Taxonomy: IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy 2024 – IFRS S1 General Requirements for Disclosure of Sustainability-related Financial Information and IFRS S2 Climate-related Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "D": "To allow entities flexibility in combining sustainability and financial reporting irrespective of their accounting framework.",
      "A": "To ensure that sustainability-related disclosures can only be used by entities applying IFRS Accounting Standards.",
      "B": "To mandate the exclusive use of XBRL for all financial and sustainability disclosures globally.",
      "C": "To replace the Financial Stability Board’s Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures entirely.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "7",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS Taxonomy.pdf",
    "source_text": "focusing on this core content is necessary for users of general purpose financial reports to assess the effects of sustainability-related risks and opportunities on an entity’s cash flows, its access to finance and cost of capital. IFRS S2 Climate-related Disclosures The objective of IFRS S2 is to require an entity to disclose information about its climate-related risks and opportunities that is useful to users of general purpose financial reports in making decisions relating to providing resources to the entity. The requirements in IFRS S2 are structured around the core content of governance, strategy, risk management, and metrics and targets. This structure is consistent with that of the core content requirements in IFRS S1. The structure of IFRS S2 is also aligned with the structure of the widely accepted recommendations of the Financial Stability Board’s Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD)4 and reflects how entities oversee and manage sustainability-related risks and opportunities, including those related to climate change. Overview of the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy The ISSB aims to facilitate digital reporting of sustainability-related financial disclosures globally by creating the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy. This section discusses the main features of the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy relating to: (a) digital reporting of sustainability-related financial information globally (paragraphs IN13–IN17); (b) tagging narrative disclosures (paragraphs IN18–IN24); (c) reflecting the relationship between IFRS S1 and IFRS S2 (paragraphs IN25–IN28); and (d) tagging metrics and targets (paragraphs IN29–IN30). Digital reporting of sustainability-related financial information globally The ISSB aims to facilitate digital reporting of sustainability-related financial disclosures globally by using a taxonomy architecture that enables an entity to use the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy together with other taxonomies, such as the IFRS Accounting Taxonomy. The ISSB used best XBRL5 taxonomy design practice in developing the IFRS Accounting Taxonomy and the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy, which allows both Taxonomies to work well together and maximises the likelihood the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy can be used effectively with other taxonomies. This approach reflects the fact that an entity may apply IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards irrespective of whether the entity’s financial statements are prepared in accordance with IFRS Accounting Standards or other generally accepted accounting principles or practices (GAAP), as discussed in paragraph 8 of IFRS S1 (paragraphs 1–6). Consistent taxonomy design practices in the IFRS Accounting Taxonomy and IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy include: (a) the grouping and ordering of taxonomy elements, which reflect the order of the related disclosure requirements in the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standard (paragraphs 75–78); and (b) the dimensional structure, which reflects disaggregation of information (related to, for example, operating segments for the IFRS Accounting Taxonomy and metrics and targets for the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy) and helps users of general purpose financial reports to understand the meaning of entity-specific elements used to tag this information (paragraphs 79–88). Following consistent design practices in different taxonomies helps to avoid unnecessary complexity and confusion that could result from different designs. For example, similar presentation structures in the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy and IFRS Accounting Taxonomy help in navigating two taxonomies to find the appropriate elements for tagging by entities, or to understand tagged data by users of general purpose financial reports. When developing the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy, the ISSB considered:IN10 IN11 IN12 IN13 IN14 IN15 IN16 IN17 4Following the publication of IFRS S1 General Requirements for Disclosure of Sustainability-related Financial Information and IFRS S2 Climate-related Disclosures , the Financial Stability Board (FSB) has asked the IFRS Foundation to take over monitoring progress on entities’ climate-related disclosures from the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD). IFRS S1 and IFRS S2 fully incorporate the recommendations of the TCFD. As such, the FSB noted that the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards mark ‘the culmination of th",
    "new_id": 812
  },
  {
    "id": 77299,
    "question": "Which of the following best reflects the implicit relationship between the structure of sustainability disclosures and the ISSB's response to feedback, as described in the IFRS Taxonomy: IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy 2024 – IFRS S1 General Requirements for Disclosure of Sustainability-related Financial Information and IFRS S2 Climate-related Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The placement of sustainability-related elements within distinct sections suggests that feedback influenced their categorization but not their prioritization.",
      "B": "The dimensional structure with entity-specific elements is primarily designed to address respondent concerns about overly rigid metrics.",
      "C": "Sustainability-related risks, metrics, and targets were consolidated into a single appendix to streamline feedback analysis by the ISSB.",
      "D": "The ISSB’s feedback summary explicitly refutes the need for any entity-specific adaptations in sustainability disclosures.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "5",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS Taxonomy.pdf",
    "source_text": "...continued APPENDIX I—OTHER FEATURES OF THE IFRS SUSTAINABILITY DISCLOSURE TAXONOMY—ILLUSTRATION OF DIMENSIONAL STRUCTURE WITH ENTITY-SPECIFIC ELEMENTS 56 Sustainability-related risks and opportunities 56 Sustainability-related metrics 58 Sustainability-related targets 59 APPENDIX J—HOW THE ISSB RESPONDED TO FEEDBACK ON THE PROPOSED IFRS SUSTAINABILITY DISCLOSURE TAXONOMY 61 Analysis of respondents to the consultation 61 Summary of how the ISSB responded to feedback 62IFRS S USTAINABILITY DISCLOSURE TAXONOMY APRIL 2024 © IFRS Foundation 4",
    "new_id": 813
  },
  {
    "id": 77300,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy and the IFRS Accounting Taxonomy were designed with consistent practices such as grouping and ordering of elements, use of dimensions, and categorical elements, as described in the IFRS Taxonomy: IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy 2024 – IFRS S1 General Requirements for Disclosure of Sustainability-related Financial Information and IFRS S2 Climate-related Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "B": "To facilitate seamless integration and interoperability between the two taxonomies, thereby reducing unnecessary complexity and enhancing usability for entities and users of financial reports.",
      "A": "To ensure that entities preparing financial statements in accordance with non-IFRS GAAP are unable to utilize the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy effectively.",
      "C": "To simplify the digital reporting process by creating a dependency between the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards and the specific metrics defined in the IFRS Accounting Standards.",
      "D": "To enforce mandatory alignment between sustainability disclosures and financial statement preparation under all GAAP frameworks, ensuring uniformity in global reporting.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "12",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS Taxonomy.pdf",
    "source_text": "Digital reporting of sustainability-related financial information globally Using the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy with other taxonomies The ISSB aims to facilitate digital reporting of sustainability-related financial disclosures globally by using a taxonomy architecture that enables entities to use the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy together with other taxonomies, for example, to tag: (a) related financial statements prepared in accordance with IFRS Accounting Standards or other GAAP (paragraphs 3–5); and (b) the information disclosed when applying the sources of guidance an entity is required and permitted to consider in accordance with IFRS S1 (paragraph 6).15 Paragraph 8 of IFRS S1 states that an entity might apply IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards irrespective of whether the entity’s related financial statements are prepared in accordance with IFRS Accounting Standards or other GAAP. An IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy that is distinct and separate from the IFRS Accounting Taxonomy can meet the needs of various entities—those that apply IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards together with other GAAP, and those that apply both IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards and IFRS Accounting Standards. The IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy relates to IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards in the same way the IFRS Accounting Taxonomy does to IFRS Accounting Standards. The IFRS Foundation used best XBRL taxonomy design practice in developing the IFRS Accounting Taxonomy and the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy, which allows both Taxonomies to work well together and maximises the likelihood the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy can be used effectively with other taxonomies.16 Consistent taxonomy design practices in the IFRS Accounting Taxonomy and IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy include: (a) the grouping and ordering of taxonomy elements, which reflect the order of the related disclosure requirements in the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards (paragraphs 75–78 and Appendix F). (b) the use in the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy of elements similar to those used in the IFRS Accounting Taxonomy for similar disclosure requirements. Appendix G includes a list of elements that reflect disclosure requirements that are similar in IFRS Accounting Standards and IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards. (c) the use of a dimensional structure, which reflects disaggregation of information (related to, for example, operating segments for the IFRS Accounting Taxonomy and metrics and targets for the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy) and helps users of general purpose financial reports to understand the meaning of entity-specific elements used to tag this information ( paragraphs 79–88 ). Both Taxonomies include explicit dimensions to reflect the disaggregation of information by entity-specific elements. Appendix J discusses why the ISSB rejected the use of the alternative, typed dimensions. (d) the use of categorical elements to improve the usability and comparability of narrative information (paragraphs 35 –48 and Appendix H). Appendix J discusses the use of categorial element types in the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy and the introduction of categorical elements in the IFRS Accounting Taxonomy. Following consistent design practices in different taxonomies helps to avoid the potential unnecessary complexity and confusion that could result from different designs. For example: (a) similar presentation structures help in navigating the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy and the IFRS Accounting Taxonomy to find the appropriate elements for tagging by entities, or to understand tagged data by users of general purpose financial reports; and1 2 3 4 5 15Please refer to Appendix A and Appendix B for further information on the terms used in the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy and this document. 16Both IFRS Taxonomies have been developed using the most recent XBRL specifications (XBRL 2.1, recommended on 31 December 2003, with errata corrections to 20 February 2013; XBRL Dimensions 1.0, recommended on 18 September 2006, with errata corrections to 25 January 2012; Extensible Enumerations 2.0, recommended on 12 February 2020; and Calculation 1.1, recommended on 22 February 2023). According to due process, both Taxonomies are subject to review by an external group of experts—the ITCG (see paragraphs IN33–IN38).IFRS S USTAINABILITY DISCLOSURE T",
    "new_id": 814
  },
  {
    "id": 77314,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why IFRS S2 requires disclosures that go beyond the TCFD's core recommendations, as described in the Comparison: IFRS S2 Climate-related Disclosures with the TCFD Recommendations?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Because IFRS S1 introduces overarching requirements that necessitate more comprehensive information than the TCFD’s core recommendations alone.",
      "A": "Because IFRS S2 mandates additional sector-specific guidance not covered by the TCFD framework.",
      "B": "Because IFRS S2 explicitly rejects the TCFD’s four core recommendations in favor of alternative standards.",
      "D": "Because the TCFD guidance prohibits companies from providing more detailed information than its recommended disclosures.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "1-2",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS TCFD Comparison.pdf",
    "source_text": "International Financial Reporting Standards®, IFRS Foundation®, IFRS®, IAS®, IFRIC®, SIC®, IASB®, ISSBTM, SASB®, IFRS for SMEs® Copyright © 2024 IFRS FoundationThis document is not part of IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards and does not add to or change the requirements in the Standards. It was developed to aid stakeholders’ understanding of the Standards. This educational material was first published in July 2023. The educational material has been updated to reflect updates to the TCFD guidance dated October 2021 and minor editorial changes.Republished November 2024 Comparison IFRS S2 Climate-related Disclosures with the TCFD recommendations\n\n[Page 2]\nComparison | IFRS S2 Climate-related Disclosures with the TCFD recommendations | November 2024 | 21 The TCFD framework consists of four core recommendations (governance, strategy, risk management, metrics and targets), 11 supporting recommended disclosures and all-sector and sector-specific guidance. The guidance informs implementation of the recommendations but is not part of the formal recommendations.The requirements in IFRS S2 Climate-related Disclosures issued by the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB) integrate, and are consistent with, the four core recommendations and 11 recommended disclosures published by the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD).1 Areas in which IFRS S2 differs from the TCFD recommendations reflect differences between IFRS S2 and the TCFD’s guidance, not the TCFD’s core recommendations or recommended disclosures.IFRS S1 General Requirements for Disclosure of Sustainability-related Financial Information sets out overarching requirements for a company to disclose information about sustainability-related risks and opportunities. The core content requirements in IFRS S1 also integrate the TCFD recommendations. Building on IFRS S1, IFRS S2 sets out supplementary requirements that relate specifically to climate-related risks and opportunities. IFRS S1 sets out the general requirements for how a company discloses that information, and specific requirements for providing a complete set of sustainability-related financial disclosures. For example, IFRS S1 sets out requirements on the aggregation and disaggregation of information that also apply to disclosures required by IFRS S2. Hence, companies may be required to disclose information beyond the TCFD’s core recommendations when they apply IFRS S1 .The following tables summarise similarities and differences between IFRS S2 and the TCFD’s core recommendations, recommended disclosures and guidance. For aspects that differ, differences take three forms. Specifically, IFRS S2: • uses different wording to capture the same information as the TCFD recommendations. In these instances, the requirements in IFRS S2 are broadly consistent with the TCFD recommendations. • requires the provision of information that is in line with the TCFD recommendations, but that is more detailed . • differs from the TCFD guidance —but not from the TCFD overall recommendations—mainly by providing some additional requirements and guidance.Introduction",
    "new_id": 815
  },
  {
    "id": 77333,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between the disclosure requirements for energy efficiency ratings and water fixture certifications, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 35: Home Builders?",
    "options": {
      "D": "An entity operating in multiple jurisdictions must separately disclose average energy efficiency ratings by jurisdiction, but no such requirement exists for water fixture certifications.",
      "A": "Entities must calculate the simple average of energy efficiency ratings for all homes, but they are not required to disclose the total number of water fixtures installed during the reporting period.",
      "B": "The scope of disclosure for energy efficiency ratings excludes homes at certain stages of construction, while water fixture certifications include all fixtures regardless of the stage of construction or sales cycle.",
      "C": "The calculation of water fixture certification percentages requires dividing the number of certified fixtures by the total number of fixtures installed, whereas energy efficiency averages do not involve a division step.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "9",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol35.pdf",
    "source_text": "1.1 The scope of homes shall include single-family dwelling units, whether detached, attached or part of multi-family residential buildings. 1.2 The entity shall disclose the energy efficiency rating system used to calculate this metric. 2 The entity shall (2) disclose the simple average rating of all homes that obtained a certified, standardised residential energy efficiency rating during the reporting period. 2.1 The simple average shall be calculated as the sum of all ratings associated with homes that obtained a rating during the reporting period divided by the number of homes that obtained a rating during the reporting period. 3 An entity operating in multiple jurisdictions shall disclose separately the number of homes and the average ratings by individual jurisdiction in which they operate. 4 The scope of disclosure includes all homes that are or were controlled by the entity, regardless of the stage of construction and the stage within the sales cycle. IF-HB-410a.2. Percentage of installed water fixtures certified to a water efficiency standard 1 The entity shall disclose the percentage of installed water fixtures certified to the jurisdictional water efficiency standard. 1.1 A water fixture is defined as a device used for the distribution of water or a device that consumes water. 1.2 The percentage shall be calculated as the number of water fixtures installed during the reporting period that were certified to the applicable jurisdictional water efficiency standard divided by the total number of water fixtures installed. 1.2.1 The scope of water fixtures includes those that are within an eligible jurisdictional water efficiency standard product category. Examples of product categories may include bathroom sink faucets and accessories, showerheads, toilets, urinals, irrigation controllers and pre-rinse spray valves. 2 The scope of disclosure includes all water fixtures installed in homes that are or were controlled by the entity, regardless of the stage of construction, the stage within the sales cycle or the entity that performed such installations. 3 The entity shall disclose the jurisdictional standard, guideline or regulation used for its calculation. IF-HB-410a.3. Number of homes delivered certified to a third-party multi-attribute green building standard 1 The entity shall disclose the number of homes delivered certified to a third-party multi-attribute green building standard designed for homes. 1.1 The scope of third-party multi-attribute green building standards is limited to home standards or certifications that, at a minimum, judge important aspects of new home design and construction:IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 8 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 816
  },
  {
    "id": 77334,
    "question": "When an entity cannot quantify the financial effects of a specific sustainability-related risk or opportunity, which combination of disclosures would be both necessary and sufficient to meet the ISSB's requirements, as outlined in the IFRS S1 Basis for Conclusions on General Requirements for Disclosure of Sustainability-related Financial Information?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Quantitative information on combined effects, identification of affected line items in financial statements, and an explanation for omitting individual quantification.",
      "B": "An explanation for omitting quantitative information and qualitative details about anticipated financial effects only.",
      "C": "Qualitative information identifying affected financial statement line items without any reference to combined effects or reasons for omission.",
      "D": "An explanation for omitting quantitative data along with qualitative insights into current financial effects but no mention of combined impacts.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "37",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S1 Basis.pdf",
    "source_text": "In determining whether an entity is required to provide quantitative information (as discussed in BC107–BC108 ), the ISSB referred to concepts in IFRS Accounting Standards. The concept of ‘separately identifiable ’ is found in various IFRS Accounting Standards, in which the term has been used to describe items that can be isolated in a manner that supports robust measurement. The ISSB decided that the concept of measurement uncertainty from the IASB ’s Conceptual Framework could be adapted for IFRS S1 to clarify that an entity might not be able to quantify current and anticipated financial effects if quantifying the effects of individual sustainability-related risks and opportunities would involve a high level of measurement uncertainty. The ISSB decided that if an entity is not required to provide quantitative information about the current or anticipated financial effects of a sustainability-related risk or opportunity, the entity would be required to: (a) explain why it has not provided quantitative information; (b) provide qualitative information about those financial effects, including identifying the line items, totals and subtotals within the related financial statements that are likely to be affected, or have been affected, by that sustainability-related risk or opportunity; and (c) provide quantitative information about the combined effects of that sustainability-related risk or opportunity with other sustainability- related risks or opportunities and other factors unless the entity determines that quantitative information about the combined financial effects would not be useful. The ISSB noted that although an entity might not be in a position to provide quantitative information about the current or anticipated financial effects of a particular sustainability-related risk or opportunity, it is still required to provide other quantitative and qualitative information that is useful to users of general purpose financial reports. For example, if an entity does not provide quantitative information for a particular sustainability-related risk or opportunity, it is required to provide quantitative information about the combined financial effects of that risk or opportunity and the other factors affecting it, unless that information is not useful. The ISSB noted that the requirements to disclose current and anticipated financial effects provide users with an understanding of how the financial statements are currently affected by or are anticipated to be affected by sustainability-related risks and opportunities. The ISSB also noted that the requirement to identify affected line items, subtotals and totals in the financial statements is useful in situations in which an entity cannot provide quantitative information about financial effects of individual sustainability-related risks and opportunities. This requirement is useful because it highlights which area in the financial statements is most likely to have been, or will be, affected by the sustainability-related risk or opportunity. The ISSB considered the feedback on some of the terms used in the requirements relating to current and anticipated financial effects. The ISSB decided to consistently use the term ‘reporting period ’ to refer to the period for which sustainability-related financial disclosures are prepared and to referBC109 BC110 BC111 BC112IFRS S1 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR DISCLOSURE OF SUSTAINABILITY- REALTED FINANCIAL INFORMATION —JUNE 2023 36 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 817
  },
  {
    "id": 77350,
    "question": "What must an entity do if it uses the exemption to omit commercially sensitive information, and how does this align with the ISSB's reasoning about competitive advantage, as explained in the IFRS S1 Basis for Conclusions on General Requirements for Disclosure of Sustainability-related Financial Information?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Disclose that the exemption has been applied while avoiding any mention of what was omitted, ensuring material information is not obscured.",
      "A": "Disclose the specific reason for omission and ensure that aggregated data fully resolves concerns about commercial sensitivity.",
      "C": "Reassess the eligibility for the exemption only when there is a significant change in market conditions affecting competitiveness.",
      "D": "Provide a general warning about weakened competitiveness as justification for non-disclosure without reassessing at subsequent reporting dates.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "28",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S1 Basis.pdf",
    "source_text": "opportunities. However, the ISSB observed that many entities already voluntarily report on sustainability-related opportunities, despite no requirement to report this information. As stated by a few respondents to the ISSB’s Exposure Draft, entities are often in favour of sharing the opportunities available to them. In contrast, it is typically necessary for a standard to require disclosure of risks to ensure information is provided in a comparable and neutral way. In assessing the circumstances in which an entity would apply the exemption, the ISSB agreed that the entity is required to first consider whether it is possible to disclose the information about the opportunity at a sufficiently aggregated level to resolve the entity ’s concerns about commercial sensitivity, while still meeting the objectives of the disclosure requirements in IFRS S1. The ISSB explained that, in such circumstances, an entity would consider how to disclose information without identifying specific information that might cause a significant loss of competitive advantage. The ISSB emphasised that an entity is required to ensure that aggregation does not obscure material information. The ISSB included additional requirements in IFRS S1 that an entity is required to apply for each item of information omitted if it applies this exemption. The ISSB discussed and agreed that: (a) an entity that applies the exemption is required to disclose that it has done so. The ISSB decided that this disclosure would signal to users of general purpose financial reports that specific information has been omitted for reasons of commercial sensitivity, without requiring the entity to disclose information about what has been omitted, thus reducing the effect of the exemption. (b) an entity is required to have a specific reason for non-disclosure, but is not required to disclose this reason. The ISSB considered whether to require an entity to disclose the reason it has omitted information, similar to the requirement in paragraph 92 of IAS 37 Provisions, Contingent Liabilities and Contingent Assets . However, the ISSB decided that an entity would be unable to provide a useful disclosure of its reasoning without revealing the commercially sensitive information. Instead, the ISSB decided to require an entity to disclose that it has used the exemption to make users aware that information has been excluded. The ISSB noted that a general risk that an entity ’s competitiveness could be weakened by disclosure would not, on its own, be an adequate reason for the entity to avoid disclosure. (c) an entity is required to reassess, at each reporting date, whether the information still qualifies for the exemption. If the entity is no longer eligible for the exemption, it would be required to disclose that information at that reporting date. The approach taken by the ISSB is broadly consistent with the approach taken in IFRS Accounting Standards; in specific circumstances in which an exemption from disclosure has been considered appropriate, the IASB has permitted non-disclosure of commercially sensitive information. The approachBC80 BC81 BC82IFRS S1 BASIS FOR CONCLUSIONS © IFRS Foundation 27",
    "new_id": 818
  },
  {
    "id": 77376,
    "question": "Which statement best captures the rationale behind the ISSB's decision to use the term 'accurate' instead of 'free from error' in paragraph 3 of the Exposure Draft, as described in the IFRS S1 Basis for Conclusions on General Requirements for Disclosure of Sustainability-related Financial Information?",
    "options": {
      "C": "To simplify the language for users unfamiliar with IFRS Accounting Standards or the Conceptual Framework.",
      "A": "To ensure that sustainability-related financial disclosures align with traditional financial reporting standards under IAS 1.",
      "B": "To emphasize the importance of neutrality over completeness in sustainability-related financial information.",
      "D": "To reflect the inherently forward-looking nature of sustainability disclosures compared to financial statements.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "24",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S1 Basis.pdf",
    "source_text": "Sustainability Disclosure Standards is insufficient to enable users of general purpose financial reports to understand the effects of sustainability-related risks and opportunities on the entity ’s cash flows, its access to finance and cost of capital over the short, medium and long term ’ (see paragraph 15(a) –(b) of IFRS S1). Fair presentation is a well-understood concept in IFRS Accounting Standards —its characteristics are set out in IAS 1 —and in other GAAP. The concepts and language in IFRS S1 were derived from IAS 1 and adapted in the context of sustainability-related financial disclosures. The ISSB does not have a separate conceptual framework that applies directly to sustainability-related financial information. IFRS S1 includes guidance on the qualitative characteristics of useful sustainability-related financial information, set out in Appendix D. This guidance is an integral part of IFRS S1 and thus is required to be applied by an entity using IFRS S1. The characteristics described in Appendix D are adapted from the IASB ’s Conceptual Framework and are intended to ensure that information in general purpose financial reports —including both sustainability-related financial disclosures and financial statements —is useful to users of those reports. The guidance is also intended to provide information to assist an entity in the preparation of sustainability-related financial disclosures. As with the Conceptual Framework , the fundamental qualitative characteristics of useful sustainability-related financial information are relevance and faithful representation. The enhancing characteristics are comparability, verifiability, timeliness and understandability. IFRS S1 explains how these concepts apply to sustainability-related financial information. For example, IFRS S1 explains that information in the form of explanations or forward- looking statements is still verifiable. Faithful representation is a component of the concept of ‘fair presentation ’ in IAS 1. According to the Conceptual Framework , to be a perfectly faithful representation, a depiction would have three characteristics: it would be complete, neutral and free from error. In developing the Exposure Draft, the ISSB noted that individuals that prepare sustainability-related financial disclosures may not be the same individuals involved in preparing financial statements, and may not be familiar with IFRS Accounting Standards or the Conceptual Framework . Therefore, paragraph 3 of the Exposure Draft used the common label of ‘accurate ’, instead of ‘free from error ’, to describe a ‘complete depiction ’ of an entity ’s sustainability-related financial information. The ISSB has aligned the terms used in paragraph D10 of IFRS S1 with those used in paragraph 13 of IFRS S1. Materiality The Exposure Draft proposed that materiality be assessed in relation to the effects of sustainability-related risks and opportunities on an entity ’s enterprise value. In response to the feedback, the ISSB confirmed that the materiality definition in IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards is aligned with the IASB ’s definitions of ‘material information ’ and ‘material ’ in its Conceptual Framework and IAS 1 respectively, which do not refer to enterprise value. To improve alignment, the ISSB removed ‘enterprise value ’ from itsBC64 BC65 BC66 BC67IFRS S1 BASIS FOR CONCLUSIONS © IFRS Foundation 23",
    "new_id": 819
  },
  {
    "id": 77395,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why materiality judgements for sustainability-related financial disclosures differ fundamentally from those for financial statements, as outlined in the IFRS S1 Basis for Conclusions on General Requirements for Disclosure of Sustainability-related Financial Information?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Sustainability-related disclosures are unconstrained by definitions of assets and liabilities, while financial statements strictly adhere to these definitions.",
      "A": "Financial statements focus exclusively on historical data, whereas sustainability-related disclosures emphasize forward-looking scenarios without considering past performance.",
      "B": "Materiality judgements for sustainability-related disclosures require consideration of risks with low probability but high impact, which is not a factor in financial statement assessments.",
      "C": "Sustainability-related disclosures prioritize qualitative over quantitative information, making them inherently subjective compared to financial statements.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "25",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S1 Basis.pdf",
    "source_text": "description of materiality and removed the definition of ‘enterprise value ’ from IFRS S1. The ISSB has clarified that IFRS S1 requires an entity to disclose material information about the sustainability-related risks and opportunities that could reasonably be expected to affect the entity ’s prospects. The ISSB based its definition of material information on the definitions of ‘material information ’ and ‘material ’ in the Conceptual Framework and IAS 1, respectively. All the definitions highlight that materiality judgements are made in relation to a specific reporting entity and focus on information that could reasonably be expected to influence decisions of users of general purpose financial reports. The definition in IFRS S1 is specific to sustainability-related financial disclosures and states that materiality judgements are made in the context of an entity ’s sustainability-related financial disclosures. This approach is consistent with how the definitions of ‘material information ’ in IAS 1 and in the IASB ’s Exposure Draft Management Commentary are specific to financial statements and management commentary, respectively. The definition in IFRS S1 also acknowledges that users do not make their decisions on the basis of just one form of general purpose financial reports published by the entity. Using conceptually aligned definitions facilitates connectivity across an entity’s general purpose financial report prepared applying IFRS Standards. Materiality judgements for sustainability-related financial disclosures will inevitably differ from those for financial statements. Different materiality judgements are necessary because sustainability-related financial disclosures and financial statements serve their specific objectives and provide different types of information about a reporting entity. Sustainability-related financial disclosures provide information about sustainability-related risks and opportunities that could reasonably be expected to affect the entity ’s prospects, while financial statements provide information about the entity ’s assets, liabilities, equity, income and expenses. The ISSB noted that information about sustainability-related risks and opportunities is unconstrained by definitions of assets and liabilities and the criteria for recognising them. Furthermore, the ISSB expects that in preparing sustainability-related financial disclosures, entities will often have to consider financial implications over longer time periods than the time periods considered in preparing financial statements. In addition, in preparing sustainability-related financial disclosures, entities will need to consider the financial implications of interactions throughout their value chain. Finally, the ISSB observed that sustainability-related financial information may have different measurement bases compared to information included in financial statements. Risk severity is commonly expressed in terms of probability and impact. Opportunities can also be expressed in the same terms. IFRS S1 states that when making materiality judgements, an entity is required to consider risks and opportunities that are unlikely to occur but have a potentially high impact. An entity is required to consider:BC68 BC69 BC70IFRS S1 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR DISCLOSURE OF SUSTAINABILITY- REALTED FINANCIAL INFORMATION —JUNE 2023 24 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 820
  },
  {
    "id": 77397,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why the ISSB intentionally designed the exemption for omitting commercially sensitive information to be narrow and specific to opportunities, as described in the IFRS S1 Basis for Conclusions on General Requirements for Disclosure of Sustainability-related Financial Information?",
    "options": {
      "A": "To ensure that disclosures about risks are comprehensive while limiting excessive detail on strategies.",
      "B": "To prioritize transparency in financial statements over concerns about competitive advantage.",
      "C": "To prevent entities from exploiting broad exemptions to obscure material information unrelated to opportunities.",
      "D": "To align sustainability-related disclosures with existing aggregation principles in IAS 1.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "27",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S1 Basis.pdf",
    "source_text": "shading to emphasise the information required by IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards or to make the distinction clear); (c) presenting the information required by IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards separately so that information is clearly distinguished from immaterial information (for example, splitting the report into parts); and (d) providing two sets of information —one that includes the entire package of information without distinction (both the information required by IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards and immaterial information) and an accompanying report that only provides the information required by IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards. Aggregation and disaggregation The concepts of aggregation and disaggregation in relation to the financial statements in IAS 1 are equally important for sustainability-related financial disclosures to ensure that users of general purpose financial reports are provided with information at appropriately aggregated and disaggregated levels. IFRS S1 requires an entity to consider all facts and circumstances when deciding how to aggregate and disaggregate information in sustainability- related financial disclosures. It also requires that the understandability of disclosures is not reduced ‘by obscuring material information with immaterial information or by aggregating material items of information that are dissimilar to each other ’ (see paragraph B29 of IFRS S1). These principles of aggregation and disaggregation build on IAS 1. Commercially sensitive information In reviewing feedback on the Exposure Draft, a strong theme emerged regarding stakeholder concerns about being required to disclose information about opportunities that could be commercially sensitive. Respondents were concerned that disclosure of such information could reveal too much detail associated with an entity ’s strategy and planned actions, which are integral to competitive advantage. Some preparers said they would be reluctant to disclose commercially sensitive information about opportunities because it might reduce their competitiveness in the market or otherwise be commercially harmful. In response, the ISSB decided to introduce a targeted exemption, noting that the circumstances in which an entity is exempt from providing material information to users of general purpose financial reports would be limited. The exemption in IFRS S1 permits an entity, in limited circumstances described in paragraph B35 of IFRS S1, to omit information about a sustainability-related opportunity from its sustainability-related financial disclosures. The ISSB decided that the exemption would be intentionally narrow and apply only to the disclosure of information about opportunities. The ISSB acknowledged that this decision might create asymmetry between the disclosure of information about risks and the disclosure of information aboutBC75 BC76 BC77 BC78 BC79IFRS S1 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR DISCLOSURE OF SUSTAINABILITY- REALTED FINANCIAL INFORMATION —JUNE 2023 26 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 821
  },
  {
    "id": 77402,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the distinction between the disclosure requirements for resilience and those for current and anticipated financial effects, as well as their interrelation, as outlined in the IFRS S1 Basis for Conclusions on General Requirements for Disclosure of Sustainability-related Financial Information?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Resilience disclosures focus on long-term strategic adaptability under uncertainty, whereas financial effects disclosures provide insights into immediate and future monetary impacts, with no requirement to use resilience assessments for the latter.",
      "A": "Resilience disclosures are optional but sufficient for determining the financial effects of sustainability risks, while financial effects disclosures are mandatory and address only past impacts.",
      "C": "Financial effects disclosures are a subset of resilience disclosures, meaning entities must first assess resilience before reporting any financial implications of sustainability risks.",
      "D": "Both resilience and financial effects disclosures are interchangeable in purpose, aiming primarily to inform users about an entity’s short-term financial performance.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "38",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S1 Basis.pdf",
    "source_text": "to the related financial statements for that reporting period. The ISSB also decided to use the phrase ‘short, medium and long term ’ consistently in IFRS S1, replacing the term ‘over time ’ used in the Exposure Draft. The ISSB decided to clarify the relationship between the disclosure requirements for information about resilience and the disclosure requirements for information about current and anticipated financial effects. The ISSB noted that the two sets of requirements are distinct and are intended to serve different information needs. The requirements on the resilience of an entity’s strategy and business model are intended to inform users of general purpose financial reports about the entity ’s ability to cope with and withstand the effects of sustainability-related risks and related uncertainties in different scenarios. The requirements on the current and anticipated financial effects of sustainability-related risks and opportunities are intended to provide information about the effects of these risks and opportunities on an entity ’s financial performance, financial position and cash flows. The requirements can be applied independently. An entity is not required to carry out a resilience assessment to determine the anticipated financial effects of sustainability-related risks and opportunities. However, if the entity does carry out a resilience assessment, the entity might find that assessment useful and relevant in determining the anticipated financial effects of sustainability- related risks and opportunities. Risk management IFRS S1 requires an entity to disclose information about the processes it uses to identify, assess, prioritise and monitor sustainability-related risks and opportunities. The risk management disclosure requirements are based on the TCFD recommendations that were used to develop the four aspects of core content, but with some changes. The TCFD recommendations focus only on processes related to risks, whereas IFRS S1 extends disclosure to include opportunities. This extension reflects the view that risks and opportunities could result from or relate to the same source of uncertainty. It also reflects the evolution of common practice in risk management, whereby processes for identification, assessment, prioritisation and response are increasingly being extended to cover opportunities as well. A few respondents to the Exposure Draft misunderstood the proposed risk management disclosure requirements as requiring an entity to disclose information about the sustainability-related risks and opportunities to which it is exposed. The risk management disclosure requirements focus on providing information about the processes used to identify, assess, prioritise and monitor sustainability-related risks and opportunities —in contrast to the strategy disclosure objective of the core content requirements, which is to enable users of general purpose financial reports to understand an entity ’s strategy for managing sustainability-related risks and opportunities.BC113 BC114 BC115 BC116IFRS S1 BASIS FOR CONCLUSIONS © IFRS Foundation 37",
    "new_id": 822
  },
  {
    "id": 77403,
    "question": "In the context of sustainability-related risks and opportunities, under which condition would an entity be required to provide qualitative information but not quantitative information about the financial effects, as described in the IFRS S1 Basis for Conclusions on General Requirements for Disclosure of Sustainability-related Financial Information?",
    "options": {
      "C": "When quantifying the financial effects involves a high level of measurement uncertainty for individual risks or opportunities.",
      "A": "When the entity determines that providing quantitative information about combined financial effects is useful.",
      "B": "When measurement uncertainty for individual sustainability-related risks and opportunities is low.",
      "D": "When the affected line items, totals, and subtotals in the financial statements are already clearly identified.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "37",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S1 Basis.pdf",
    "source_text": "In determining whether an entity is required to provide quantitative information (as discussed in BC107–BC108 ), the ISSB referred to concepts in IFRS Accounting Standards. The concept of ‘separately identifiable ’ is found in various IFRS Accounting Standards, in which the term has been used to describe items that can be isolated in a manner that supports robust measurement. The ISSB decided that the concept of measurement uncertainty from the IASB ’s Conceptual Framework could be adapted for IFRS S1 to clarify that an entity might not be able to quantify current and anticipated financial effects if quantifying the effects of individual sustainability-related risks and opportunities would involve a high level of measurement uncertainty. The ISSB decided that if an entity is not required to provide quantitative information about the current or anticipated financial effects of a sustainability-related risk or opportunity, the entity would be required to: (a) explain why it has not provided quantitative information; (b) provide qualitative information about those financial effects, including identifying the line items, totals and subtotals within the related financial statements that are likely to be affected, or have been affected, by that sustainability-related risk or opportunity; and (c) provide quantitative information about the combined effects of that sustainability-related risk or opportunity with other sustainability- related risks or opportunities and other factors unless the entity determines that quantitative information about the combined financial effects would not be useful. The ISSB noted that although an entity might not be in a position to provide quantitative information about the current or anticipated financial effects of a particular sustainability-related risk or opportunity, it is still required to provide other quantitative and qualitative information that is useful to users of general purpose financial reports. For example, if an entity does not provide quantitative information for a particular sustainability-related risk or opportunity, it is required to provide quantitative information about the combined financial effects of that risk or opportunity and the other factors affecting it, unless that information is not useful. The ISSB noted that the requirements to disclose current and anticipated financial effects provide users with an understanding of how the financial statements are currently affected by or are anticipated to be affected by sustainability-related risks and opportunities. The ISSB also noted that the requirement to identify affected line items, subtotals and totals in the financial statements is useful in situations in which an entity cannot provide quantitative information about financial effects of individual sustainability-related risks and opportunities. This requirement is useful because it highlights which area in the financial statements is most likely to have been, or will be, affected by the sustainability-related risk or opportunity. The ISSB considered the feedback on some of the terms used in the requirements relating to current and anticipated financial effects. The ISSB decided to consistently use the term ‘reporting period ’ to refer to the period for which sustainability-related financial disclosures are prepared and to referBC109 BC110 BC111 BC112IFRS S1 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR DISCLOSURE OF SUSTAINABILITY- REALTED FINANCIAL INFORMATION —JUNE 2023 36 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 823
  },
  {
    "id": 77404,
    "question": "Which statement best captures the nuanced relationship between IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards and jurisdictional requirements, as outlined in the IFRS S1 Basis for Conclusions on General Requirements for Disclosure of Sustainability-related Financial Information?",
    "options": {
      "D": "IFRS standards provide a foundational global baseline that jurisdictions can augment, provided such additions do not obscure the core information required by the standards.",
      "A": "IFRS standards are designed to replace all jurisdictional requirements, ensuring uniformity across international markets.",
      "B": "Jurisdictional requirements can only supplement IFRS standards if they align perfectly with the global baseline without introducing any additional disclosures.",
      "C": "The development of IFRS standards was primarily driven by the need to eliminate the influence of jurisdictional regulatory bodies like EFRAG and the US SEC.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "14",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S1 Basis.pdf",
    "source_text": "Global baseline and interoperability with jurisdictional and regulatory initiatives IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards are intended to establish a comprehensive global baseline of sustainability-related financial disclosures to meet the needs of users of general purpose financial reports and, therefore, of international capital markets. The global baseline is intended to serve as a comprehensive foundation of disclosure requirements, resulting in comparable, cost-effective and decision-useful sustainability-related financial disclosures that are designed to meet the needs of users. Jurisdictions will be able to build any necessary incremental disclosure requirements on this common baseline. IFRS S1 is intended to be compatible with law or regulation in the jurisdictions in which entities operate, including law or regulation that specifies the documents, formats and structures for disclosing information. Entities are permitted to report additional information needed to meet jurisdictional requirements alongside information required by IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards. The ISSB observed that, for the purposes of comparability, it is important for the global baseline to be visible in an entity’s sustainability-related financial disclosures. IFRS S1 permits additional disclosures if they do not obscure the information required by IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards. Almost all respondents to the Exposure Draft agreed with, and strongly welcomed, the development of IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards to establish a comprehensive global baseline of sustainability-related financial disclosures for the capital markets. A strong message from respondents to the Exposure Draft was the importance of achieving a high degree of interoperability with jurisdictional requirements, notably with proposals published by EFRAG and the US SEC. In response to the strong and widely held views on interoperability, the Foundation began several initiatives, including forming the Jurisdictional Working Group (JWG) to discuss important strategic matters relating to IFRS S1 and IFRS S2 and jurisdictional initiatives on sustainability reporting. When established, the JWG included: (a) the Chinese Ministry of Finance; (b) the European Commission and EFRAG; (c) the Japanese Financial Services Agency and the Sustainability Standards Board of Japan; (d) the UK ’s Financial Conduct Authority; (e) the US SEC; and (f) IOSCO (as an observer).BC27 BC28 BC29 BC30IFRS S1 BASIS FOR CONCLUSIONS © IFRS Foundation 13",
    "new_id": 824
  },
  {
    "id": 77407,
    "question": "Which principle best explains why an entity is not required to identify every sustainability-related risk or opportunity, as outlined in the IFRS S1 Basis for Conclusions on General Requirements for Disclosure of Sustainability-related Financial Information?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The impracticality of conducting an exhaustive search due to undue cost or effort.",
      "B": "The need to ensure that all risks and opportunities are based on supportable and reasonable information.",
      "C": "The prohibition against overstating or understating risks and opportunities based on unsupportable data.",
      "D": "The obligation to focus only on risks and opportunities concentrated in the entity’s value chain.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "20",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S1 Basis.pdf",
    "source_text": "(b) the sources of guidance in IFRS S1 that provide practical guidance on identifying sustainability-related risks and opportunities, including risks and opportunities across a range of sustainability-related issues and specific to industries; and (c) the ISSB ’s ongoing and future work to continue developing IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards and educational materials. Paragraph 3 of IFRS S1 requires an entity to disclose information about all sustainability-related risks and opportunities that could reasonably be expected to affect the entity ’s prospects. In feedback to the ISSB, preparers described challenges in identifying risks and opportunities, such as the breadth of assessments that would be necessary to cover all the sustainability- related risks and opportunities that might affect the entity. In response, the ISSB introduced the concept of an entity using ‘all reasonable and supportable information that is available to the entity at the reporting date without undue cost or effort ’, including information about past events, current conditions and forecasts of future conditions when identifying sustainability-related risks and opportunities (see paragraphs BC10–BC17 ). The ISSB observed that introducing this concept clarifies that an entity: (a) is prohibited from overstating or understating opportunities (or risks) premised on information that is unsupportable or unreasonable; (b) is required to use all information that is available to the entity at the reporting date (including information about past events, current conditions and forecasts of future conditions); (c) is not required to use information that was unavailable at the reporting date; and (d) is not expected to carry out an exhaustive search for information to identify every sustainability-related risk or opportunity —because such an exhaustive search would represent ‘undue cost or effort ’. Sustainability-related risks and opportunities that could reasonably be expected to affect the entity ’s prospects include those that arise throughout the entity ’s value chain. IFRS S1 requires an entity to disclose a description of the current and anticipated effects of sustainability-related risks and opportunities on the entity ’s business model and value chain. An entity is also required to disclose a description of where in the entity ’s business model and value chain sustainability-related risks and opportunities are concentrated. Examples of the type of information an entity might provide include: (a) a beverage company might need to disclose risks associated with water use, especially in areas where water is scarce. The entity might describe how its use of water affects the supply available to meet its operational needs. It might explain how its water consumption affects communities close to the entity ’s operations that rely on the same source of water. It might also explain how over-consumption of water in those locations could lead to risks of reputational damage and loss of customers, or to the imposition of taxes or limits on the use of theBC51 BC52IFRS S1 BASIS FOR CONCLUSIONS © IFRS Foundation 19",
    "new_id": 825
  },
  {
    "id": 77408,
    "question": "Which implication regarding the relationship between IFRS S1 and financial reporting practices can be drawn from the text, as described in the IFRS S1 Basis for Conclusions on General Requirements for Disclosure of Sustainability-related Financial Information?",
    "options": {
      "B": "IFRS S1 ensures compatibility with various GAAPs while leveraging established financial reporting practices to enhance the utility of sustainability-related disclosures.",
      "A": "IFRS S1 mandates that entities using other GAAP must adopt IFRS Accounting Standards for sustainability disclosures.",
      "C": "The alignment of IFRS S1 with the IASB’s Conceptual Framework is intended to restrict its application exclusively to entities following IFRS Accounting Standards.",
      "D": "Entities applying IFRS S1 are required to amend their financial statements to reflect sustainability-related risks as primary financial data.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "6",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S1 Basis.pdf",
    "source_text": "sustainability-related risks and opportunities. This focus on core content reflects feedback on the 2020 consultation on sustainability reporting held by the IFRS Foundation Trustees (the Trustees) and builds on the widely accepted recommendations of the Financial Stability Board ’s Task Force on Climate- related Financial Disclosures (TCFD). IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards use terminology suitable for profit- oriented entities, including public-sector business entities. IFRS S1 specifies that if entities with not-for-profit activities in the private sector or public sector apply this Standard, they might need to amend the descriptions used for particular items of information when applying IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards. The ISSB noted interest in IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards among the public sector and entities other than profit-oriented entities. For example, the ISSB noted the ongoing work by the International Public Sector Accounting Standards Board (IPSASB) on public sector sustainability reporting guidance that is related to IFRS S1 and IFRS S2 Climate- related Disclosures (IFRS S2). The ISSB also noted national measurement schemes, and interest expressed by regulators and other organisations that oversee financial market stability. Financial statements prepared under other GAAP IFRS S1 applies to sustainability-related financial disclosures provided as part of an entity ’s general purpose financial reports. IFRS S1 is designed to require the disclosure of information that complements an entity ’s financial statements, regardless of which generally accepted accounting principles or practices (GAAP) the entity uses in preparing those financial statements. IFRS S1 establishes a base for decision-useful and comparable reporting of sustainability-related financial information by requiring the application of some established practices from financial reporting. IFRS S1 uses definitions and requirements that are consistent, if applicable, with the IASB ’s Conceptual Framework , IAS 1 Presentation of Financial Statements and IAS 8 Accounting Policies, Changes in Accounting Estimates and Errors . The ISSB intends that such an approach does not, in any way, limit the suitability of IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards for entities applying other GAAP instead of IFRS Accounting Standards. Relationship with other IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards IFRS S1 sets out the general requirements that an entity is required to apply to assert compliance with IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards. IFRS S1 identifies the essential elements of a complete set of sustainability-related financial disclosures and sets out the qualitative characteristics of useful sustainability-related financial information. An entity applying IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards would apply the requirements in IFRS S1 in conjunction with other Standards (for example, an entity applying IFRS S2 would refer to IFRS S1 to decide how to aggregate or disaggregate information). As a result, IFRS S1 will establish the basis for furtherBC4 BC5 BC6IFRS S1 BASIS FOR CONCLUSIONS © IFRS Foundation 5",
    "new_id": 826
  },
  {
    "id": 77469,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between an organization's impacts and its contribution to sustainable development, as described in GRI 207: Tax 2019?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Impacts, whether negative or positive, short-term or long-term, always indicate an organization’s direct contribution to sustainable development.",
      "A": "An organization’s impacts on human rights are considered contributions to sustainable development only when they align with the UN Guiding Principles.",
      "B": "Only actual impacts that are reversible and intended can signify an organization’s contribution to sustainable development.",
      "D": "Potential irreversible impacts are excluded from determining an organization’s contribution to sustainable development.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "17",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 207_ Tax 2019.pdf",
    "source_text": "highest governance body governance body with the highest authority in the organization Note: In some jurisdictions, governance systems consist of two tiers, where supervision and management are separated or where local law provides for a supervisory board drawn from non-executives to oversee an executive management board. In such cases, both tiers are included under the definition of highest governance body. human rights rights inherent to all human beings, which include, at a minimum, the rights set out in the United Nations (UN) International Bill of Human Rights and the principles concerning fundamental rights set out in the International Labour Organization (ILO) Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work Source: United Nations (UN), Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework , 2011; modified Note: See Guidance to 2-23-b-i in GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 for more information on ‘human rights’. impact effect the organization has or could have on the economy, environment, and people, including on their human rights , which in turn can indicate its contribution (negative or positive) to sustainable development Note 1: Impacts can be actual or potential, negative or positive, short-term or long-term, intended or unintended, and reversible or irreversible. Note 2: See section 2.1 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 for more information on ‘impact’. indigenous peoples Indigenous Peoples are generally identified as: Source: International Labour Organization (ILO), Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention , 1989 (No. 169) local community individuals or groups of individuals living or working in areas that are affected or that could be affected by the organization’s activities Note: The local community can range from those living adjacent to the organization’s operations to those living at a distance. material topics topics that represent the organization’s most significant impacts on the economy, environment, and people, including impacts on their human rights Note: See section 2.2 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 and section 1 in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 for more information on ‘material topics’. remuneration basic salary plus additional amounts paid to a workertribal peoples in independent countries whose social, cultural and economic conditions distinguish them from other sections of the national community, and whose status is regulated wholly or partially by their own customs or traditions or by special laws or regulations;• peoples in independent countries who are regarded as indigenous on account of their descent from the populations which inhabited the country, or a geographical region to which the country belongs, at the time of conquest or colonization or the establishment of present state boundaries and who, irrespective of their legal status, retain some or all of their own social, economic, cultural and political institutions.• GRI 207: Tax 2019 17",
    "new_id": 827
  },
  {
    "id": 77472,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why aggregated revenues are considered a less appropriate indicator of an organization’s scale of activity in a tax jurisdiction compared to the combination of third-party sales and intra-group transactions with other jurisdictions, as outlined in GRI 207: Tax 2019?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Aggregated revenues double-count local revenues, potentially misleading about the organization's true scale of activity in the jurisdiction.",
      "A": "Aggregated revenues fail to account for the statutory tax rate differences across jurisdictions, leading to inaccurate profit assessments.",
      "B": "Aggregated revenues include intra-group transactions within the same jurisdiction, which can distort the organization's actual economic contribution.",
      "C": "Aggregated revenues exclude critical financial data such as dividends, interest, and royalties, which are essential for assessing activity scale.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "14",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 207_ Tax 2019.pdf",
    "source_text": "organization’s scale of activity in the jurisdiction. It is important that the organization reports the number of employees and/or the number of workers consistently across all jurisdictions and between time periods. Guidance for Disclosures 207-4-b-iv and 207-4-b-v These disclosures require the organization to report revenues from third-party sales for each tax jurisdiction and from intra-group transactions between that jurisdiction and other tax jurisdictions. Intra-group transactions within the same tax jurisdiction are not required, but the organization can report this information separately. Intra-group transactions between jurisdictions can influence the tax bases of the organization in the jurisdictions involved in these transactions. Intra-group transactions within the same tax jurisdiction do not affect the tax base of the organization within that jurisdiction. For this reason, revenues from third-party sales and intra-group transactions with other jurisdictions are a more appropriate indicator of an organization’s scale of activity in a tax jurisdiction than aggregated revenues. Aggregated revenues could result in local revenues being double-counted, which might create a misleading impression about the organization's scale of activity in a jurisdiction. The organization can also report other sources of revenue, for example, dividends, interest, and royalties, where this is standard practice in the sector of the organization. Guidance for Disclosure 207-4-b-vi When reporting profit/loss before tax for a tax jurisdiction, the organization can calculate the consolidated profit/loss before tax for all its resident entities in the jurisdiction. Guidance for Disclosure 207-4-b-vii When reporting tangible assets for a tax jurisdiction, the organization can calculate the consolidated total of the net book values of tangible assets for all its resident entities in the jurisdiction. Guidance for Disclosure 207-4-b-viii When reporting corporate income tax paid on a cash basis for a tax jurisdiction, the organization can calculate the total actual corporate income tax paid during the time period reported in Disclosure 207-4-c by all its resident entities in the jurisdiction. This includes cash taxes paid by entities to the jurisdiction of residence and to all other jurisdictions (e.g., withholding taxes incurred in other tax jurisdictions). If the tax paid includes a significant amount of withholding tax, the organization can explain this. If taxes are incurred in other tax jurisdictions, the organization can report the amount of tax paid to the other tax jurisdictions separately and identify the jurisdictions where the tax was paid. Guidance for Disclosure 207-4-b-x When reporting the reasons for the difference between corporate income tax accrued on profit/loss and the tax due if the statutory tax rate is applied to profit/loss before tax, the organization can describe items that explain the difference, such as tax reliefs, allowances, incentives, or any special tax provisions where an entity benefits from preferential tax treatment. The organization can group explanatory items into a generic category, such as ‘other’, if these items together do not exceed 10% of the difference. The organization can also report the expiration date, investment requirements, and likely long- term continuity of tax reliefs or incentives for a jurisdiction. In addition to providing a qualitative explanation as required by this disclosure, the organization can also report a quantitative corporate tax reconciliation. Guidance for Disclosure 207-4-c and clause 2.1 The organization is required to report information on a regular schedule and make it available in time for information users to make decisions (see the Timeliness principle in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 for more information). The organization is also recommended to report the information for the same reporting period and publish the information at the same time as its financial reporting, where this is possible (see section 5.1 in GRI 1 for more information). However, the GRI 207: Tax 2019 14",
    "new_id": 828
  },
  {
    "id": 77473,
    "question": "When reporting on tax as a material topic, which of the following best describes the relationship between Disclosure 3-3 in GRI 3 and the requirements in GRI 207: Tax 2019?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Disclosure 3-3 in GRI 3 is supplemented by relevant disclosures from GRI 207, but GRI 207 does not replace the core requirement of Disclosure 3-3.",
      "B": "Disclosure 3-3 in GRI 3 replaces the need for any disclosures from GRI 207, as it fully encompasses tax-related impacts.",
      "C": "GRI 207 is optional if the organization has already addressed tax management comprehensively in Disclosure 3-3 of GRI 3.",
      "D": "GRI 207 mandates the creation of new policies or practices if they do not already exist, whereas Disclosure 3-3 only requires reporting on existing items.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "6-7",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 207_ Tax 2019.pdf",
    "source_text": "See Requirements 4 and 5 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 . Reasons for omission are permitted for these disclosures. If the organization cannot comply with a disclosure or with a requirement in a disclosure (e.g., because the required information is confidential or subject to legal prohibitions), the organization is required to specify the disclosure or the requirement it cannot comply with, and provide a reason for omission together with an explanation in the GRI content index. See Requirement 6 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 for more information on reasons for omission. If the organization cannot report the required information about an item specified in a disclosure because the item (e.g., committee, policy, practice, process) does not exist, it can comply with the requirement by reporting this to be the case. The organization can explain the reasons for not having this item, or describe any plans to develop it. The disclosure does not require the organization to implement the item (e.g., developing a policy), but to report that the item does not exist. If the organization intends to publish a standalone sustainability report, it does not need to repeat information that it has already reported publicly elsewhere, such as on web pages or in its annual report. In such a case, the organization can report a required disclosure by providing a reference in the GRI content index as to where this information can be found (e.g., by providing a link to the web page or citing the page in the annual report where the information has been published). Requirements, guidance and defined terms The following apply throughout this Standard: Requirements are presented in bold font and indicated by the word 'shall'. An organization must comply with requirements to report in accordance with the GRI Standards. Requirements may be accompanied by guidance. Guidance includes background information, explanations, and examples to help the organization better understand the requirements. The organization is not required to comply with guidance. The Standards may also include recommendations. These are cases where a particular course of action is encouraged but not required. The word ‘should’ indicates a recommendation, and the word ‘can’ indicates a possibility or option. Defined terms are underlined in the text of the GRI Standards and linked to their definitions in the Glossary . The organization is required to apply the definitions in the Glossary.Any disclosures from this Topic Standard that are relevant to the organization’s tax-related impacts (Disclosure 207-1 through Disclosure 207-4).• GRI 207: Tax 2019 6\n\n[Page 7]\n1. Topic management disclosures An organization reporting in accordance with the GRI Standards is required to report how it manages each of its material topics . An organization that has determined tax to be a material topic is required to report how it manages the topic using Disclosure 3-3 in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 (see clause 1.1 in this section). The organization is also required to report any disclosures from this section (Disclosure 207-1 through Disclosure 207-3) that are relevant to its tax- related impacts . This section is therefore designed to supplement – and not replace – Disclosure 3-3 in GRI 3 . Disclosure 3-3 in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 . REQUIREMENTSThe reporting organization shall report how it manages tax using 1.1 GRI 207: Tax 2019 7",
    "new_id": 829
  },
  {
    "id": 77484,
    "question": "Which scenario would invalidate an entity's claim of using renewable energy under the disclosure requirements of the Leisure Facilities – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "The entity generates renewable electricity on-site and retains Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs) but sells Guarantees of Origin (GOs).",
      "A": "The entity consumes electricity from a grid mix that includes renewable sources, but the renewable portion is outside its control or influence.",
      "C": "The entity purchases renewable energy through a PPA explicitly including RECs and GOs, which are retired on its behalf.",
      "D": "The entity uses biomass materials certified by a third-party standard such as the Forest Stewardship Council.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "7-8",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Leisure Facilities.pdf",
    "source_text": "Energy Management Topic Summary Leisure facilities entities operate large outdoor and indoor facilities that may consume a significant amount of energy. Most of the industry ’s electricity is purchased commercially, which indirectly results in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, a significant contributor to climate change. Entities in the industry are implementing energy management best practices to reduce operating expenses and environmental impacts and to improve their brand value with guests, who increasingly are concerned about environmental sustainability. Metrics SV-LF-130a.1. (1) Total energy consumed, (2) percentage grid electricity and (3) percentage renewable 1 The entity shall disclose (1) the total amount of energy it consumed as an aggregate figure, in gigajoules (GJ). 1.1 The scope of energy consumption includes energy from all sources, including energy purchased from external sources and energy produced by the entity itself (self-generated). For example, direct fuel usage, purchased electricity, and heating, cooling and steam energy are all included within the scope of energy consumption. 1.2 The scope of energy consumption includes only energy directly consumed by the entity during the reporting period. 1.3 In calculating energy consumption from fuels and biofuels, the entity shall use higher heating values (HHV), also known as gross calorific values (GCV), which are measured directly or taken from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2The entity shall disclose (2) the percentage of energy it consumed that was supplied from grid electricity. 2.1 The percentage shall be calculated as purchased grid electricity consumption divided by total energy consumption. 3The entity shall disclose (3) the percentage of energy it consumed that was renewable energy. 3.1 Renewable energy is defined as energy from sources that are replenished at a rate greater than or equal to their rate of depletion, such as geothermal, wind, solar, hydro and biomass. 3.2 The percentage shall be calculated as renewable energy consumption divided by total energy consumption. 3.3 The scope of renewable energy includes renewable fuel the entity consumed, renewable energy the entity directly produced and renewable energy the entity purchased, if purchased through a renewable power purchase agreement (PPA) that explicitly includes renewable energy certificates (RECs) or Guarantees of Origin (GOs), a Green ‐e Energy Certified utility or supplier programme, or other green power products that explicitly include RECs or GOs, or for which Green ‐e Energy Certified RECs are paired with grid electricity. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |LEISURE FACILITIES |7\n\n[Page 8]\n3.3.1 For any renewable electricity generated on-site, any RECs and GOs shall be retained (not sold) and retired or cancelled on behalf of the entity for the entity to claim them as renewable energy. 3.3.2 For renewable PPAs and green power products, the agreement shall explicitly include and convey that RECs and GOs be retained or replaced and retired or cancelled on behalf of the entity for the entity to claim them as renewable energy. 3.3.3 The renewable portion of the electricity grid mix outside the control or influence of the entity is excluded from the scope of renewable energy. 3.4 For the purposes of this disclosure, the scope of renewable energy from biomass sources is limited to materials certified to a third-party standard (for example, Forest Stewardship Council, Sustainable Forest Initiative, Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification or American Tree Farm System), materials considered eligible sources of supply according to the Green-e Framework for Renewable Energy Certification, Version 1.0 (2017) or Green-e regional standards, or materials eligible for an applicable jurisdictional renewable portfolio standard. 4The entity shall apply conversion factors consistently for all data reported under this disclosure, such as the use of HHVs for fuel use (including biofuels) and conversion of kilowatt hours (kWh) to GJ (for energy data including electricity from solar or wind energy). SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |LEISURE FACILITIES |8",
    "new_id": 830
  },
  {
    "id": 77493,
    "question": "Which factor, when reported in relation to local communities, would most directly require an organization to evaluate both the reversibility of its impacts and the community's socioeconomic infrastructure, according to GRI 413: Local Communities 2016?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The state of socioeconomic infrastructure, including health and education systems.",
      "A": "The degree of physical or economic isolation of the local community.",
      "B": "The volume and type of pollution released by operations near vulnerable populations.",
      "D": "The use of hazardous substances impacting reproductive health.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "9-10",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 413_ Local Communities 2016.pdf",
    "source_text": "information available in alternate languages or format for those who are not literate or who do not have access to printed materials. Where necessary, organizations are expected to establish additional or separate processes so that negative impacts on vulnerable or disadvantaged groups are avoided, minimized, mitigated or compensated.1 1International Finance Corporation (IFC), Guidance Notes: Performance Standards on Environmental and Social Sustainability , 2012. GRI 413: Local Communities 2016 9\n\n[Page 10]\nDisclosure 413-2 Operations with significant actual and potential negative impacts on local communities The reporting organization shall report the following information:REQUIREMENTS Operations with significant actual and potential negative impacts on local communities , including: the location of the operations; i. the significant actual and potential negative impacts of operations. ii.a. RECOMMENDATIONSWhen compiling the information specified in Disclosure 413-2, the reporting organization should:2.2 report the vulnerability and risk to local communities from potential negative impacts due to factors including:2.2.1 the degree of physical or economic isolation of the local community; 2.2.1.1 the level of socioeconomic development, including the degree of gender equality within the community;2.2.1.2 the state of socioeconomic infrastructure, including health and education infrastructure;2.2.1.3 the proximity to operations; 2.2.1.4 the level of social organization; 2.2.1.5 the strength and quality of the governance of local and national institutions around local communities;2.2.1.6 report the exposure of the local community to its operations due to higher than average use of shared resources or impact on shared resources, including:2.2.2 the use of hazardous substances that have an impact on the environment and human health in general, and specifically have an impact on reproductive health;2.2.2.1 the volume and type of pollution released; 2.2.2.2 the status as major employer in the local community; 2.2.2.3 land conversion and resettlement; 2.2.2.4 natural resource consumption; 2.2.2.5 for each of the significant actual and potential negative economic, social, cultural, and/or environmental impacts on local communities and their rights, describe:2.2.3 the intensity or severity of the impact; 2.2.3.1 the likely duration of the impact; 2.2.3.2 the reversibility of the impact; 2.2.3.3 the scale of the impact. 2.2.3.4 Guidance for Disclosure 413-2 Internal sources of information about actual and potential negative impacts of operations on local communities can include: Background This disclosure is focused on significant actual and potential negative impacts related to an organization’s operations and not on community investments or donations, which are addressed by GRI 201: Economic Performance 2016 . This disclosure informs stakeholders about an organization’s awareness of its negative impacts on local communities. It also enables the organization to better prioritize and improveGUIDANCE actual performance data;• internal investment plans and associated risk assessments;• all data collected with topic disclosures as they relate to individual communities. For example: GRI 203: Indirect Economic Impacts 2016 , GRI 301: Materials 2016 , GRI 302: Energy 2016 , GRI 303: Water and Effluents 2018 , GRI 304: Biodiversity 2016 , GRI 305: Emissions 2016 , GRI 306: Waste 2020 , GRI 403: Occupational Health and Safety 2018 , GRI 408: Child Labor 2016 , GRI 409: Forced or Compulsory Labor 2016 , GRI 410: Security Practices 2016 , GRI 411: Rights of Indigenous Peoples 2016 , and GRI 416: Customer Health and Safety 2016 .• GRI 413: Local Communities 2016 10",
    "new_id": 831
  },
  {
    "id": 77494,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between 'sustainability' and the organization's interaction with entities upstream and downstream, as described in GRI 413: Local Communities 2016?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Sustainability, as used interchangeably with sustainable development, extends beyond the supply chain to include all activities in the value chain affecting present and future needs.",
      "A": "Sustainability is defined as meeting present needs without compromising future generations, and it applies exclusively to entities within the supply chain.",
      "B": "The value chain encompasses both upstream and downstream entities, but sustainability only pertains to mitigating impacts on local communities by suppliers.",
      "C": "Entities downstream from the organization are solely responsible for ensuring sustainability, while upstream entities focus on human rights compliance.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "14-15",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 413_ Local Communities 2016.pdf",
    "source_text": "Note: See section 1 in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 for more information on ‘severity’. supplier entity upstream from the organization (i.e., in the organization’s supply chain ), which provides a product or service that is used in the development of the organization’s own products or services Examples: brokers, consultants, contractors, distributors, franchisees, home workers , independent contractors, licensees, manufacturers, primary producers, sub- contractors, wholesalers Note: A supplier can have a direct business relationship with the organization (often referred to as a first-tier supplier) or an indirect business relationship. supply chain range of activities carried out by entities upstream from the organization, which provide products or services that are used in the development of the organization’s own products or services sustainable development / sustainability development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs Source: World Commission on Environment and Development, Our Common Future , 1987 Note: The terms ‘sustainability’ and ‘sustainable development’ are used interchangeably in the GRI Standards. value chain range of activities carried out by the organization, and by entities upstream and downstream from the organization, to bring the organization’s products or services from their conception to their end use Note 1: Entities upstream from the organization (e.g., suppliers ) provide products or services that are used in the development of the organization’s own products or services. Entities downstream from the organization (e.g., distributors, customers) receive products or services from the organization. Note 2: The value chain includes the supply chain . vulnerable group group of individuals with a specific condition or characteristic (e.g., economic, physical, political, social) that could experience negative impacts as a result of the organization’s activities more severely than the general population Examples: children and youth; elderly persons; ex-combatants; HIV/AIDS-affected households; human rights defenders; indigenous peoples ; internally displaced persons; migrant workers and their families; national or ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities; persons who might be discriminated against based on their sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, or sex characteristics (e.g., lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex); persons with disabilities; refugees or returning refugees; women Note: Vulnerabilities and impacts can differ by gender. worker person that performs work for the organization Examples: employees , agency workers, apprentices, contractors, home workers, interns, self- employed persons, sub-contractors, volunteers, and persons working for organizations other than the reporting organization, such as for suppliers Note: In the GRI Standards, in some cases, it is specified whether a particular subset of workers is required to be used. Bibliography GRI 413: Local Communities 2016 14\n\n[Page 15]\nBibliography This section lists authoritative intergovernmental instruments and additional references used in developing this Standard. Authoritative instruments: Additional references:Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises , 2011.1. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Risk Awareness Tool for Multinational Enterprises in Weak Governance Zones , 2006.2. United Nations (UN) Convention, ‘International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights’, 1966. 3. United Nations (UN) Convention, ‘International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights’, 1966. 4. United Nations (UN) Declaration, ‘Declaration on the Right to Development’, 1986. 5. United Nations (UN) Declaration, ‘Universal Declaration of Human Rights’, 1948. 6. International Finance Corporation (IFC), Performance Standards on Environmental and Social Sustainability , 2012.7. International Finance Corporation (IFC), Stakeholder Engagement: A Good Practice Handbook for Companies Doing Business in Emerging Markets , 2007.8. GRI 413: Local Communities 2016 15",
    "new_id": 832
  },
  {
    "id": 77504,
    "question": "Which inference about the reporting of parental leave data is most strongly supported by the text in GRI 401: Employment 2016?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The calculation of retention rates excludes employees who left within 12 months after returning from parental leave, regardless of reason.",
      "B": "Organizations are required to report on the total number of employees who took parental leave but not on their return-to-work rates.",
      "C": "Parental leave policies are uniformly applied across all locations of operation due to standardized legislation.",
      "D": "Men’s uptake of paternity leave directly determines an organization’s overall employee retention rate.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "9-10",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 401_ Employment 2016.pdf",
    "source_text": "Disclosure 401-2 Benefits provided to full-time employees that are not provided to temporary or part- time employees The reporting organization shall report the following information: Compilation requirements REQUIREMENTS Benefits which are standard for full-time employees of the organization but are not provided to temporary or part-time employees , by significant locations of operation. These include, as a minimum: life insurance; i. health care; ii. disability and invalidity coverage; iii. parental leave ; iv. retirement provision; v. stock ownership; vi. others. vii.a. The definition used for ‘significant locations of operation’. b. When compiling the information specified in Disclosure 401-2, the reporting organization shall exclude in-kind benefits such as provision of sports or child day care facilities, free meals during working time, and similar general employee welfare programs. 2.3 Background Data reported under this disclosure provide a measure of an organization’s investment in human resources and the minimum benefits it offers its full-time employees. The quality of benefits for full-time employees is a key factor in retaining employees.GUIDANCE GRI 401: Employment 2016 9\n\n[Page 10]\nDisclosure 401-3 Parental leave The reporting organization shall report the following information:REQUIREMENTS Total number of employees that were entitled to parental leave , by gender. a. Total number of employees th at took parental leave, by gender. b. Total number of employees that returned to work in the reporting period after parental leave ended, by gender.c. Total number of employees that returned to work after parental leave ended that were still employed 12 months after their return to work, by gender.d. Return to work and retention rates of employees that took parental leave, by gender. e. Return to work rate=Total number of employees that did return to work after parental leave ___________________________________________ Total number of employees due to return to work after taking parental leavex 100 Retention rate =Total number of employees retained 12 months after returning to work following a period of parental leave ___________________________________________ Total number of employees returning from parental leave in the prior reporting period(s)x 100 RECOMMENDATIONSWhen compiling the information specified in Disclosure 401-3, the reporting organization should use the following formulas to calculate the return to work and retention rates:2.4 Guidance for Disclosure 401-3 Employees entitled to parental leave means those employees that are covered by organizational policies, agreements or contracts that contain parental leave entitlements. To determine who returned to work after parental leave ended and were still employed 12 months later, an organization can consult records from the prior reporting periods. Background Many countries have introduced legislation to provide parental leave. The aim of the legislation is to allow employees to take leave and return to work in the same or a comparable position. The application of legislation varies according to interpretation by government, employers and employees. Many women are discouraged from taking leave and returning to work by employer practices that affect their employment security, remuneration and career path. Many men are not encouraged to take the leave to which they are entitled. Equitable gender choice for maternity and paternity leave, and other leave entitlements, can lead to the greater recruitment and retention of qualified employees. It can also boost employee morale and productivity. Men’s uptake of paternity leave options can indicate the degree to which an organization encourages fathers to take such leave. Men taking advantage of leave entitlements positively impacts women to take such leave without prejudicing their career path.GUIDANCE GRI 401: Employment 2016 10",
    "new_id": 833
  },
  {
    "id": 77505,
    "question": "Which condition, if altered, would most directly undermine the necessity for the proposed amendment to IFRS S2, as described in the Exposure Draft Basis for Conclusions on Amendments to Greenhouse Gas Emissions Disclosures – Proposed amendments to IFRS S2 (Comments to be received by 27 June 2025)?",
    "options": {
      "B": "If all jurisdictional authorities mandated the use of the GHG Protocol Corporate Standard without exception.",
      "A": "If entities operating globally were no longer subject to multiple jurisdictional or exchange requirements.",
      "C": "If the term 'entity' in IFRS Standards were redefined to exclude subsidiaries and only apply to parent companies.",
      "D": "If stakeholders unanimously agreed that duplicative reporting does not affect the quality of sustainability disclosures.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "17",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Basis Draft.pdf",
    "source_text": "Jurisdictional relief from using the GHG Protocol Corporate Standard The proposed amendment The ISSB proposes to amend IFRS S2 to clarify the scope of jurisdictional relief available if an entity is required by a jurisdictional authority or exchange on which it is listed to use a method for measuring greenhouse gas emissions other than the GHG Protocol Corporate Standard. The proposed amendment would clarify that the relief is available when such a requirement from a jurisdictional authority or exchange on which it is listed ( ‘jurisdictional or exchange requirement ’) applies to an entity in whole or in part. Why the ISSB proposed the amendment Without the proposed amendment, the jurisdictional relief as set out in paragraph 29(a)(ii) of IFRS S2 refers to the ‘entity’ and it does not specify whether the jurisdictional relief is available when the jurisdictional or exchange requirement to measure greenhouse gas emissions using a method other than the GHG Protocol Corporate Standard applies to a part or parts of the entity, or if the relief is only available when such a jurisdictional or exchange requirement applies to the entity as a whole. This question is particularly important for entities that operate around the world and might thus be subject to various such requirements for the measurement of their greenhouse gas emissions.6 The absence of specificity in the jurisdictional relief could result in confusion for stakeholders —particularly for preparers, assurance providers and regulators —about whether an entity is able to apply the jurisdictional relief to part of an entity and this confusion could result in diversity in application. The absence of specificity might also increase the amount of duplicative reporting. Specifically, if the relief is misunderstood as being available only in circumstances in which a whole entity is subject to a jurisdictional or exchange requirement, then an entity that is subject to such a requirement, but only in part, would not use the jurisdictional relief in IFRS S2 and such an entity would need to measure part of its emissions more than once. How the proposed amendment would work The ISSB noted that the term ‘entity’ is used in IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards in the same way as in IFRS Accounting Standards —that is, it is used to refer to the reporting entity. The clarification does not change the way that the term ‘entity’ is used in IFRS Standards. The ISSB proposes to clarify that the relief is available if an entity, in whole or in part, is subject to aBC39 BC40 BC41 BC42 6For example, consider sustainability-related financial disclosures provided by a reporting entity with a subsidiary that operates in a jurisdiction that requires it to measure greenhouse gas emissions using a method other than the Greenhouse Gas Protocol: A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard (2004) (GHG Protocol Corporate Standard). This is the only part of the entity where this other method is applicable; the parent and other subsidiaries are not subject to this jurisdictional requirement. In such circumstances, the entity might question whether the jurisdictional relief is available.BASIS FOR CONCLUSIONS —APRIL 2025 16 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 834
  },
  {
    "id": 77509,
    "question": "Under which circumstance would an entity NOT be required to align its industry-classification system for reporting financed emissions with the system mandated by prudential regulators, assuming it does not use GICS, as described in the Exposure Draft Basis for Conclusions on Amendments to Greenhouse Gas Emissions Disclosures – Proposed amendments to IFRS S2 (Comments to be received by 27 June 2025)?",
    "options": {
      "C": "If the entity uses an alternative classification system of its choice that provides useful information to users of financial reports.",
      "A": "If the entity is listed on an exchange that mandates a specific industry-classification system for climate-related disclosures.",
      "B": "If the entity has ceased using GICS prior to the reporting date and no jurisdictional or exchange requirements apply.",
      "D": "If the entity is subject to a jurisdictional requirement to report climate-related financial information using a specified system.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "15",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Basis Draft.pdf",
    "source_text": "(b) to alleviate application challenges for entities not using GICS at the reporting date by permitting an alternative industry-classification system when disaggregating financed emissions information by industry. The ISSB ’s proposed amendments seek to reduce additional legal and cost implications by limiting the requirement to use GICS for the disaggregation of financed emissions. Only an entity using GICS —in any part of the entity —to classify its lending or investment activities at the reporting date would be required to do so. Requiring these entities to use GICS for the purposes of applying IFRS S2 would support the comparability of entities ’ financed emissions disclosures. For the avoidance of doubt, the proposed amendments would mean that the requirement to use GICS would not apply to an entity that used GICS to classify its lending or investment activities prior to the reporting date but has ceased to use GICS for such a purpose at the reporting date. The ISSB proposes to provide relief so that an entity that does not use GICS in any part of the entity to classify its lending or investment activities at the reporting date would be required to use an alternative industry ‑classification system for disaggregating its financed emissions information. If an entity does not use GICS to classify its lending or investment activities and is required by a jurisdictional authority or an exchange on which it is listed to use an industry ‑classification system to report climate ‑related financial information or for other financial reporting purposes (which is intended to include prudential reporting), the ISSB proposes to require the entity to use one of those industry ‑classification systems when applying IFRS S2. In making that selection, the ISSB proposes to require the entity to use an industry ‑classification system used to report climate-related financial information if the entity is subject to such a jurisdictional or exchange requirement. The ISSB proposes this to seek to align as much as possible with the objective of IFRS S2 of providing relevant industry disaggregation to users of general financial reports, while not imposing undue costs or burdens on entities. The amendment is also intended to reduce the potential for a regulated entity to be subject to duplicative reporting because of the requirements in IFRS S2. For example, in some circumstances, the proposed amendment would require an entity not otherwise using GICS for classifying lending or investment activities to use the industry ‑classification system required to be used by prudential regulators instead of requiring the use of GICS. If an entity does not use GICS to classify its lending or investment activities and is not subject to any jurisdictional or exchange requirements to use an industry-classification system to report climate-related financial information or for other financial reporting purposes, the ISSB proposes that the entity use an industry-classification system of its choice. The ISSB proposes that, in making this choice, the entity be required to choose a system that enables it to provide the information in a manner that is useful to users of general purpose financial reports. This proposed amendment would ensure that useful information is provided while providing relief to some entities by enablingBC32 BC33 BC34BASIS FOR CONCLUSIONS —APRIL 2025 14 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 835
  },
  {
    "id": 77510,
    "question": "Under which condition would an entity be required to apply multiple methods for measuring greenhouse gas emissions, and what implication does this have for disclosures, as described in the Exposure Draft Basis for Conclusions on Amendments to Greenhouse Gas Emissions Disclosures – Proposed amendments to IFRS S2 (Comments to be received by 27 June 2025)?",
    "options": {
      "D": "If only part of an entity is subject to a jurisdictional or exchange requirement using a method other than the GHG Protocol Corporate Standard, the entity must disclose the specific methods used for each portion of its operations due to differing measurement approaches.",
      "A": "When a jurisdictional authority mandates the use of GWP values from the latest IPCC assessment, the entity must adopt these values uniformly across all operations, ensuring consistency in disclosures.",
      "B": "An entity can choose to apply alternative methods for any part of its operations as long as it discloses the reasons for selecting those methods, regardless of jurisdictional requirements.",
      "C": "When no jurisdictional or exchange requirements exist, the entity must still measure emissions using both the GHG Protocol Corporate Standard and another method to provide comparative data in disclosures.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "18",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Basis Draft.pdf",
    "source_text": "jurisdictional or exchange requirement to measure greenhouse gas emissions using a method other than the GHG Protocol Corporate Standard. The ISSB also proposes to clarify that if only part of an entity is subject to such a jurisdictional or exchange requirement, the relief to measure greenhouse gas emissions using the method other than the GHG Protocol Corporate Standard is only applicable to that part of the entity. The entity would be required to measure greenhouse gas emissions for the rest of the entity using the GHG Protocol Corporate Standard. The ISSB observed that if the relief is only applied to part of an entity it would then use more than one method to measure its greenhouse gas emissions. The entity would measure some of its greenhouse gas emissions using the GHG Protocol Corporate Standard, and some of these emissions using one or more alternative methods required by one or more jurisdictional authorities or exchanges. Since there could be more than one jurisdictional or exchange requirement, paragraph B28 of IFRS S2 —which requires an entity to disclose the applicable method and measurement approach that the entity uses to determine its greenhouse gas emissions when it uses the jurisdictional relief — has been amended to more clearly reflect this. The ISSB further noted the potential applicability of the requirements related to disaggregation of information in accordance with paragraphs B29 –B30 of IFRS S1. Applicability of jurisdictional relief for global warming potential values The proposed amendment The ISSB proposes to amend IFRS S2 to extend the jurisdictional relief set out in paragraphs 29(a)(ii) and B24 of the Standard in relation to the measurement of greenhouse gas emissions to permit an entity, in specific circumstances, to use global warming potential (GWP) values that differ from those otherwise required in the Standard. The relief would be available if an entity, in whole or in part, is required by a jurisdictional authority or an exchange on which it is listed to use GWP values other than the GWP values based on a 100-year time horizon from the latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change assessment available at the reporting date (GWP values from the latest IPCC assessment) for converting the seven constituent greenhouse gases into a CO 2 equivalent value. In such circumstances, the entity would be permitted to use the GWP values required by such a jurisdictional authority or exchange instead of the GWP values from the latest IPCC assessment for the relevant part of the entity, for as long as such a jurisdictional or exchange requirement applies to that part of the entity. Why the ISSB proposed the amendment Paragraphs B21 –B22 of IFRS S2 require entities to use GWP values from the latest IPCC assessment when converting the seven constituent greenhouse gas emissions into CO 2 equivalent values. However, stakeholders reported that some jurisdictions require the use of GWP values that are not from the latestBC43 BC44 BC45AMENDMENTS TO GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS DISCLOSURES © IFRS Foundation 17",
    "new_id": 836
  },
  {
    "id": 77511,
    "question": "What is the primary reason the ISSB decided against aligning the definition of derivatives in IFRS S2 with a specific GAAP, and what implication does this have for entities, as described in the Exposure Draft Basis for Conclusions on Amendments to Greenhouse Gas Emissions Disclosures – Proposed amendments to IFRS S2 (Comments to be received by 27 June 2025)?",
    "options": {
      "A": "To avoid creating a disconnect between an entity’s financial statements and its sustainability-related disclosures when different GAAPs define derivatives differently, while still requiring entities to disclose their judgments about derivative classifications.",
      "B": "To ensure that all financial instruments classified as derivatives under IFRS 9 are consistently categorized as such in greenhouse gas emissions disclosures, thereby improving comparability.",
      "C": "To allow entities complete flexibility in defining derivatives for greenhouse gas emissions measurement without any need for justification or disclosure of their reasoning.",
      "D": "To simplify the process of measuring Scope 3 Category 15 emissions by adopting a universal definition of derivatives that aligns with operational purposes rather than accounting standards.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "11",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Basis Draft.pdf",
    "source_text": "reporting sustainability-related financial information. Therefore, using a GAAP definition for the amendments might not result in the information about greenhouse gas emissions that is most useful for users of general purpose financial reports. For example, some financial instruments that are accounted for as derivatives in financial statements are not categorised as derivatives in greenhouse gas emissions measurement methodologies.4 Additionally, the definition of derivatives varies by GAAP; so if the ISSB were to provide a definition of derivatives in IFRS S2 aligned with a particular GAAP, it might create a disconnect with an entity ’s related financial statements if an entity uses a GAAP other than the one used as a basis for the IFRS S2 definition of derivatives. Lastly, the ISSB considered that definitions of derivatives for operational purposes may differ from those under GAAP, which would create additional complexity. The ISSB decided that in the absence of a definition of derivatives in IFRS S2 , an entity could determine what it treats as derivatives for the purpose of its Scope 3 Category 15 greenhouse gas emissions disclosure. The ISSB observed that the comparability of financed emissions disclosures might be affected if entities determine what they treat as derivatives differently when applying the proposed amendment. Therefore, the ISSB proposes that an entity using the relief be required to explain what it has treated as a derivative for these purposes. An explanation of the financial instruments that an entity treats as derivatives would aid understandability of their disclosures, and support their comparability with the disclosures of other entities. For example, an entity applying IFRS Accounting Standards might explain that it has used the definition of a derivative as set out in IFRS 9 Financial Instruments in using the relief. The ISSB noted that deciding what to treat as derivatives for the purposes of the limitation would require an entity to apply judgement. Thus, an entity would be required to consider the applicability of the requirements in paragraph 74 of IFRS S1 to disclose the judgements that have the most significant effect on the information included in its disclosures. The ISSB further noted that this approach would avoid reducing the connectivity between financial statements and sustainability-related financial disclosures. Duration of the relief The ISSB considered whether the proposed permission to limit an entity ’s measure of Scope 3 Category 15 greenhouse gas emissions should be provided for a finite duration —that is, as a transition relief. However, the ISSB was unable to identify a basis to determine an appropriate duration for a transition relief. Additionally, the ISSB noted that derivatives, facilitated emissions and insurance-associated emissions were excluded from the Scope 3 Category 15 additional information requirements in paragraphs B58 –B63 of IFRS S2 without a transition period. Therefore, excluding these types of emissions from the measurement and disclosure required by paragraph 29(a)(i)(3) of IFRS S2 is consistent with that approach.BC20 BC21 4For example, IFRS 9 Financial Instruments requires some loan commitments to be accounted for as derivatives.BASIS FOR CONCLUSIONS —APRIL 2025 10 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 837
  },
  {
    "id": 77528,
    "question": "Which scenario would most likely necessitate an entity to reassess its classification of medical waste under the outlined categories, assuming the waste's initial categorization was valid, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "B": "A research facility discovers that bedding from animals not exposed to infectious agents was mistakenly included in the 'Animal waste' category.",
      "A": "A hospital realizes that unused sharps were recorded as 'Sharps' instead of 'Unused sharps,' despite no contact with biological material.",
      "C": "A laboratory identifies that culture dishes used for transferring non-infectious agents were categorized under 'Cultures and stocks.'",
      "D": "A medical center finds that blood-soaked items caked with dried human blood were classified under 'Human blood and blood products' rather than 'Pathological wastes.'",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "232",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Industry.pdf",
    "source_text": "2.1 Cultures and stocks —cultures and stocks of infection agents and associated biological cultures, including cultures from medical and pathological laboratories, and stocks of infectious agents from research and industrial laboratories, waste from the production of biological, discarded, live and attenuated vaccines, and culture dishes and devices used to transfer, inoculate and mix cultures. 2.2 Pathological wastes —human pathological wastes, including tissues, organs, body parts and body fluids removed during surgery and autopsy, or other medical procedures, and specimens of body fluids and their containers. 2.3 Human blood and blood products —(1) liquid waste human blood; (2) blood products; (3) items saturated or dripping with human blood; or (4) items saturated or dripping with human blood now caked with dried human blood, including serum, plasma and other blood components, and their containers used or intended for use in patient care, testing and laboratory analysis, or the development of pharmaceuticals. Intravenous bags also are included in this category. 2.4 Sharps —sharps used in animal or human patient care or treatment, or in medical research or industrial laboratories, including hypodermic needles, syringes (with or without the attached needle), Pasteur pipettes, scalpel blades, blood vials, needles with attached tubing and culture dishes (regardless of presence of infectious agents). Also included are other types of broken or unbroken glassware that were in contact with infectious agents, such as used slide and cover slips. 2.5 Animal waste —contaminated animal carcasses, body parts and bedding of animals known to have been exposed to infectious agents during research (including research in veterinary hospitals), production of biologicals or testing of pharmaceuticals. 2.6 Isolation wastes —biological waste and discarded materials contaminated with blood, excretion, exudates or secretions from humans who are isolated to protect others from specific highly communicable diseases, or isolated animals known to be infected with highly communicable diseases. 2.7 Unused sharps —unused, discarded sharps including hypodermic needles, suture needles, syringes and scalpel blades. 3 The entity shall calculate the percentages of medical waste by their final disposition method as the total weight of medical waste generated that was (a) incinerated, (b) recycled or treated and (c) landfilled, divided by the total weight of medical waste generated. 3.1 Recycling or treatment shall include disposal via recycling facility, treatment facility or other (for example, return to a supplier or commercial composting). 4 If the entity uses a waste transport service, broker or intermediary to handle its medical waste, the entity shall make a good faith effort to determine the final disposition method.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 231",
    "new_id": 838
  },
  {
    "id": 77589,
    "question": "Under which condition would a tenant’s energy consumption data be excluded from the entity’s disclosure of total energy consumption for its portfolio area, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "C": "If the energy consumption data for the tenant’s space is unavailable, but data for the Base Building is available.",
      "A": "If the tenant has sole operational control over the asset and self-generates all its energy.",
      "B": "If the tenant consumes energy in a vacant space within the property.",
      "D": "If the tenant purchases renewable energy exclusively for their operations.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "298",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Industry.pdf",
    "source_text": "5.4 Purchased by Landlord is defined as the energy purchased by the landlord but consumed by the tenant. This can include energy purchased by the landlord but used for vacant space. 5.5 Purchased by Tenant is defined as the energy purchased by the tenant. Typically, this is data outside the entity's immediate control. 5.6 Managed Assets and Indirectly Managed Assets are defined as follows: ‘This definition of Managed assets and the definition of Indirectly Managed assets are solely based on the landlord/tenant relationship. [Managed and Indirectly Managed Assets are] assets or buildings for which the landlord is determined to have ‘operational control ’, where operational control is defined as having the ability to introduce and implement operating and/or environmental policies and measures. In case both the landlord and tenant have the authority to introduce and implement any or all the policies mentioned above, the asset or building should be reported as a Managed asset. Where a single tenant has the sole authority to introduce and implement operating and/or environmental policies and measures, the tenant should be assumed to have operational control, so it should be considered to be an Indirectly Managed asset. ’ 6 The entity shall consider the 2018 GRESB Real Estate Assessment Reference Guide as a normative reference, thus any updates made year-on-year shall be considered updates to this guidance. IF-RE-130a.2. (1) Total energy consumed by portfolio area with data coverage, (2) percentage grid electricity and (3) percentage renewable, by property sector 1 The entity shall disclose (1) total energy consumption by the portfolio area for which energy consumption data coverage is available as an aggregate figure, in gigajoules (GJ) or their multiples, where: 1.1 The scope of disclosure includes all property area in the entity ’s portfolio for which energy consumption data coverage is available, regardless of whether the Tenant Space or Base Building consumes the energy (including outdoor, exterior and parking areas) and which party pays for energy expenses. 1.2 The scope of disclosure excludes the portion of energy consumed by the portfolio area for which energy consumption data is unavailable. 1.2.1 If energy consumption data is unavailable for Tenant Space or Whole Building for a property but is available for the Base Building, then the entity shall disclose this energy consumption data. 1.3 The scope of energy consumption includes energy from all sources, including energy purchased from sources external to the entity and its tenants, and energy produced by the entity or its tenants (self-generated). For example, direct fuel use, purchased electricity, and heating, cooling and steam energy all are included within the scope of energy consumption.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 297",
    "new_id": 839
  },
  {
    "id": 77611,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why an entity might continue practices that result in lifecycle trade-offs related to water scarcity, despite their potential negative impacts, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Because the entity deems these practices necessary to manage water scarcity effectively.",
      "A": "Because such practices are legally mandated by environmental regulations.",
      "B": "Because the entity prioritizes short-term financial gains over long-term sustainability.",
      "C": "Because the lifecycle trade-offs are deemed insignificant compared to other operational priorities.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "347",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Industry.pdf",
    "source_text": "4 Disclosure of strategies, plans and infrastructure investments shall be limited to activities that were active or reached completion during the reporting period. 5 The entity shall discuss if its management of water scarcity results in any additional lifecycle impacts or trade-offs including trade-offs in land use (for example, development of water storage facilities such as reservoirs), energy consumption, and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and why the entity chose these practices despite lifecycle trade-offs. Network Resiliency & Impacts of Climate Change Topic Summary Climate change may create uncertainty for water supply systems and wastewater systems because of potential impacts on infrastructure and operations. Climate change may result in increased water stress, more frequent severe weather events, reduced water quality and rising sea levels that could impair utility assets and operations. Water supply and wastewater disposal are basic services for which maintaining operational continuity is of utmost importance. The increasing frequency and severity of storms challenge water and wastewater treatment facilities, and these factors can affect service continuity. Intense precipitation may result in sewage volumes that exceed treatment facility capacity resulting in the release of untreated effluent. Minimising current and future risks of service disruptions and improving service quality may require additional capital expenditures and operational expenses. As the likelihood of extreme weather events increases, entities that address these risks through redundancies and strategic planning may better serve customers and improve performance. Metrics IF-WU-450a.1. Wastewater treatment capacity located in 100-year flood zones 1 The entity shall disclose the capacity, in cubic metres per day, of its wastewater treatment facilities located in 100-year flood zones. 1.1 100-year flood zones are defined as land areas subject to a 1% greater chance of flooding in any given year. Such areas also may be referenced as being subject to the 1% annual chance flood, the 1% annual exceedance probability flood or the 100-year flood. 1.1.1 Examples of 100-year flood zones may include coastal flood plains, flood plains along major rivers and areas subject to flooding from ponding in low-lying areas. 2 The scope of disclosure shall include all the entity ’s wastewater treatment facilities located in 100-year flood zones. IF-WU-450a.2. (1) Number and (2) volume of sanitary sewer overflows (SSO) and (3) percentage of volume recovered 1 The entity shall disclose the (1) number of sanitary sewer overflows (SSO) originating from sewer systems under the entity ’s operational control. 1.1 SSOs are defined as overflows, spills, releases or diversions of wastewater from a sanitary sewer system.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 346 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 840
  },
  {
    "id": 77630,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes the primary challenge faced by entities in the Electric Utilities & Power Generators industry when operating across both regulated and deregulated markets, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Ensuring reliable and accessible power supply while addressing environmental concerns and adhering to emissions regulations, regardless of market structure.",
      "B": "Balancing the need to generate profits with the obligation to provide electricity at a low cost exclusively in regulated markets.",
      "C": "Maintaining monopoly status in regulated markets while competing for wholesale power generation in deregulated markets.",
      "D": "Transitioning from fossil fuel-based energy sources to renewable energy sources as mandated by emissions-limiting regulations in all markets.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "243",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Industry.pdf",
    "source_text": "Volume 32 —Electric Utilities & Power Generators Industry Description Electric Utilities & Power Generators industry entities generate electricity; build, own and operate transmission and distribution (T&D) lines; and sell electricity. Utilities generate electricity from many different sources, commonly including coal, natural gas, nuclear energy, hydropower, solar, wind and other renewable and fossil fuel energy sources. The industry comprises entities operating in both regulated and unregulated business structures. Regulated utilities face comprehensive regulatory oversight of their pricing mechanisms and their allowed return on equity, among other types of regulation, to maintain their licence to operate as a monopoly. Unregulated entities or merchant power entities are often independent power producers (IPPs) that generate electricity to sell to the wholesale market, which includes regulated utility buyers and other end users. Furthermore, entities in the industry may operate across both regulated and deregulated power markets depending on their operational span. Regulated markets typically contain vertically integrated utilities that own and operate everything from the generation of power to its retail distribution. Deregulated markets commonly split generation from distribution to encourage wholesale power generation competition. Overall, the complex task of providing reliable, accessible, low-cost power while balancing the protection of human life and the environment remains a challenge. Note: The Electric Utilities & Power Generators industry covers activities related only to electricity provision, not to natural gas provision. Some utilities may operate in both electricity and natural gas markets. Utilities undertaking activities related to natural gas sourcing and distribution also should consider the topics and metrics in the Gas Utilities & Distributors (IF-GU) industry. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Greenhouse Gas Emissions & Energy Resource Planning(1) Gross global Scope 1 emissions, percentage covered under (2) emissions-limiting regulations and (3) emissions-reporting regulationsQuantitative Metric tons (t) CO₂-e, Percentage (%)IF-EU-110a.1 Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with power deliveriesQuantitative Metric tons (t) CO₂-eIF-EU-110a.2 Discussion of long- and short-term strategy or plan to manage Scope 1 emissions, emissions reduction targets, and an analysis of performance against those targetsDiscussion and Analysisn/a IF-EU-110a.3 continued...IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 242 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 841
  },
  {
    "id": 77634,
    "question": "Which scenario best illustrates a situation where a building would be classified as an 'Indirectly Managed asset' despite the landlord having some authority over its operations, according to the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "B": "A single tenant occupies the entire building and independently establishes both operational and environmental policies without requiring approval from the landlord.",
      "A": "A landlord implements environmental policies for common areas while tenants retain exclusive control over their leased spaces, including introducing their own sustainability measures.",
      "C": "Both the landlord and tenant share decision-making authority on all operational policies, but the tenant is responsible for implementing them in their leased space.",
      "D": "The landlord purchases water for vacant spaces within the building and enforces strict usage policies across all tenant-occupied areas.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "311",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Industry.pdf",
    "source_text": "5.1.3 Managed Assets and Indirectly Managed Assets 5.1.4 Geographical markets 6 The following terms are defined according to the 2018 GRESB Real Estate Assessment Reference Guide: 6.1 Base Building is defined as water consumed in supplying central building services to lettable/leasable areas and common areas. 6.2 Tenant Space is defined as the lettable floor area (both vacant and let/ leased areas) that is or can be occupied by tenants. 6.3 Whole Building is defined as water used by tenants and base building services to lettable/leasable and common spaces. This should include all water supplied to the building for the operation of the building and the tenant space. 6.4 Purchased by Landlord is defined as water purchased by the landlord but consumed by the tenant. This may include water purchased by the landlord but used for vacant space. 6.5 Purchased by Tenant is defined as water purchased by the tenant. Typically, this is data outside the entity's immediate control. 6.6 Managed Assets and Indirectly Managed Assets are defined as follows: ‘This definition of Managed assets and the definition of Indirectly Managed assets are solely based on the landlord/tenant relationship. [Managed and Indirectly Managed Assets are] assets or buildings for which the landlord is determined to have ‘operational control ’ where operational control is defined as having the ability to introduce and implement operating and/or environmental policies and measures. In case both the landlord and tenant have the authority to introduce and implement any or all the policies mentioned above, the asset or building should be reported as a Managed asset. Where a single tenant has the sole authority to introduce and implement operating and/or environmental policies and measures, the tenant should be assumed to have operational control, so it should be considered to be an Indirectly Managed asset. ’ 7 The entity shall consider the 2018 GRESB Real Estate Assessment Reference Guide as a normative reference, thus any updates made year-on-year shall be considered updates to this guidance. IF-RE-140a.3. Like-for-like percentage change in water withdrawn for portfolio area with data coverage, by property sector 1 The entity shall disclose the like-for-like percentage change in water withdrawn for the portfolio area with data coverage. 1.1 The percentage shall be calculated as water withdrawn (by volume) in the reporting period divided by the water withdrawn (by volume) in the immediately prior reporting period minus one.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 310 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 842
  },
  {
    "id": 77639,
    "question": "Which scenario best demonstrates a violation of the principles for calculating emissions covered under emissions-limiting regulations, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "C": "An entity reports emissions from two distinct regulatory frameworks separately, despite both covering the same emission sources.",
      "A": "An entity excludes emissions from voluntary trading systems when calculating the percentage of regulated emissions.",
      "B": "An entity accounts for emissions subject to overlapping regulations by including them only once in its total calculation.",
      "D": "An entity includes emissions reductions achieved through divestment as part of its absolute emissions reduction target analysis.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "65",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Industry.pdf",
    "source_text": "3.2 The percentage shall be calculated as the total amount of gross global Scope 1 GHG emissions (CO 2-e) covered under emissions-limiting regulations divided by the total amount of gross global Scope 1 GHG emissions (CO 2-e). 3.2.1 For emissions subject to more than one emissions-limiting regulation, the entity shall not account for those emissions more than once. 3.3 The scope of emissions-limiting regulations excludes emissions covered under voluntary emissions-limiting regulations (for example, voluntary trading systems), as well as reporting-based regulations. 4 The entity may discuss any change in its emissions from the previous reporting period, including whether the change was because of emissions reductions, divestment, acquisition, mergers, changes in output or changes in calculation methodology. 5 In the case that current reporting of GHG emissions to the CDP or other entity (for example, a national regulatory disclosure programme) differs in terms of the scope and consolidation approach used, the entity may disclose those emissions. However, primary disclosure shall be according to the guidelines described above. 6 The entity may discuss the calculation methodology for its emissions disclosure, such as if data are from continuous emissions monitoring systems (CEMS), engineering calculations or mass balance calculations. EM-IS-110a.2. Discussion of long- and short-term strategy or plan to manage Scope 1 emissions, emissions reduction targets, and an analysis of performance against those targets 1 The entity shall discuss its long- and short-term strategy or plan to manage its Scope 1 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. 1.1 Scope 1 emissions are defined and shall be calculated according to the methodology contained in The Greenhouse Gas Protocol: A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard (GHG Protocol), Revised Edition, March 2004, published by the World Resources Institute and the World Business Council on Sustainable Development (WRI/WBCSD). 1.2 The scope of GHG emissions includes the seven GHGs covered under the Kyoto Protocol —carbon dioxide (CO 2), methane (CH 4), nitrous oxide (N 2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), sulphur hexafluoride (SF6), and nitrogen trifluoride (NF 3). 2 The entity shall discuss its emission reduction target(s) and analyse its performance against the target(s), including, if relevant: 2.1 The scope of the emission reduction target (for example, the percentage of total emissions to which the target is applicable); 2.2 Whether the target is absolute or intensity-based, and the metric denominator if it is an intensity-based target;IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 64 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 843
  },
  {
    "id": 77648,
    "question": "Which scenario would violate the disclosure requirements for ENERGY STAR® certification as outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "D": "An entity calculates the percentage of its U.S. portfolio certified to ENERGY STAR® by including properties with pre-assessments or unofficial ratings awarded before the reporting period.",
      "A": "An entity excludes from the denominator properties ineligible for ENERGY STAR® certification due to specific use characteristics, while calculating the percentage of its U.S. portfolio certified to ENERGY STAR®.",
      "B": "An entity includes in the numerator properties located in Canada that are certified to ENERGY STAR®, while disclosing the percentage of its U.S. portfolio certified to ENERGY STAR®.",
      "C": "An entity discloses the percentage of its U.S. portfolio certified to ENERGY STAR® based on certifications officially in effect during the reporting period, excluding properties ineligible for certification.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "304",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Industry.pdf",
    "source_text": "1.3 The percentage shall be calculated as the portfolio gross floor area that has an energy rating divided by the total portfolio gross floor area. 1.3.1 The entity may exclude from the denominator the portfolio gross floor area that is ineligible to receive an energy rating based on the property sector, location (for example, located in a region in which energy ratings are unavailable), or other specific use characteristics that cause the property to be ineligible. 1.4 The scope of energy rating schemes includes: 1.4.1 ENERGY STAR® for operations in the U.S. and Canada 1.4.2 EU Energy Performance Certificates (EPC) for operations in the European Union 1.4.3 National Australian Built Environment Rating System (NABERS) Energy for operations in Australia 1.4.4 NABERSNZ for operations in New Zealand 1.4.5 Other energy rating schemes that can be demonstrated to have substantially equivalent criteria, methodology and presentation of results as those schemes stated above 1.5 The scope of energy rating schemes is aligned with the 2018 GRESB Real Estate Assessment Reference Guide in that it ‘only include[s] energy ratings that were awarded before or during the reporting period (pre-assessments or other unofficial rating schemes are not valid). Some energy ratings are valid for a limited period only —the rating should be officially in effect during the reporting period. ’ 2 The entity may additionally disclose the percentage(s) by energy rating scheme. 3 The entity shall (2) disclose the percentage of its portfolio certified to ENERGY STAR®. 3.1 The percentage shall be calculated as the portfolio gross floor area certified to ENERGY STAR® in the US divided by the total portfolio gross floor area in the US. 3.1.1 For a property to qualify as certified to ENERGY STAR®, the certification must be officially in effect during the reporting period (as aligned with the 2018 GRESB Real Estate Assessment Reference Guide). 3.1.2 The entity may exclude from the denominator the portfolio gross floor area that is ineligible to be certified to ENERGY STAR® based on the property sector or other specific use characteristics that cause the property to be ineligible. 3.2 If property is located in Canada, the entity may separately disclose the percentage of the portfolio in Canada that is certified to ENERGY STAR®.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 303",
    "new_id": 844
  },
  {
    "id": 77661,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the nuanced relationship between vented emissions and process emissions, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Process emissions include all non-combusted releases, while vented emissions specifically exclude those classified under process emissions.",
      "B": "Vented emissions are a subset of process emissions, as both involve intentional releases during normal operations.",
      "C": "Vented emissions encompass chemical transformations, whereas process emissions are limited to mechanical releases like depressurizing.",
      "D": "Process emissions and vented emissions are interchangeable terms for non-combusted, intentional releases.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "85",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Industry.pdf",
    "source_text": "1.2.2 Emissions from mobile sources, which may include barges, ships, railcars and trucks for material transport; planes/helicopters and other entity vehicles for personnel transport; forklifts, all-terrain vehicles, construction equipment and other off-road mobile equipment 1.3 Other combusted emissions shall exclude those emissions disclosed as flared hydrocarbons. 1.4 Process emissions shall include those emissions that are not combusted and are intentional or designed into the process or technology to occur during normal operations and are a result of some form of chemical transformation or processing step. Such emissions may include emissions from hydrogen plants, amine units, glycol dehydrators, fluid catalytic cracking unit and reformer generation, and flexi-coker coke burn. 1.5 Vented emissions shall include those emissions that are not combusted and are intentional or designed into the process or technology to occur during normal operations, and which include: 1.5.1 Venting from crude oil, condensate or natural gas product storage tanks, gas-driven pneumatic devices, gas samplers, chemical injection pumps, exploratory drilling, loading/ballasting/transit and loading racks 1.5.2 Venting resulting from maintenance/turn-arounds, which may include decoking of furnace tubes, well unloading, vessel and gas compressor depressurising, compressor starts, gas sampling, and pipeline blowdowns 1.5.3 Venting from non-routine activities, which may include pressure relief valves, pressure control valves, fuel supply unloading valves and emergency shut-down devices 1.6 Vented emissions shall exclude those emissions disclosed as process emissions. 1.7 Fugitive emissions shall include those emissions that can be individually found and fixed to reduce emissions rates to near zero and which may include emissions from valves, flanges, connectors, pumps, compressor seal leaks, Cata-Dyne® heaters, and wastewater treatment and surface impoundments. EM-EP-110a.3. Discussion of long- and short-term strategy or plan to manage Scope 1 emissions, emissions reduction targets, and an analysis of performance against those targets 1 The entity shall discuss its long- and short-term strategy or plan to manage its Scope 1 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 84 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 845
  },
  {
    "id": 77666,
    "question": "Which of the following statements is true regarding how an entity should handle emissions subject to overlapping regulations and the role of voluntary systems in emissions reporting, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "B": "An entity must exclude emissions covered by voluntary systems from its primary disclosure but may discuss these emissions separately, provided they do not overlap with mandatory regulations.",
      "A": "Emissions subject to multiple regulations can be counted multiple times if they fall under different regulatory jurisdictions.",
      "C": "Voluntary emissions-limiting regulations, such as voluntary trading systems, are excluded from the scope of emissions-limiting regulations but may still be disclosed as part of primary reporting.",
      "D": "Reporting-based regulations are considered part of emissions-limiting regulations when calculating the percentage of gross global Scope 1 GHG emissions.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "65",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Industry.pdf",
    "source_text": "3.2 The percentage shall be calculated as the total amount of gross global Scope 1 GHG emissions (CO 2-e) covered under emissions-limiting regulations divided by the total amount of gross global Scope 1 GHG emissions (CO 2-e). 3.2.1 For emissions subject to more than one emissions-limiting regulation, the entity shall not account for those emissions more than once. 3.3 The scope of emissions-limiting regulations excludes emissions covered under voluntary emissions-limiting regulations (for example, voluntary trading systems), as well as reporting-based regulations. 4 The entity may discuss any change in its emissions from the previous reporting period, including whether the change was because of emissions reductions, divestment, acquisition, mergers, changes in output or changes in calculation methodology. 5 In the case that current reporting of GHG emissions to the CDP or other entity (for example, a national regulatory disclosure programme) differs in terms of the scope and consolidation approach used, the entity may disclose those emissions. However, primary disclosure shall be according to the guidelines described above. 6 The entity may discuss the calculation methodology for its emissions disclosure, such as if data are from continuous emissions monitoring systems (CEMS), engineering calculations or mass balance calculations. EM-IS-110a.2. Discussion of long- and short-term strategy or plan to manage Scope 1 emissions, emissions reduction targets, and an analysis of performance against those targets 1 The entity shall discuss its long- and short-term strategy or plan to manage its Scope 1 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. 1.1 Scope 1 emissions are defined and shall be calculated according to the methodology contained in The Greenhouse Gas Protocol: A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard (GHG Protocol), Revised Edition, March 2004, published by the World Resources Institute and the World Business Council on Sustainable Development (WRI/WBCSD). 1.2 The scope of GHG emissions includes the seven GHGs covered under the Kyoto Protocol —carbon dioxide (CO 2), methane (CH 4), nitrous oxide (N 2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), sulphur hexafluoride (SF6), and nitrogen trifluoride (NF 3). 2 The entity shall discuss its emission reduction target(s) and analyse its performance against the target(s), including, if relevant: 2.1 The scope of the emission reduction target (for example, the percentage of total emissions to which the target is applicable); 2.2 Whether the target is absolute or intensity-based, and the metric denominator if it is an intensity-based target;IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 64 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 846
  },
  {
    "id": 77674,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the relationship between an entity's oversight approach to incorporating ESG factors and its strategic asset allocation practices, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "C": "An entity must disclose its criteria for assessing ESG incorporation quality but is not required to link this to specific portfolio-level decisions in strategic asset allocation.",
      "A": "The entity’s oversight approach is exclusively focused on internal operations and does not extend to external fund managers or fiduciary managers.",
      "B": "An entity’s formal oversight mechanisms are directly responsible for ensuring ESG trends influence sector-specific risk modeling at the individual portfolio level.",
      "D": "The entity’s accountability structure for ESG incorporation is independent of how it allocates assets across sectors or geographies, with no required integration.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "121",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Industry.pdf",
    "source_text": "4.1.4 Approach to incorporating ESG factors into investment strategies 5 The entity shall describe its oversight/accountability approach to the incorporation of ESG factors. 5.1 The discussion shall include: 5.1.1 Formal oversight individuals or bodies involved 5.1.2 Roles and responsibilities of employees involved 5.1.3 Criteria used in assessing the quality of ESG incorporation 6 The entity shall discuss whether it conducts scenario analysis or modelling in which the risk profile of future ESG trends is calculated at the portfolio level. 6.1 ESG trends may include climate change, natural resource constraints, human capital risks and opportunities, and cybersecurity risks. 6.2 The entity shall describe the types of portfolios or strategies in which it executes scenario analysis or modelling. 6.2.1 The entity is not required to provide such disclosure at the individual portfolio or strategy level. 7 The entity shall discuss ESG trends it considers apply broadly in terms of their effect on sectors and industries, as well as the trends it deems as sector- or industry-specific. 8 The entity shall describe whether it incorporates ESG factors in strategic asset allocation or allocation of assets between sectors or geographical markets. 8.1 The entity shall describe the types of portfolios or strategies in which it incorporates ESG factors in strategic asset allocation or allocation of assets between sectors or geographical markets. 8.1.1 The entity is not required to provide such disclosure at the individual portfolio or strategy level. 9 The entity shall describe how ESG factors are incorporated in the assessment of and how it influences the entity ’s views on: 9.1 Time horizon of investments 9.2 Risk and return profiles of investments 9.3 Traditional fundamental factors such as economic conditions, central bank policy, industry trends and geopolitical risks 10 When relevant, the entity shall discuss its approach to incorporation of ESG factors in selecting external fund managers and fiduciary managers. 10.1 The entity shall describe its oversight/accountability approach to assessing the quality of incorporation of ESG factors by external fund managers and fiduciary managers, which may include: 10.1.1 Formal oversight individuals or bodies involved 10.1.2 Roles and responsibilities of employees involvedIFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 120 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 847
  },
  {
    "id": 77680,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between water consumption, water withdrawal, and regulatory risk as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Entities must disclose both water consumed and withdrawn in high-stress areas, but only water consumption directly impacts regulatory risks associated with hazardous waste management.",
      "A": "Water consumption is limited to water that evaporates during use, whereas water withdrawal includes all water removed from a catchment area, creating higher regulatory risk for withdrawals.",
      "B": "Regulatory risks are heightened when water does not return to its original catchment area, which aligns with the definition of water consumption but excludes water used in pollution control devices.",
      "C": "Water withdrawal is synonymous with water consumption, and both are disclosed equally to address regulatory risks posed by cement kiln dust and similar industrial outputs.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "58",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Industry.pdf",
    "source_text": "2.2 Water obtained from a water utility in compliance with jurisdictional drinking water regulations can be assumed to meet the definition of fresh water. 3 The entity shall disclose the amount of water, in thousands of cubic metres, consumed in its operations. 3.1 Water consumption is defined as: 3.1.1 Water that evaporates during withdrawal, use and discharge 3.1.2 Water that is directly or indirectly incorporated into the entity ’s product or service 3.1.3 Water that does not otherwise return to the same catchment area from which it was withdrawn, such as water returned to another catchment area or the sea 4 The entity shall analyse all its operations for water risks and identify activities that withdraw and consume water in locations with High (40 –80%) or Extremely High (>80%) Baseline Water Stress as classified by the World Resources Institute ’s (WRI) Water Risk Atlas tool, Aqueduct. 5 The entity shall disclose water withdrawn in locations with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress as a percentage of the total water withdrawn. 6 The entity shall disclose water consumed in locations with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress as a percentage of the total water consumed. Waste Management Topic Summary Construction materials production recycling rates are high. However, waste from production processes, pollution control devices and from hazardous waste management activities present a regulatory risk and can increase operating costs. Cement kiln dust (CKD)—consisting of fine-grained, solid, highly alkaline waste removed from cement kiln exhaust gas by air pollution control devices —is the most significant waste category in the industry. Regulatory risk remains high from evolving environmental laws. Entities that reduce waste streams —hazardous waste streams in particular —and recycle by-products, can reduce regulatory and litigation risks and costs. Metrics EM-CM-150a.1. Amount of waste generated, percentage hazardous and percentage recycled 1 The entity shall disclose the amount of waste generated in metric tons. 1.1 Waste is defined as anything for which the entity has no further use, and which is discarded or released to the environment. 1.2 The scope includes slags, dusts, sludges, used oil and other solid wastes that meet the above definition. 1.3 The scope excludes gaseous waste.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 57",
    "new_id": 848
  },
  {
    "id": 77689,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the implicit relationship between sustainability disclosure topics and the operational scope of entities in the E-Commerce industry, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Strategies to mitigate environmental impacts of product delivery are relevant for pure-play e-commerce entities but explicitly exclude traditional retail operations.",
      "B": "The disclosed metrics on greenhouse gas footprints apply exclusively to brick-and-mortar retailers integrating e-commerce components.",
      "C": "Entities must report on energy consumption and water management only if they operate physical data centers within regions of High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress.",
      "D": "Sustainability disclosures regarding hardware infrastructure are optional for entities whose primary activity is online marketplaces without proprietary data centers.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "24",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Industry.pdf",
    "source_text": "Volume 4 —E-Commerce Industry Description E-Commerce industry entities provide an online marketplace for other entities or individuals to sell their goods and services, as well as retailers and wholesalers that provide an exclusively web-based platform for consumers to buy goods and services. Entities in this industry sell to consumers as well as to other businesses. Because of the accessibility of e-commerce sites, the industry is a global marketplace for buyers and sellers. Note: This industry scope applies only to ‘pure-play ’ e-commerce operations and does not address the manufacturing or brick-and-mortar retail operations of entities. Many consumer goods manufacturers and retailers have incorporated or are in the process of incorporating an e-commerce component to their business. Separate standards exist for the Multiline and Specialty Retailers & Distributors (CG-MR); Apparel, Accessories & Footwear (CG-AA); and Toys & Sporting Goods (CG-TS) industries. Depending on the specific activities and operations of entities in these industries, disclosure topics and metrics associated with the E-Commerce industry also may be relevant. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Hardware Infrastructure Energy & Water Management(1) Total energy consumed, (2) percentage grid electricity and (3) percentage renewableQuantitative Gigajoules (GJ), Percentage (%)CG-EC-130a.1 (1) Total water withdrawn, (2) total water consumed; percentage of each in regions with High or Extremely High Baseline Water StressQuantitative Thousand cubic metres (m³), Percentage (%)CG-EC-130a.2 Discussion of the integration of environmental considerations into strategic planning for data centre needsDiscussion and Analysisn/a CG-EC-130a.3 Product Packaging & DistributionTotal greenhouse gas (GHG) footprint of product shipmentsQuantitative Metric tons (t) CO₂-eCG-EC-410a.1 Discussion of strategies to reduce the environmental impact of product deliveryDiscussion and Analysisn/a CG-EC-410a.2 Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Entity-defined measure of user activity 6Quantitative Number CG-EC-000.A continued...IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 23",
    "new_id": 849
  },
  {
    "id": 77708,
    "question": "When calculating the percentage of wood-fibre-based materials sourced from third-party certified forestlands, how must entities treat materials certified under multiple standards, and why does this approach align with the text's emphasis on transparency and accountability, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "B": "The full weight of materials certified under multiple standards can be counted toward each relevant certification to ensure comprehensive reporting of compliance efforts.",
      "A": "Materials certified under multiple standards should be excluded from calculations to avoid inflating the reported percentages and maintain strict compliance.",
      "C": "Entities must allocate such materials proportionally across each certification to prevent overstating adherence to any single standard.",
      "D": "Such materials should only be counted once, assigned to the most rigorous certification standard, to prioritize accuracy over inclusivity.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "385",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Industry.pdf",
    "source_text": "Metrics RR-PP-430a.1. Percentage of wood fibre sourced from (1) third-party certified forestlands and percentage to each standard and (2) meeting other fibre sourcing standards and percentage to each standard 1 The entity shall disclose the percentage of total wood-fibre-based materials sourced from forestlands certified to forest management standards, where: 1.1 Third-party forest management standards are those certifying forests are harvested in a sustainable manner and ensure adherence to environmental and social criteria including legal compliance, land rights, community and worker relations, environmental impact and biodiversity, forest management plans and practices, land use, wildlife habitat conservation, and water conservation, among others. 1.2 Third-party forest management certifications may include those promoted by the following organisations (or the equivalent): 1.2.1 American Tree Farm System (ATFS) (ATFS Certification) 1.2.2 Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) (FSC Forest Management and Chain of Custody certifications) 1.2.3 Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC) (PEFC Chain of Custody certifications) 1.2.4 Forest certification systems endorsed by the PEFC 1.2.5 Sustainable Forest Initiative (SFI) (SFI Forest Management and Chain of Custody certifications) 1.3 The scope of wood-fibre-based materials includes all inputs processed to be sold as a finished good, including recycled raw materials, virgin raw materials, and goods consumed directly in the production process and excluding biomass for energy. 2 The percentage of wood-fibre-based materials from third-party certified forestlands shall be calculated as the total weight (in air dried metric tons) of the entity’s wood-fibre-based materials sourced from third-party certified forestlands divided by the total weight (in air dried metric tons) of wood-fibre-based materials sourced. 3 The entity shall disclose the percentage of the total wood-fibre-based materials from third-party certified forestlands certified to each standard (for example, FSC Chain of Custody, PEFC Chain of Custody and SFI Chain of Custody). 3.1 The entity shall calculate the percentage of wood-fibre-based materials certified to each standard as the amount of wood-fibre-based materials third-party certified to the respective standard divided by the total amount of wood fibre sourced by the entity. 3.2 If wood-fibre is certified to multiple third-party certifications, the entity shall include the amount of such fibre in its calculations for each relevant certification.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 384 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 850
  },
  {
    "id": 77800,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the required scope of emissions disclosure for entities under the given guidelines, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Nitrous oxide (N2O) is explicitly excluded from the reporting requirements for oxides of nitrogen (NOx), even when emitted by stationary sources.",
      "A": "Entities must report methane as part of their volatile organic compounds (VOCs) emissions if it contributes significantly to atmospheric photochemical reactions.",
      "B": "The definition of dioxins/furans encompasses all polychlorinated dibenzodioxins (PCDDs) and polychlorinated dibenzofurans (PCDFs), regardless of chlorine content.",
      "D": "Particulate matter (PM 10) disclosures are limited to solid materials, excluding any liquid particles with an aerodynamic diameter of 10 micrometres or less.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "54",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Industry.pdf",
    "source_text": "Metrics EM-CM-120a.1 Air emissions of the following pollutants: (1) NO x (excluding N 2O), (2) SO x, (3) particulate matter (PM 10), (4) dioxins/furans, (5) volatile organic compounds (VOCs), (6) polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and (7) heavy metals 1 The entity shall disclose its emissions of air pollutants, in metric tons per pollutant, released into the atmosphere. 1.1 The scope of disclosure includes air pollutants associated with the entity ’s direct air emissions resulting from all the entity ’s activities and sources of emissions, which may include stationary and mobile sources, production facilities, office buildings and transportation fleets. 2 The entity shall disclose its emissions of (1) oxides of nitrogen (NO x), reported as NOx. 2.1 The scope of NO x includes NO and NO 2 but excludes N 2O. 3 The entity shall disclose its emissions of (2) oxides of sulphur (SO x), reported as SOx. 3.1 The scope of SO x includes SO 2 and SO 3. 4 The entity shall disclose its emissions of (3) particulate matter 10 micrometres or less in diameter (PM 10), reported as PM 10. 4.1 PM 10 is defined as any airborne finely divided solid or liquid material with an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to a nominal 10 micrometres. 5 The entity shall disclose its emissions of (4) dioxins/furans. 5.1 Dioxins/furans include, but are not limited to the sum of the 17 congeners of polychlorinated dibenzodioxins (PCDDs) and polychlorinated dibenzofurans (PCDFs) that contain chlorine 6 The entity shall disclose its emissions of (5) non-methane volatile organic compounds (VOCs). 6.1 VOCs are defined as any compound of carbon, excluding carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, carbonic acid, metallic carbides or carbonates, ammonium carbonate and methane, that participates in atmospheric photochemical reactions, except those designated under applicable jurisdictional law or regulation as having negligible photochemical reactivity. 6.1.1 If applicable regulatory definitions of VOCs may conflict with this definition, the entity may define VOCs in accordance with the applicable regulatory definition. 7 The entity shall disclose its emissions of (6) polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs).IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 53",
    "new_id": 851
  },
  {
    "id": 77812,
    "question": "Which of the following combinations of strategies would most comprehensively address both environmental and social risks in the supply chain, as implied by the entity's potential actions in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Audits of suppliers’ environmental practices and maintenance of a supply chain code of conduct.",
      "A": "Supplier training programs on agrochemical application and expenditures on research for alternative crops.",
      "B": "Diversification of suppliers and engagement with suppliers on labor and human rights issues.",
      "C": "Expenditures on research for substitute crops and supplier training programs on environmental best practices.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "218-219",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Industry.pdf",
    "source_text": "2.2 The entity shall identify Tier 1 suppliers that withdraw and consume water in locations with High (40 –80%) or Extremely High (>80%) Baseline Water Stress as classified by the World Resources Institute ’s (WRI) Water Risk Atlas tool, Aqueduct. 3 If the entity is unable to identify or collect data pertaining to all Tier 1 suppliers, the entity shall disclose the percentage of agricultural products for which the source region and water risks are unknown. FB-PF-440a.2. List of priority food ingredients and discussion of sourcing risks related to environmental and social considerations 1 The entity shall identify the highest priority food ingredients to its business. 1.1 Priority food ingredients are defined as ingredients (excluding water) that constitute the largest food ingredient expense, or those ingredients identified by the entity as essential to its products or as having significant environmental or social risks. 1.2 The scope of disclosure includes priority food ingredients sourced by the entity, which may include those sourced directly from contract growers and from producer supply agreements. 2 The entity shall discuss its strategic approach to managing the environmental and social risks that arise from its highest priority food ingredients. 2.1 Environmental risks may include effects of drought and climate change on ingredient prices, reputational damage because of deforestation and other risks resulting from the environmental impacts associated with the entity’s supply chain. 2.2 Social risks may include the effects of workers ’ rights on productivity, reputational damage because of human rights issues and other risks resulting from the social impacts associated with the entity ’s supply chain. 3 The entity may identify which food ingredients present risks to its operations, the risks represented and the strategies the entity uses to mitigate such risks. 3.1 For environmental risks, relevant strategies to discuss may include the diversification of suppliers, supplier training programmes on environmental best management practices, expenditures on research and development for alternative and substitute crops, and audits or certifications of suppliers ’ environmental practices. 3.2 For social risks, relevant strategies to discuss may include supplier training programmes on agrochemical application, engagement with suppliers on labour and human rights issues and maintenance of a supply chain code of conduct.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 217\n\n[Page 219]\nVolume 26 —Restaurants Industry Description Entities in the Restaurants industry prepare meals, snacks and beverages to customers ’ orders for immediate on- and off-premises consumption. Broadly divided into three sub- categories, the restaurant industry includes limited-service eating places, casual full- service eating places and upscale full-service eating places. Limited-service restaurants provide services to customers who order and pay before eating. Fast-food restaurants represent the largest share of the limited-service restaurants segment. Full-service restaurants offer more service, food for consumption primarily on-premises, and typically reflect higher quality food and prices. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Energy Management(1) Total energy consumed, (2) percentage grid electricity and (3) percentage renewableQuantitative Gigajoules (GJ), Percentage (%)FB-RN-130a.1 Water Management(1) Total water withdrawn, (2) total water consumed; percentage of each in regions with High or Extremely High Baseline Water StressQuantitative Thousand cubic metres (m³), Percentage (%)FB-RN-140a.1 Supply Chain Management & Food SourcingPercentage of food purchased that (1) meets environmental and social sourcing standards, and (2) is certified to third-party environmental or social standardsQuantitative Percentage (%) by costFB-RN-430a.1 Discussion of strategy to manage environmental and social risks within the supply chain, including animal welfareDiscussion and Analysisn/a FB-RN-430a.3 Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Number of (1) entity-owned and (2) franchise restaurants Quantitative Number FB-RN-000.A Number of employees at (1) entity-owned and (2) franchise locationsQuantitative Number FB-RN-000.BIFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 218 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 852
  },
  {
    "id": 77844,
    "question": "Which of the following conditions must be satisfied for a property to qualify as certified to ENERGY STAR® in the U.S., and how does this interact with exclusions from the denominator, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The certification must be officially in effect during the reporting period, and properties ineligible due to sector or use characteristics can only be excluded from the denominator but not the numerator.",
      "B": "The certification must be officially in effect during the reporting period, and properties ineligible due to sector or use characteristics can be excluded from both numerator and denominator.",
      "C": "The certification must have been awarded before, during, or immediately after the reporting period, and no exclusions from the denominator are permitted regardless of eligibility.",
      "D": "The certification must have been pre-assessed or unofficially rated during the reporting period, and properties ineligible based on location or other specific characteristics can be excluded from the numerator.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "304",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Industry.pdf",
    "source_text": "1.3 The percentage shall be calculated as the portfolio gross floor area that has an energy rating divided by the total portfolio gross floor area. 1.3.1 The entity may exclude from the denominator the portfolio gross floor area that is ineligible to receive an energy rating based on the property sector, location (for example, located in a region in which energy ratings are unavailable), or other specific use characteristics that cause the property to be ineligible. 1.4 The scope of energy rating schemes includes: 1.4.1 ENERGY STAR® for operations in the U.S. and Canada 1.4.2 EU Energy Performance Certificates (EPC) for operations in the European Union 1.4.3 National Australian Built Environment Rating System (NABERS) Energy for operations in Australia 1.4.4 NABERSNZ for operations in New Zealand 1.4.5 Other energy rating schemes that can be demonstrated to have substantially equivalent criteria, methodology and presentation of results as those schemes stated above 1.5 The scope of energy rating schemes is aligned with the 2018 GRESB Real Estate Assessment Reference Guide in that it ‘only include[s] energy ratings that were awarded before or during the reporting period (pre-assessments or other unofficial rating schemes are not valid). Some energy ratings are valid for a limited period only —the rating should be officially in effect during the reporting period. ’ 2 The entity may additionally disclose the percentage(s) by energy rating scheme. 3 The entity shall (2) disclose the percentage of its portfolio certified to ENERGY STAR®. 3.1 The percentage shall be calculated as the portfolio gross floor area certified to ENERGY STAR® in the US divided by the total portfolio gross floor area in the US. 3.1.1 For a property to qualify as certified to ENERGY STAR®, the certification must be officially in effect during the reporting period (as aligned with the 2018 GRESB Real Estate Assessment Reference Guide). 3.1.2 The entity may exclude from the denominator the portfolio gross floor area that is ineligible to be certified to ENERGY STAR® based on the property sector or other specific use characteristics that cause the property to be ineligible. 3.2 If property is located in Canada, the entity may separately disclose the percentage of the portfolio in Canada that is certified to ENERGY STAR®.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 303",
    "new_id": 853
  },
  {
    "id": 77865,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why energy sourcing decisions in the Multiline and Specialty Retailers & Distributors industry create trade-offs that could impact financial performance, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Because increasing regulations and incentives for energy efficiency may raise conventional electricity prices while making alternatives more competitive.",
      "A": "Because entities must balance the higher costs of renewable energy against the reputational benefits of sustainability.",
      "C": "Because fossil fuel-based energy production is becoming less reliable, leading to operational disruptions.",
      "D": "Because global supply chains are unable to adapt to changes in energy availability, creating logistical inefficiencies.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "36",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Industry.pdf",
    "source_text": "Volume 6 —Multiline and Specialty Retailers & Distributors Industry Description The Multiline and Specialty Retailers & Distributors industry encompasses a variety of retailing categories such as department stores, mass merchants, home products stores and warehouse clubs, as well as a smaller segment of distributors like electronics wholesalers and automotive wholesalers. These entities (except for the distribution segment) commonly manage global supply chains to anticipate consumer demands, keep costs low and keep products stocked in their brick-and-mortar storefronts. This is a highly competitive industry in which each category generally has a small number of important players characterised by generally low margins. The relatively substitutable nature of retail makes entities in this industry especially susceptible to reputational risks. Note: Separate standards exist for the Food Retailers & Distributors (FB-FR), Drug Retailers (HC-DR), E-Commerce (CG-EC) and Apparel, Accessories & Footwear (CG-AA) industries. Retail entities involved in food or drug retail, e-commerce, or apparel, accessories and footwear manufacturing should also consider the disclosure topics and metrics outlined in these other standards. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Energy Management in Retail & Distribution(1) Total energy consumed, (2) percentage grid electricity and (3) percentage renewableQuantitative Gigajoules (GJ), Percentage (%)CG-MR-130a.1 Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Number of: (1) retail locations and (2) distribution centres Quantitative Number CG-MR-000.A Total area of: (1) retail space and (2) distribution centresQuantitative Square metres (m²)CG-MR-000.B Energy Management in Retail & Distribution Topic Summary Entities in this industry require significant amounts of energy for retail facilities and warehouses. An increasing number of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions regulations and incentives for energy efficiency and renewable energy may result in price increases for conventional electricity sources while making alternative sources more cost-competitive. Fossil fuel-based energy production and consumption contribute to significant environmental impacts, including climate change and pollution. Energy sourcing decisions can create trade-offs related to energy supply costs and operational reliability. Overall energy efficiency and access to alternative energy sources are becoming increasingly important for entities to manage. Efficiency in this area can have financialIFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 35",
    "new_id": 854
  },
  {
    "id": 77866,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why disclosing water consumption in regions with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress is particularly critical for metals and mining entities, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "C": "It highlights operational vulnerabilities tied to water scarcity, which could lead to higher costs, liabilities, or lost revenues.",
      "A": "It allows entities to avoid regulatory penalties by proving compliance with local drinking water regulations.",
      "B": "It ensures that all water withdrawn from non-freshwater sources is returned to the original catchment area.",
      "D": "It demonstrates the entity’s ability to use desalination and recirculation technologies effectively in any region.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "78",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Industry.pdf",
    "source_text": "Water Management Topic Summary Mining and metals production can affect both the availability and the quality of local water resources. Metals and mining entities face operational, regulatory and reputational risks because of water scarcity, costs of water acquisition, regulations on effluents or the amount of water used, and competition with local communities and other industries for limited water resources. Effects associated with water management may include higher costs, liabilities and lost revenues because of curtailment or suspension of operations. The severity of these risks may vary depending on the region ’s water availability and the regulatory environment. Entities in the industry may deploy new technologies to manage risks related to water risk, including desalination, water recirculation and innovative waste-disposal solutions. Reducing water use and contamination can create operational efficiencies for entities and reduce their operating costs. Metrics EM-MM-140a.1. (1) Total water withdrawn, (2) total water consumed; percentage of each in regions with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress 1 The entity shall disclose the amount of water, in thousands of cubic metres, withdrawn from all sources. 1.1 Water sources include surface water (including water from wetlands, rivers, lakes and oceans), groundwater, rainwater collected directly and stored by the entity, and water and wastewater obtained from municipal water supplies, water utilities or other entities. 2 The entity may disclose portions of its supply by source if, for example, significant portions of withdrawals are from non-freshwater sources. 2.1 Fresh water may be defined according to the local laws and regulations where the entity operates. If no legal definition exists, fresh water shall be considered to be water that has less than 1,000 parts per million of dissolved solids. 2.2 Water obtained from a water utility in compliance with jurisdictional drinking water regulations can be assumed to meet the definition of fresh water. 3 The entity shall disclose the amount of water, in thousands of cubic metres, consumed in its operations. 3.1 Water consumption is defined as: 3.1.1 Water that evaporates during withdrawal, use and discharge 3.1.2 Water that is directly or indirectly incorporated into the entity ’s product or service 3.1.3 Water that does not otherwise return to the same catchment area from which it was withdrawn, such as water returned to another catchment area or the seaIFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 77",
    "new_id": 855
  },
  {
    "id": 77867,
    "question": "Which of the following is a necessary condition for an entity's GHG emissions data to align with its financial reporting consolidation approach, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The entity must consolidate GHG emission data using the same organizational boundary approach applied in financial reporting, typically aligned with the 'financial control' method.",
      "A": "The entity must use only the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report (2014) as the source for global warming potential values.",
      "B": "The entity must adhere exclusively to industry-specific guidance such as those from the International Aerospace Environmental Group or the US EPA.",
      "C": "The entity must disclose all Scope 1 emissions under voluntary emissions-reduction programs rather than regulated mechanisms.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "51",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Industry.pdf",
    "source_text": "1.1 Emissions of all GHGs shall be consolidated and disclosed in metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO 2-e) and calculated in accordance with published 100-year time horizon global warming potential (GWP) values. To date, the preferred source for GWP values is the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fifth Assessment Report (2014). 1.2 Gross emissions are GHGs emitted into the atmosphere before accounting for offsets, credits or other similar mechanisms that have reduced or compensated for emissions. 2 Scope 1 emissions are defined and shall be calculated according to the methodology contained in The Greenhouse Gas Protocol: A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard (GHG Protocol), Revised Edition, March 2004, published by the World Resources Institute and the World Business Council on Sustainable Development (WRI/WBCSD). 2.1 These emissions include direct emissions of GHGs from stationary or mobile sources that include production facilities, office buildings and product transportation (marine, road and rail). 2.2 Acceptable calculation methodologies include those that conform to the GHG Protocol as the base reference, but provide additional guidance, such as industry- or region-specific guidance. Examples include: 2.2.1 GHG Reporting Guidance for the Aerospace Industry published by the International Aerospace Environmental Group (IAEG) 2.2.2 Greenhouse Gas Inventory Guidance: Direct Emissions from Stationary Combustion Sources published by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 2.2.3 India GHG Inventory Program 2.2.4 ISO 14064-1 2.2.5 Petroleum Industry Guidelines for reporting GHG emissions , 2nd edition, 2011, published by IPIECA 2.2.6 Protocol for the quantification of greenhouse gas emissions from waste management activities published by Entreprises pour l’Environnement (EpE) 2.3 GHG emission data shall be consolidated according to the approach with which the entity consolidates its financial reporting data, which is generally aligned with the ‘financial control ’ approach defined by the GHG Protocol and the approach provided by the Climate Disclosure Standards Board (CDSB) that is described in REQ-07, ‘Organisational boundary, ’ of the CDSB Framework for reporting environmental and social information . 3 The entity shall disclose the percentage of its gross global Scope 1 GHG emissions covered under an emissions-limiting regulation or programme intended to limit or reduce emissions directly, such as cap-and-trade schemes, carbon tax/fee systems, and other emissions control (for example, command-and-control approach) and permit-based mechanisms.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 50 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 856
  },
  {
    "id": 77868,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between an entity's management strategies for priority raw materials and the environmental or social factors outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Strategies like supplier training, industry partnerships, and regenerative agricultural practices are implemented to counteract business risks tied to environmental or social factors affecting priority raw materials.",
      "B": "Management strategies such as enhancing traceability systems and investing in alternative materials are primarily designed to address customer demand for specific raw materials.",
      "C": "The entity’s approach to mitigating risks associated with water stress in cotton-growing regions involves exclusively sourcing certified cotton under third-party standards.",
      "D": "Regulatory compliance issues related to priority raw materials can be fully resolved through the adoption of advanced traceability technologies alone.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "8-9",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Industry.pdf",
    "source_text": "2.1.2 Regulation on greenhouse gases (GHG) 2.1.3 Environmental regulations for suppliers 2.1.4 Land use practices 2.1.5 Production methods that result in water pollution, soil degradation, deforestation or loss of biodiversity 2.2 Social factors may include: 2.2.1 Suppliers ’ animal welfare, labour and human rights practices 2.2.2 Materials sourcing from regions of conflict 2.2.3 Regulations on labour practices or human rights 3 For each priority raw material, the entity shall discuss the business risks and opportunities associated with environmental or social factors. 3.1 Business risks and opportunities may include: 3.1.1 Access to, and availability of, the priority raw material 3.1.2 Ability to trace the priority raw material 3.1.3 Price volatility of the priority raw material 3.1.4 Regulatory compliance issues associated with the priority raw material 3.1.5 Customer demand for products containing the priority raw material 3.1.6 The entity ’s brand value and reputation 4 For each priority raw material, the entity shall discuss its management strategy for addressing business risks and opportunities associated with environmental or social factors most likely to threaten its ability to source priority raw materials. 4.1 Relevant strategies may include: 4.1.1 Enhancing supply chain monitoring and traceability of raw materials suppliers through due diligence practices, research into traceability or the use of traceability systems, technology, supplier screening, supplier audits or certifications, or a list of countries from which the entity sources each priority raw material 4.1.2 Supporting raw material suppliers through supplier training or engagement programmes or introducing regenerative agricultural practices 4.1.3 Partnering with industry groups or non-governmental organisations to address environmental or social factors in supplier regions 4.1.4 Investing in the design phase or in research and development to identify substitutable or alternative materials less impacted by environmental and social factorsIFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 7\n\n[Page 9]\n4.2 If the entity identifies cotton as one of its priority raw materials, it shall discuss its vulnerability to cotton-growing regions with water stress and how it manages the risk of price variability because of sourcing cotton from these regions. 4.2.1 The entity may identify its known sources of cotton for High (40%–80%) or Extremely High (>80%) Baseline Water Stress using the World Resources Institute ’s (WRI) Water Risk Atlas tool, Aqueduct. 4.3 The entity shall disclose any relevant performance measures or targets used to assess the effectiveness of its management approach, as well as its progress against such targets. 4.4 Disclosure corresponds to the Sustainable Apparel Coalition ’s Higg Brand & Retail Module. 5 The entity may use the following table format to organise disclosure. Priority Raw Material (Name)Environmental or Social FactorsDiscussion of Business Risks or OpportunitiesManagement Strategy CG-AA-440a.4. (1) Amount of priority raw materials purchased, by material, and (2) amount of each priority raw material that is certified to a third-party environmental or social standard, by standard 1 For each priority raw material, the entity shall disclose the amount of materials purchased, in metric tons, during the reporting period. 1.1 The entity shall identify priority raw materials using the definition of ‘priority materials ’ outlined in the Priority Material section of the Textile Exchange ’s Materials Terminology Guide . 1.2 Priority raw materials may include synthetic fibres, natural fibres, manufactured cellulosic materials, materials derived from animals, and any other materials used directly to make apparel, accessories, or footwear products, which may include cotton, rayon, viscose, polyester, acrylic, spandex, nylon, rubber, foam, leather, wool, cashmere, mohair, flax, silk, hemp and down. 1.3 The entity shall identify priority raw materials using the categorisation scheme presented in the ‘Materials Portfolio ’ section of the Textile Exchange ’s Materials Terminology Guide . 1.4 If the entity purchases finished goods rather than unprocessed raw materials, it shall calculate the initial amount, in metric tons, of priority raw materials required for production.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 8 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 857
  },
  {
    "id": 77869,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why an entity’s energy sourcing decisions might influence its operating efficiency and risk profile over time, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Because trade-offs in energy sourcing, including cost, reliability, regulatory compliance, and emissions, can alter both financial and environmental risks.",
      "A": "Because energy sourcing directly determines the entity's total production output, which is the primary factor affecting operational efficiency.",
      "C": "Because the use of renewable energy sources always reduces operational costs, thereby improving efficiency across all business units.",
      "D": "Because energy sourcing decisions are mandated by international regulations, leaving no flexibility for entities to manage their risk profiles.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "424",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Industry.pdf",
    "source_text": "3 The entity shall discuss the activities and investments required to achieve the plans or targets, and any risks or limiting factors that might affect achievement of the plans or targets. 4 The entity shall discuss the scope of its strategies, plans or reduction targets, such as whether they pertain differently to different business units, geographies or emissions sources. 5 The entity shall discuss whether its strategies, plans or reduction targets are related to, or associated with, emissions limiting or emissions reporting-based programmes or regulations (for example, the EU Emissions Trading Scheme, Quebec Cap-and-Trade System, California Cap-and-Trade Program), including regional, national, international or sectoral programmes. 6 Disclosure of strategies, plans or reduction targets shall be limited to activities that were ongoing (active) or reached completion during the reporting period. Energy Management Topic Summary Containers and packaging manufacturing is energy-intensive, with energy used to power processing units, cogeneration plants, machinery and non-manufacturing facilities. The type of energy used, amount consumed and energy management strategies depend on the type of products manufactured. Typically, fossil fuels such as natural gas and biomass are the predominant form of energy used, while purchased electricity also may be a significant share. Therefore, energy purchases may be a significant share of production costs. An entity ’s energy mix may include energy generated on site, purchased grid electricity and fossil fuels, and renewable and alternative energy. Trade-offs in the use of such energy sources include cost, reliability of supply, related water use and air emissions, and regulatory compliance and risk. As such, an entity ’s energy intensity and energy sourcing decisions may affect its operating efficiency and risk profile over time. Metrics RT -CP-130a.1. (1) Total energy consumed, (2) percentage grid electricity, (3) percentage renewable and (4) total self-generated energy 1 The entity shall disclose (1) the total amount of energy it consumed as an aggregate figure, in gigajoules (GJ). 1.1 The scope of energy consumption includes energy from all sources, including energy purchased from external sources and energy produced by the entity itself (self-generated). For example, direct fuel usage, purchased electricity, heating, cooling and steam energy all are included within the scope of energy consumption. 1.2 The scope of energy consumption includes only energy directly consumed by the entity during the reporting period. 1.3 In calculating energy consumption from fuels and biofuels, the entity shall use higher heating values (HHV), also known as gross calorific values (GCV), which are measured directly or taken from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 423",
    "new_id": 858
  },
  {
    "id": 77870,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between underwriting, advisory, and securitisation activities as they pertain to ESG integration and revenue disaggregation requirements, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Underwriting, advisory, and securitisation activities must all disclose ESG integration practices, but only underwriting includes derivative transactions explicitly tied to its primary function.",
      "A": "Underwriting and advisory activities are both required to disclose ESG integration exclusively through proprietary investments, while securitisation focuses on marketing repackaged instruments without such disclosure.",
      "B": "Securitisation must report ESG integration only for mortgage-related assets, whereas underwriting and advisory activities are exempt from industry-level revenue disaggregation.",
      "D": "Advisory services are excluded from ESG-related disclosures, while underwriting and securitisation require detailed reporting segmented by GICS industry codes and client tiers.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "142",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Industry.pdf",
    "source_text": "1.1 Integration of ESG factors is defined as the systematic and explicit inclusion of material ESG factors into underwriting, advisory and securitisation activities and may include review of transactions by the entity’s Environmental and Social Risk Management (ESRM) group or screening (exclusionary, inclusionary or benchmarked). 1.1.1 The entity shall describe how ESG factors are integrated in the aforementioned activities. 2 The entity shall disaggregate the revenue from transactions by important business activities including (a) underwriting, (b) advisory and (c) securitisation. 2.1 Underwriting is defined as activities in which the entity raises investment capital from investors on behalf of corporations and governments that are issuing either equity or debt securities. It includes public offerings and private placements, including local and cross-border transactions and acquisition financing of a wide range of securities and other financial instruments, including loans. Underwriting also includes derivative transactions entered into with public and private sector clients in connection with the entity ’s underwriting activities. 2.2 Advisory is defined as activities in which the entity provides financial advice to institutional clients on a fee basis. It excludes wealth management and asset management activities. 2.3 Securitisation is defined as the process through which the entity creates a financial instrument by combining other financial assets and then marketing different tiers of the repackaged instruments to investors. It may include securitisation of residential and commercial mortgages, corporate bonds, loans and other types of financial assets by selling these assets to securitisation vehicles (for example, trusts, corporate entities and limited liability entities) or through a re-securitisation. 3 The entity shall disaggregate the revenue from transactions by industry. 3.1 The entity shall use the Global Industry Classification Standard (GICS) six- digit industry-level code for classifying transactions. 3.1.1 The entity shall use the latest version of the classification system available at the date of reporting. 3.1.2 The entity shall disclose the classification standard used if different from GICS. 4 The entity shall provide disclosure for at least the 10 largest industries by monetary amount of exposure or to industries representing at least 2% of the overall monetary amount of exposure. FN-IB-410a.2. (1) Number and (2) total value of investments and loans incorporating integration of environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors, by industry 1 The entity shall report the number of proprietary investments and loans incorporating integration of environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 141",
    "new_id": 859
  },
  {
    "id": 77871,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures how the Managed Care industry is expected to address the potential migration of tropical diseases to non-tropical regions due to climate change, according to the disclosed strategies in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Through incorporating projections about geographical shifts in disease incidence into their risk models and discussing these impacts on plan affordability.",
      "A": "By focusing exclusively on increasing enrollees in health insurance plans to offset rising costs associated with new disease patterns.",
      "B": "By reducing administrative services for self-funded insurance plans to allocate more resources toward combating infectious diseases.",
      "C": "Prioritizing investments in pharmaceutical benefits management as the primary strategy to mitigate risks posed by vector-borne diseases.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "238-239",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Industry.pdf",
    "source_text": "Volume 30 —Managed Care Industry Description The Managed Care industry offers health insurance products for individual, commercial, Medicare and Medicaid members. Entities also provide administrative services and network access for self-funded insurance plans and manage pharmacy benefits. Enrolment in managed care traditionally has been correlated with employment rates, whereas revenue is driven by medical cost inflation. Legislative uncertainty and a focus on reducing health care costs may create downward pricing pressure and continue to drive industry consolidation. In addition, a focus on patient outcomes and plan performance continues to shape the industry ’s sustainability risks and opportunities. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Climate Change Impacts on Human HealthDiscussion of the strategy to address the effects of climate change on business operations and how specific risks presented by changes in the geographical incidence, morbidity and mortality of illnesses and diseases are incorporated into risk modelsDiscussion and Analysisn/a HC-MC-450a.1 Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Number of enrollees by plan type Quantitative Number HC-MC-000.A Climate Change Impacts on Human Health Topic Summary An increase in extreme weather events associated with climate change could have significant health impacts. These events, coupled with the potential spread of infectious diseases and food and water scarcity, may present material implications for the Managed Care industry through an increase in encounters with the health care system. Entities that manage the risks posed by extreme weather events and potential changes in the incidence, morbidity and mortality of illnesses and diseases may protect shareholder value better.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 237\n\n[Page 239]\nMetrics HC-MC-450a.1. Discussion of the strategy to address the effects of climate change on business operations and how specific risks presented by changes in the geographical incidence, morbidity and mortality of illnesses and diseases are incorporated into risk models 1 The entity shall discuss its strategic business approach to addressing significant risks related to the effects of climate change, which may include changes in the following aspects of illnesses and diseases: 1.1 Geographical incidence 1.2 Morbidity 1.3 Mortality 2 Relevant disclosure may include discussion of: 2.1 Increases in allergic responses, asthma rates and heat-induced illness 2.2 Migration of tropical diseases such as malaria, dengue fever and other vector-borne tropical diseases to non-tropical regions 2.3 Increases in waterborne diseases, such as cholera, because of increased natural disaster incidence 2.4 Increased rates of human developmental diseases such as malnutrition because of decreased food availability 3 The entity shall discuss any projected impacts on revenue, costs or plan affordability. 4 The entity may discuss how it incorporates the effects of climate change into its risk assessment and risk adjustment activities.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 238 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 860
  },
  {
    "id": 77872,
    "question": "Which statement best captures the implicit reasoning behind requiring entities to disclose their policies and procedures for managing environmental and social risks in sourcing iron ore or coking coal, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "A": "To ensure transparency around systemic risks that could threaten long-term operational continuity and stakeholder trust.",
      "B": "To enable entities to demonstrate compliance with voluntary trade organization standards as a substitute for regulatory frameworks.",
      "C": "To allow entities to focus exclusively on internal audits as a sufficient measure for addressing all potential supply chain disruptions.",
      "D": "To prioritize reporting on greenhouse gas emissions over other sustainability metrics due to their direct financial impact.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "71-72",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Industry.pdf",
    "source_text": "Metrics EM-IS-430a.1. Discussion of the process for managing iron ore or coking coal sourcing risks arising from environmental and social issues 1 The entity shall discuss its policies and procedures for managing environmental and social risks that may affect sourcing that are present in its iron ore or coking coal supply chain. 1.1 Discussion shall include any existing or projected risks or constraints in obtaining raw materials (for example, iron ore or coking coal) within the supply chain, including those related to restricted/limited availability, political situations, local labour conditions, natural disasters, climate change or regulations. 1.2 The scope of disclosure may include description of the use of screening, codes of conduct, audits and certifications. 2 If audits are discussed, the entity may disclose whether audits are internal (first party), independent (third party) or administered by peers (for example, trade organisations).IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 70 © IFRS Foundation\n\n[Page 72]\nVolume 10 —Metals & Mining Industry Description The Metals & Mining industry is involved in extracting metals and minerals, producing ores, quarrying stones, smelting and manufacturing metals, refining metals, and providing mining support activities. Entities also produce iron ores, rare earth metals, and precious metals and stones. Larger entities in this industry are integrated vertically – from mining across global operations to wholesaling metals to customers. Note: There exists a separate standard for the Iron & Steel Producers (EM-IS) industry. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Greenhouse Gas EmissionsGross global Scope 1 emissions, percentage covered under emissions- limiting regulationsQuantitative Metric tons (t) CO₂-e, Percentage (%)EM-MM-110a.1 Discussion of long- and short-term strategy or plan to manage Scope 1 emissions, emissions reduction targets, and an analysis of performance against those targetsDiscussion and Analysisn/a EM-MM-110a.2 Energy Management(1) Total energy consumed, (2) percentage grid electricity and (3) percentage renewableQuantitative Gigajoules (GJ), Percentage (%)EM-MM-130a.1 Water Management(1) Total water withdrawn, (2) total water consumed; percentage of each in regions with High or Extremely High Baseline Water StressQuantitative Thousand cubic metres (m³), Percentage (%)EM-MM-140a.1 Number of incidents of non-compliance associated with water quality permits, standards and regulationsQuantitative Number EM-MM-140a.2 Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Production of (1) metal ores and (2) finished metal productsQuantitative Metric tons (t) saleableEM-MM-000.A Total number of employees, percentage contractorsQuantitative Number, Percentage (%)EM-MM-000.BIFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 71",
    "new_id": 861
  },
  {
    "id": 77873,
    "question": "Which condition, if altered, would most directly undermine the entity's ability to accurately classify water as 'fresh' under the disclosure requirements, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Local laws redefine 'fresh water' to include water with up to 1,500 parts per million of dissolved solids.",
      "A": "The entity begins sourcing water exclusively from regions with Low Baseline Water Stress.",
      "C": "The entity switches to using only rainwater collected directly and stored on-site.",
      "D": "The World Resources Institute updates its Aqueduct tool to reclassify certain High Baseline Water Stress areas as Low.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "156",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Industry.pdf",
    "source_text": "Metrics FB-AG-140a.1. (1) Total water withdrawn, (2) total water consumed; percentage of each in regions with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress 1 The entity shall disclose the amount of water, in thousands of cubic metres, withdrawn from all sources. 1.1 Water sources include surface water (including water from wetlands, rivers, lakes and oceans), groundwater, rainwater collected directly and stored by the entity, and water and wastewater obtained from municipal water supplies, water utilities or other entities. 2 The entity may disclose portions of its supply by source if, for example, significant portions of withdrawals are from non-freshwater sources. 2.1 Fresh water may be defined according to the local laws and regulations where the entity operates. If no legal definition exists, fresh water shall be considered to be water that has less than 1,000 parts per million of dissolved solids. 2.2 Water obtained from a water utility in compliance with jurisdictional drinking water regulations can be assumed to meet the definition of fresh water. 3 The entity shall disclose the amount of water, in thousands of cubic metres, consumed in its operations. 3.1 Water consumption is defined as: 3.1.1 Water that evaporates during withdrawal, use and discharge 3.1.2 Water that is directly or indirectly incorporated into the entity ’s product or service 3.1.3 Water that does not otherwise return to the same catchment area from which it was withdrawn, such as water returned to another catchment area or the sea 4 The entity shall analyse all its operations for water risks and identify activities that withdraw and consume water in locations with High (40 –80%) or Extremely High (>80%) Baseline Water Stress as classified by the World Resources Institute ’s (WRI) Water Risk Atlas tool, Aqueduct. 5 The entity shall disclose water withdrawn in locations with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress as a percentage of the total water withdrawn. 6 The entity shall disclose water consumed in locations with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress as a percentage of the total water consumed. FB-AG-140a.2. Description of water management risks and discussion of strategies and practices to mitigate those risks 1 The entity shall describe its water management risks associated with water withdrawals, water consumption and discharge of water or wastewater.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 155",
    "new_id": 862
  },
  {
    "id": 77875,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the implicit relationship between supplier engagement strategies and their role in mitigating risks related to both animal welfare and human rights, as discussed in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Supplier contracts addressing labour and human rights issues are likely to include specific clauses related to animal welfare certifications.",
      "A": "Supplier training programs on environmental management inherently ensure compliance with animal welfare standards.",
      "B": "Diversification of suppliers is primarily aimed at addressing reputational damage caused by antibiotic use in animal protein production.",
      "D": "Supplier engagement on human rights issues indirectly supports animal welfare by fostering a culture of ethical practices across the supply chain.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "225-226",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Industry.pdf",
    "source_text": "1.1.7 Animal welfare, human rights or related supply chain incidents that may result in reputational damage 1.2 Relevant strategies to discuss may include supplier screening, diversification of suppliers, supplier training programmes on best environmental management practices, supplier engagement on labour and human rights issues, and maintenance of a supply chain code of conduct, supply chain audits and certifications. 2 The entity may identify which products or product lines present risks to its operations, the risks represented, and the strategies the entity uses to mitigate such risks. 3 The entity shall discuss its animal welfare standards applicable to its supply chain. 3.1 Animal welfare standards are defined as policies for beef, pork, poultry or dairy production conditions, including: 3.1.1 Animal treatment and handling 3.1.2 Housing and transportation conditions 3.1.3 Slaughter facilities and procedures 3.1.4 Use of antibiotics and hormones 3.2 Discussion shall include, but is not limited to: 3.2.1 Any targets the entity has related to animal welfare standards and its progress toward those targets 3.2.2 Any requirements for suppliers related to animal welfare standards 3.2.3 How, if in any way, animal welfare standards are addressed in supplier contracts 4 The entity shall describe its use of animal welfare certifications. Certifications may include: Animal Welfare Approved, Certified Humane Program, Food Alliance Certified and Global Animal Partnership 5-Step Animal Welfare Rating Program. 5 The entity may disclose the percentage of animal protein sold, by animal protein type, that is produced without medically important antibiotics. 5.1 The percentage is calculated as the carcass (or dressed) weight of animal protein purchased that did not receive medically important antibiotics at any stage of its life divided by the total carcass (or dressed) weight of animal protein purchased. 224 © IFRS Foundation\n\n[Page 226]\nVolume 27 —Drug Retailers Industry Description Drug Retailers industry entities operate retail pharmacies and distribution centres that supply retail stores. Stores may be entity-owned or franchised. Large entities source drugs and other merchandise through wholesalers and distributors. Consumer sales of prescription and over-the-counter pharmaceutical products generate a majority of the industry ’s revenue; other goods sold include household goods, personal care products and a limited selection of groceries. Additionally, the pharmacy retailer segment is expanding its health-focused services by offering clinics at various retail locations, which may add to the industry ’s shifting sustainability landscape. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Energy Management in Retail(1) Total energy consumed, (2) percentage grid electricity and (3) percentage renewableQuantitative Gigajoules (GJ), Percentage (%)HC-DR-130a.1 Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Number of pharmacy locations Quantitative Number HC-DR-000.A Total area of retail spaceQuantitative Square metres (m²)HC-DR-000.B Number of prescriptions filled, percentage for controlled substancesQuantitative Number, Percentage (%)HC-DR-000.C Number of pharmacists 28Quantitative Number HC-DR-000.D Energy Management in Retail Topic Summary Chain drug retailers operate thousands of locations that consume large quantities of energy. Electricity is used primarily for lighting and refrigeration. Many retail locations may operate 24 hours a day, thereby increasing energy demand. Operational energy efficiency and diversification among a range of energy supply sources may mitigate exposure to rising energy costs and limit an entity ’s indirect greenhouse gas emissions. 28Pharmacists are employees who dispense drugs prescribed by physicians and other health practitioners and provide information to patients about medications and their use. Pharmacists may advise physicians and other health practitioners on the selection, dosage, interactions, and side effects of medications.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 225",
    "new_id": 863
  },
  {
    "id": 77879,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between regulatory compliance costs and operational efficiencies in iron and steel production, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Entities can mitigate financial impacts of regulatory compliance by achieving operational efficiencies through cost-effective GHG emission reductions.",
      "A": "Regulatory compliance costs are negligible since technological improvements have already minimized GHG emissions per ton of steel.",
      "B": "Operational efficiencies in reducing GHG emissions lead to increased fuel costs, which offsets any potential financial benefits from regulations.",
      "C": "Climate change mitigation policies eliminate the need for operational efficiencies because they directly cap GHG emissions regardless of production methods.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "63",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Industry.pdf",
    "source_text": "Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Raw steel production, percentage from: (1) basic oxygen furnace processes, (2) electric arc furnace processesQuantitative Metric tons (t), Percentage (%)EM-IS-000.A Total iron ore production 10Quantitative Metric tons (t) EM-IS-000.B Total coking coal production 11Quantitative Metric tons (t) EM-IS-000.C Greenhouse Gas Emissions Topic Summary Iron and steel production generates significant direct greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, primarily carbon dioxide and methane, from production processes and on-site fuel combustion. Although technological improvements have reduced the GHG emissions per ton of steel produced, steel production remains carbon-intensive compared to other industries. Regulatory efforts to reduce GHG emissions in response to the risks posed by climate change may result in additional regulatory compliance costs and risks for iron and steel entities because of climate change mitigation policies. Entities can achieve operational efficiencies through the cost-effective reduction of GHG emissions. Capturing such efficiencies can mitigate the potential financial effects of increased fuel costs from regulations that limit —or put a price on —GHG emissions. Metrics EM-IS-110a.1. Gross global Scope 1 emissions, percentage covered under emissions-limiting regulations 1 The entity shall disclose its gross global Scope 1 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to the atmosphere of the seven GHGs covered under the Kyoto Protocol —carbon dioxide (CO 2), methane (CH 4), nitrous oxide (N 2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), sulphur hexafluoride (SF 6), and nitrogen trifluoride (NF 3). 1.1 Emissions of all GHGs shall be consolidated and disclosed in metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO 2-e) and calculated in accordance with published 100-year time horizon global warming potential (GWP) values. To date, the preferred source for GWP values is the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fifth Assessment Report (2014). 1.2 Gross emissions are GHGs emitted into the atmosphere before accounting for offsets, credits or other similar mechanisms that have reduced or compensated for emissions. 10Note to EM-IS-000.B – The scope of production includes iron ore consumed internally and that which is made available for sale. 11Note to EM-IS-000.C – The scope of production includes coking coal consumed internally and that which is made available for sale.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 62 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 864
  },
  {
    "id": 77882,
    "question": "Which of the following is NOT a valid implication or requirement based on the strategies and efforts described for managing product lifecycle impacts, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "A": "End-of-life considerations must be incorporated into product design, requiring the exclusive use of materials that are universally recyclable.",
      "B": "Entities must exclusively use Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) methodologies compliant with ISO 14040 and ISO 14044 when discussing environmental efficiency improvements.",
      "C": "Designing products with consolidated shipping in mind is considered an effort to manage product lifecycle impacts but is not mandatory for compliance.",
      "D": "The use of recycled materials is presented as a relevant strategy, but entities are not required to quantify the percentage of recycled content in their products.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "18",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Industry.pdf",
    "source_text": "improve lifecycle impacts, reduce regulatory risk, meet growing customer demand and realise cost savings. Metrics CG-BF-410a.1. Description of efforts to manage product lifecycle impacts and meet demand for sustainable products 1 The entity shall discuss strategies to assess and manage the environmental impact of products throughout their lifecycle. 1.1 Relevant strategies and efforts to assess product lifecycle impacts include the use of environmentally focused design principles, and the use of sustainability performance standards, screening tools and sampling methods, among others, including the operational processes used for these assessments. 1.2 Relevant strategies and efforts to manage product lifecycle impacts include changes in materials selection, assessment of upstream environmental impacts, changes in manufacturing (resource intensity), recycled and renewable materials use, optimisation of packaging, design for consolidated shipping, design of low-energy-consumption products, design for product take-back and labelling for recycling, among others. 2 The entity shall discuss factors that drive demand for its sustainable building and furnishings products, including green building certification programmes, jurisdictional procurement criteria, demand from retailers or retail consumer demand. 3 The entity shall describe the scope of its efforts including to which product categories, business segments or operating regions they relate. 4 The entity may discuss its use of Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) and Environmental Product Declarations (EPD) in the context of its approach to reducing environmental impact and maximising product resource efficiency. 4.1 Improvements to the environmental efficiency of products should be discussed in terms of LCA functional unit service parameters (time, extent and quality of function). 4.2 LCA should be based on ISO 14040 and ISO 14044. EPD should be based on ISO 14025 and ISO 21930:2017 for construction products. 5 The entity may disclose the percentage of its products certified to third-party multi-attribute or single-attribute sustainability standards. 6 The entity may describe its extended producer responsibility (EPR) efforts, including: 6.1 How end-of-life considerations are incorporated into product design, including using materials that are easily and commonly recyclable in existing recycling infrastructureIFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 17",
    "new_id": 865
  },
  {
    "id": 77883,
    "question": "Which of the following strategies would be considered insufficient on its own for addressing business risks associated with environmental or social factors for priority raw materials, based on the implied scope and depth of mitigation measures in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Partnering exclusively with industry groups to address regional supplier issues without implementing internal monitoring systems.",
      "A": "Enhancing supply chain traceability through technology and supplier audits while also engaging in supplier training programs.",
      "C": "Introducing regenerative agricultural practices alongside investments in research and development for alternative materials.",
      "D": "Using third-party certifications for raw material sourcing and maintaining a list of approved sourcing countries.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "8-9",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Industry.pdf",
    "source_text": "2.1.2 Regulation on greenhouse gases (GHG) 2.1.3 Environmental regulations for suppliers 2.1.4 Land use practices 2.1.5 Production methods that result in water pollution, soil degradation, deforestation or loss of biodiversity 2.2 Social factors may include: 2.2.1 Suppliers ’ animal welfare, labour and human rights practices 2.2.2 Materials sourcing from regions of conflict 2.2.3 Regulations on labour practices or human rights 3 For each priority raw material, the entity shall discuss the business risks and opportunities associated with environmental or social factors. 3.1 Business risks and opportunities may include: 3.1.1 Access to, and availability of, the priority raw material 3.1.2 Ability to trace the priority raw material 3.1.3 Price volatility of the priority raw material 3.1.4 Regulatory compliance issues associated with the priority raw material 3.1.5 Customer demand for products containing the priority raw material 3.1.6 The entity ’s brand value and reputation 4 For each priority raw material, the entity shall discuss its management strategy for addressing business risks and opportunities associated with environmental or social factors most likely to threaten its ability to source priority raw materials. 4.1 Relevant strategies may include: 4.1.1 Enhancing supply chain monitoring and traceability of raw materials suppliers through due diligence practices, research into traceability or the use of traceability systems, technology, supplier screening, supplier audits or certifications, or a list of countries from which the entity sources each priority raw material 4.1.2 Supporting raw material suppliers through supplier training or engagement programmes or introducing regenerative agricultural practices 4.1.3 Partnering with industry groups or non-governmental organisations to address environmental or social factors in supplier regions 4.1.4 Investing in the design phase or in research and development to identify substitutable or alternative materials less impacted by environmental and social factorsIFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 7\n\n[Page 9]\n4.2 If the entity identifies cotton as one of its priority raw materials, it shall discuss its vulnerability to cotton-growing regions with water stress and how it manages the risk of price variability because of sourcing cotton from these regions. 4.2.1 The entity may identify its known sources of cotton for High (40%–80%) or Extremely High (>80%) Baseline Water Stress using the World Resources Institute ’s (WRI) Water Risk Atlas tool, Aqueduct. 4.3 The entity shall disclose any relevant performance measures or targets used to assess the effectiveness of its management approach, as well as its progress against such targets. 4.4 Disclosure corresponds to the Sustainable Apparel Coalition ’s Higg Brand & Retail Module. 5 The entity may use the following table format to organise disclosure. Priority Raw Material (Name)Environmental or Social FactorsDiscussion of Business Risks or OpportunitiesManagement Strategy CG-AA-440a.4. (1) Amount of priority raw materials purchased, by material, and (2) amount of each priority raw material that is certified to a third-party environmental or social standard, by standard 1 For each priority raw material, the entity shall disclose the amount of materials purchased, in metric tons, during the reporting period. 1.1 The entity shall identify priority raw materials using the definition of ‘priority materials ’ outlined in the Priority Material section of the Textile Exchange ’s Materials Terminology Guide . 1.2 Priority raw materials may include synthetic fibres, natural fibres, manufactured cellulosic materials, materials derived from animals, and any other materials used directly to make apparel, accessories, or footwear products, which may include cotton, rayon, viscose, polyester, acrylic, spandex, nylon, rubber, foam, leather, wool, cashmere, mohair, flax, silk, hemp and down. 1.3 The entity shall identify priority raw materials using the categorisation scheme presented in the ‘Materials Portfolio ’ section of the Textile Exchange ’s Materials Terminology Guide . 1.4 If the entity purchases finished goods rather than unprocessed raw materials, it shall calculate the initial amount, in metric tons, of priority raw materials required for production.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 8 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 866
  },
  {
    "id": 77885,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between product design considerations and extended producer responsibility (EPR) initiatives, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The inclusion of end-of-life considerations in product design complements EPR initiatives but does not replace the need for direct or indirect involvement in recovery and recycling programs.",
      "A": "Product design efforts, such as material recyclability and hazardous substance reduction, are sufficient to meet mandatory EPR requirements in all jurisdictions.",
      "B": "Designing products for disassembly is a necessary condition for an entity to claim participation in voluntary EPR initiatives.",
      "D": "Entities that label products and components for disassembly automatically fulfill their obligations under both voluntary and mandatory EPR schemes.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "14",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Industry.pdf",
    "source_text": "2.1 If the entity has products certified to a previous version of certification requirements, it shall disclose this information, including to which version its products are certified, a breakdown of how many products are certified to that version, and its time line(s) for achieving certification to the most current requirements version. 3 For each jurisdiction where the entity sells products, the entity shall disclose the applicable certification programme or disclose the applicable international certification programme. CG-AM-410a.3. Description of efforts to manage products ’ end-of-life impacts 1 The entity shall describe its efforts to manage the end-of-life impacts of its products, including those related to safe and proper disposal or recycling of constituent chemicals and other product components, which may include toxic heavy metals (for example, mercury and cadmium), rigid polymers, refrigerants and other metals (for example, steel and aluminium). 2 The entity shall describe the scope of its efforts, including to which product categories, business segments or operating regions they relate. 3 The entity shall discuss how it includes end-of-life considerations in product design such as: 3.1 Use of materials that are easily and commonly recyclable in existing recycling infrastructure 3.2 Eliminating or minimising the use of hazardous materials or materials that may otherwise pose environmental harm upon disposal (for example, refrigerants with ozone depleting potential or global warming potential) 3.3 Designing products for disassembly (i.e., designing products so they can be easily, rapidly, and cost-effectively disassembled with commonly available tools) 3.4 Proper labelling of products and their component materials to facilitate disassembly and recycling 4 The entity shall discuss its participation in extended producer responsibility (EPR) initiatives, including: 4.1 Whether the entity directly conducts product take-back, recovery and recycling or if the entity supports infrastructure for product recovery and recycling through joint ventures, partnerships with retailers and others, or by funding research into recycling technologies 4.2 Whether the initiative is voluntary or mandatory 4.3 Relevant performance measures or targets for the initiative such as the total amount of material recovered and the total amount of material recycledIFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 13",
    "new_id": 867
  },
  {
    "id": 77886,
    "question": "Which scenario would be excluded from the entity's disclosure requirements regarding recovered materials, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Products under warranty that are collected for repairs and subsequently reused in their original form.",
      "A": "Materials sent to a third party for refurbishment with the intent to reintroduce them into the supply chain.",
      "B": "End-of-life products physically handled by the entity and recycled into new components.",
      "C": "Recovered materials processed internally by the entity to regenerate usable products.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "19",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Industry.pdf",
    "source_text": "6.2 Designing products for disassembly (designing products so they can be easily, rapidly and cost-effectively disassembled with commonly available tools) 6.3 Proper labelling of products and their component materials to facilitate disassembly and recycling. CG-BF-410a.2. (1) Weight of end-of-life material recovered, (2) percentage of recovered materials recycled 1 The entity shall disclose the weight, in metric tons, of materials recovered, including those recovered through recycling services, product take-back programmes and refurbishment services. 1.1 The scope of disclosure shall include products, materials and parts at the end of their useful life that would have otherwise been discarded as waste or used for energy recovery, but have instead been collected. 1.2 The scope of disclosure shall include both materials physically handled by the entity and materials of which the entity does not take physical possession, but for which it has contracted with a third party the task of collection for the express purpose of reuse, recycling or refurbishment. 1.3 The scope of disclosure excludes products and parts that are under warranty and have been collected for repairs. 2 The entity shall disclose the percentage of end-of-life materials recovered that were recycled or remanufactured. 2.1 Recycled and remanufactured materials are defined as waste materials reprocessed or treated by means of production or manufacturing processes and made into a final product or a component for incorporation into a product. 2.2 The scope of recycled materials includes materials used, reused or reclaimed. 2.2.1 Reused materials are defined as those recovered products or components of products used for the same purpose for which they were conceived. 2.2.2 Reclaimed materials are defined as those processed to recover or regenerate a usable product. 2.3 The scope of recycled materials includes materials sent for further recycling through the transfer to a third party for the express purpose of reuse, recycling or refurbishment. 2.4 The scope of recycled and remanufactured products includes primary recycled materials, co-products (outputs of equal value to primary recycled materials), and by-products (outputs of lesser value than primary recycled materials). 2.5 The entity shall calculate the percentage as the weight of incoming recovered material recycled or remanufactured divided by the total weight of incoming recovered material.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 18 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 868
  },
  {
    "id": 77887,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why an entity in the Home Builders industry might emphasize the certification of homes to third-party multi-attribute green building standards, according to the disclosed metrics in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "A": "To communicate the incorporation of resource efficiency into home design and appeal to environmentally conscious customers.",
      "B": "To directly reduce the monetary losses from legal proceedings related to environmental regulations.",
      "C": "To improve stakeholder relations by showcasing compliance with fugitive emissions regulations.",
      "D": "To ensure eligibility for pipeline replacement rate disclosures under gas delivery infrastructure requirements.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "283-284",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Industry.pdf",
    "source_text": "7 The entity shall discuss direct or indirect financial opportunities related to the integrity of gas delivery infrastructure, which may include improvements to stakeholder relations, opportunities for capital investments, reduction in customer rates through improved operational efficiency, and reduced risks of regulatory or civil fines or settlements. 8 The entity may disclose the following: 8.1 Pipeline replacement rates 8.2 Average response time for gas emergencies 8.3 Open Grade 2 and 2+ leaks 8.4 Fugitive emissions, including the technique(s) employed to measure leakage, the amount of leakage calculated according to each technique it employs, and the regulations to which its gas leakage is subject. 8.5 Process emissions 8.6 Other efforts designed to reduce emissions or improve the safety of its gas delivery infrastructureIFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 282 © IFRS Foundation\n\n[Page 284]\nVolume 35 —Home Builders Industry Description Home Builders industry entities build new homes and develop residential communities. Development efforts generally include land acquisition, site preparation, home construction and home sales. The majority of the industry focuses on the development and sale of single-family homes, which are typically part of entity-designed residential communities. A smaller segment develops town homes, condominiums, multi-family housing and mixed-use development. Many entities in the industry offer financing services to individual homebuyers. The industry is fragmented, since many developers of all sizes exist, which vary in entity structure and geographical focus. Listed entities tend to be significantly larger and more integrated than the numerous privately held home builders. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Land Use & Ecological ImpactsNumber of (1) lots and (2) homes delivered on redevelopment sitesQuantitative Number IF-HB-160a.1 Number of (1) lots and (2) homes delivered in regions with High or Extremely High Baseline Water StressQuantitative Number IF-HB-160a.2 Total amount of monetary losses as a result of legal proceedings associated with environmental regulations 45Quantitative Presentation currencyIF-HB-160a.3 Discussion of process to integrate environmental considerations into site selection, site design and site development and constructionDiscussion and Analysisn/a IF-HB-160a.4 Design for Resource Efficiency(1) Number of homes that obtained a certified residential energy efficiency rating and (2) average ratingQuantitative Number, RatingIF-HB-410a.1 Percentage of installed water fixtures certified to a water efficiency standardQuantitative Percentage (%)IF-HB-410a.2 Number of homes delivered certified to a third-party multi-attribute green building standardQuantitative Number IF-HB-410a.3 Description of risks and opportunities related to incorporating resource efficiency into home design, and how benefits are communicated to customersDiscussion and Analysisn/a IF-HB-410a.4 continued... 45Note to IF-HB-160a.3 – The entity shall briefly describe the nature, context, and any corrective actions taken as a result of the monetary losses.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 283",
    "new_id": 869
  },
  {
    "id": 77888,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why energy management remains a critical issue for real estate entities even when energy costs are primarily borne by occupants, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Because building energy performance influences tenant demand, regulatory risks, and asset value appreciation.",
      "A": "Because energy costs assumed by occupants have no impact on tenant demand or rental rates.",
      "C": "Because entities are legally required to manage energy performance regardless of cost allocation.",
      "D": "Because renewable energy production is mandated for all property sectors.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "295",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Industry.pdf",
    "source_text": "...continued ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Leasable floor area, by property sector 50Quantitative Square metres (m²)IF-RE-000.B Percentage of indirectly managed assets, by property sector 51Quantitative Percentage (%) by floor areaIF-RE-000.C Average occupancy rate, by property sector 52Quantitative Percentage (%)IF-RE-000.D Energy Management Topic Summary Real estate assets consume significant amounts of energy for space heating, ventilating, air conditioning, water heating, lighting and using equipment and appliances. The type and magnitude of energy used and strategies for energy management are dependent upon the real estate asset class, among other factors. Generally, grid electricity is the predominant form of consumed energy, though on-site fuel combustion and renewable energy production also serve important roles. Energy costs may be borne by entities or property occupants; either way, energy management is a significant industry issue. To the extent that the real estate owner assumes direct responsibility for energy costs, such costs often represent significant operating costs, indicating the importance of energy management. Energy pricing volatility and a general trend of electricity price increases, energy-related regulations, potentially wide variations in energy performance in existing building stock, and opportunities for efficiency improvements through economically attractive capital investments all show the importance of energy management. Energy costs assumed by occupants, either in whole or in part, are nonetheless likely to affect entities through various channels. Building energy performance is a notable driver of tenant demand, because it allows them to control operating costs, mitigate potential environmental impacts, and, often just as importantly, maintain a reputation for resource conservation. Additionally, real estate owners may be exposed to energy-related regulations even if energy costs are the occupants ’ responsibility. Overall, entities that effectively manage asset energy performance may realise reduced operating costs and regulatory risks, as well as increased tenant demand, rental rates and occupancy rates — all of which drive revenue and asset value appreciation. Improving energy performance is 50Note to IF-RE-000.B – Leasable floor area shall be disclosed separately for each portion of the entity’s portfolio where properties are classified into sectors that are aligned with the FTSE Nareit Classification Structure. Number of units may be used in place of floor area in the Apartments and Lodging/Resorts property sectors when floor area is not available. 51Note to IF-RE-000.C –The definition of “indirectly managed assets ” is solely based on the landlord/tenant relationship and is aligned with the 2018 GRESB Real Estate Assessment Reference Guide: “Where a single tenant has the sole authority to introduce and implement operating and/or environmental policies and measures, the tenant should be assumed to have operational control, so [the asset] should be considered to be an Indirectly Managed Asset. ” Percentage of indirectly managed assets shall be disclosed separately for each portion of the entity’s portfolio where properties are classified into sectors that are aligned with the FTSE Nareit Classification Structure. 52Note to IF-RE-000.D – Average occupancy rate shall be disclosed separately for each portion of the entity ’s portfolio where properties are classified into sectors that are aligned with the FTSE Nareit Classification Structure.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 294 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 870
  },
  {
    "id": 77893,
    "question": "Which of the following accurately reflects a logical implication of how the organization must handle calculations for transported hazardous waste, based on the interplay between the definitions and methodology provided in GRI 306: Effluents and Waste 2016?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The inclusion of waste transported between different locations of the organization is required for both imported and exported hazardous waste calculations, except when crossing international borders.",
      "A": "The total weight of hazardous waste transported excludes any waste moved between locations owned, leased, or managed by the organization, as these movements are considered internal operations.",
      "B": "The conversion of volumes to weight is optional when calculating transported hazardous waste if the organization provides a detailed explanation justifying why such conversions are unnecessary.",
      "D": "Hazardous waste treated by external sources/suppliers is excluded from the calculation of transported waste only if it has not been exported or imported by the organization.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "11",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 306_ Effluents and Waste 2016.pdf",
    "source_text": "Disclosure 306-4 Transport of hazardous waste The reporting organization shall report the following information: a. Total weight for each of the following: i. Hazardous waste transported ii. Hazardous waste imported iii. Hazardous waste exported iv. Hazardous waste treated b. Percentage of hazardous waste shipped internationally. c. Standards, methodologies, and assumptions used. Compilation requirements 2.4 When compiling the information specified in Disclosure 306-4, the reporting organization shall: 2.4.1 convert volumes to an estimate of weight; 2.4.2 in response to Disclosure 306-4-c, provide a brief explanation of the methodology used for making these conversions.REQUIREMENTS Guidance for Disclosure 306-4 This disclosure covers waste deemed hazardous under the terms of the Basel Convention Annex I, II, III, and VIII (see reference 1 in the References section). It covers hazardous waste transported by or on behalf of the reporting organization within the reporting period by destination, including transport across operational boundaries and within operations. The organization can calculate the total weight of transported hazardous waste using the following equation: Total weight of hazardous waste transported by destination = Weight of hazardous waste transported to the organization by destination from external sources/suppliers not owned by the organization + Weight of hazardous waste transported from the organization by destination to external sources/suppliers not owned by the organization + Weight of hazardous waste transported nationally and internationally by destination between locations owned, leased, or managed by the organization Imported hazardous waste can be calculated as the total weight of hazardous waste transported across international borders and which enters the boundaries of the organization, by destination, excluding waste transported between different locations of the organization. Exported hazardous waste can be calculated as the proportion of the total amount of transported hazardous waste by destination that is transported from the organization to locations abroad, including all waste that leaves the boundaries of the organization to cross international borders and excluding transportation between different locations of the organization. For treated waste, the organization can identify: • the portion of the total amount of transported and exported waste that the organization has treated, by destination; • the portion of the total amount of waste, by destination, that is treated by external sources/suppliers, that has been transported, exported, or imported by the organization.GUIDANCE GRI 306: Effluents and Waste 2016 11",
    "new_id": 871
  },
  {
    "id": 77897,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the organization's obligations and options regarding water discharge reporting under the described standards in GRI 303: Water and Effluents 2018?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The organization is required to separately report third-party water discharges and provide at least one figure for 'other water,' even if additional breakdowns are based on internal practices.",
      "A": "The organization must report all unauthorized discharges exceeding regulatory limits but is not required to disclose any future plans for reducing such incidents.",
      "B": "An organization may choose to report only the total volume of freshwater discharged, as reporting on 'other water' is optional unless specific pollutants are present.",
      "C": "While the organization must report water discharge by treatment levels, it is not obligated to explain the rationale behind selecting those treatment levels unless local regulations demand it.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "14",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 303_ Water and Effluents 2018.pdf",
    "source_text": "Guidance for Disclosure 303-4 For an example of how to present information on requirements in Disclosure 303-4, see Table 1. See Guidance for Disclosure 303-3-b for how to assess areas with water stress. Guidance for Disclosure 303-4-a-iv An example of third-party water discharge is when an organization sends water and effluents to other organizations for use. In these instances, the organization is required to report the volume of this water discharge separately. Guidance for Disclosures 303-4-b and 303-4-c The organization is required to provide a breakdown of the water discharged to all areas and to all areas with water stress by the categories freshwater and other water. Other water constitutes any water that has a concentration of total dissolved solids higher than 1,000 mg/L. Other water is therefore all water that does not fall into the freshwater category. The organization is, at a minimum, required to report a figure for other water discharged. The organization can additionally report any further breakdowns for other water discharge based on its water management and reporting practices, as long as it explains the approach used to define water quality using Disclosure 303-4-e. The organization can report additional information on how water quality has been determined, including consideration of the potential value of water to its users, as well as any absolute physical and/or chemical criteria used. Guidance for Disclosure 303-4-d In the context of this Standard, substances of concern are those that cause irreversible damage to the waterbody, ecosystem, or human health. Discharge limits for substances of concern can be based on regulation and/or other factors determined by an organization. In countries where no regulations for discharge limits are available, the organization can develop its own discharge limits. ‘Discharge consent’ is the permission granted to an organization, allowing it to discharge a set amount of a substance. The organization can report any unauthorized discharges that exceed these limits using Disclosure 303-4-d. The organization can also describe any plans to reduce unauthorized discharges in the future. Guidance for clause 2.4.2 Reporting water discharge by level of treatment can provide insight into the effort an organization is making to improve the quality of its water discharge. When reporting how the treatment levels were determined, the organization is expected to include the reasons why a certain level of treatment was set. The level of treatment can be reported for any water or effluents at the point of discharge, whether treated by the organization onsite or sent to a third party for treatment. Water treatment involves physical, chemical or biological processes that improve water quality by removing solids, pollutants, and organic matter from water and effluents. Minimum requirements for treatment might be specified in national, state, or local legislation; however, the organization is expected to consider its overall water discharge impacts and the needs of other water users in setting treatment levels. The organization can break down its water discharge by the following treatment levels: An organization might withdraw and discharge water of good quality that does not requirePrimary treatment, which aims to remove solid substances that settle or float on the water surface;• Secondary treatment, which aims to remove substances and materials that have remained in the water, or are dissolved or suspended in it;• Tertiary treatment, which aims to upgrade water to a higher level of quality before it is discharged. It includes processes that remove, for example, heavy metals, nitrogen, and phosphorus.• GRI 303: Water and Effluents 2018 14",
    "new_id": 872
  },
  {
    "id": 77908,
    "question": "Which of the following best represents a logical implication drawn from the reporting requirements for water discharge and consumption, as described in GRI 303: Water and Effluents 2018?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The purpose of reporting both freshwater and other water discharge is to distinguish between sources that meet Total Dissolved Solids thresholds and those that do not.",
      "B": "Facilities must report water discharge levels by treatment type, even though this is not mandatory, to comply with all recommended disclosures.",
      "C": "Suppliers with significant water-related impacts are required to disclose total water withdrawal but not the percentage adhering to effluent quality standards.",
      "D": "Reporting organizations can exclude data on change in water storage if it is deemed insignificant under Disclosure 303-5.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "19-20",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 303_ Water and Effluents 2018.pdf",
    "source_text": "Water discharge [Disclosure 303-4] ALL AREAS AREAS WITH WATER STRESS Water discharge by destination Surface water ML (303-4-a-i) X Groundwater ML (303-4-a-ii) X Seawater ML (303-4-a-iii) X Third-party water (total) ML (303-4-a-iv) X Third-party water sent for use to other organizations ML (303-4-a-iv) X Total water discharge Surface water + groundwater + seawater + third-party water (total) ML (303-4-a) ML (303-4-c) Water discharge by freshwater and other water Freshwater (≤1,000 mg/L Total Dissolved Solids) ML (303-4-b-i) ML (303-4-c-i) Other water (>1,000 mg/L Total Dissolved Solids) ML (303-4-b-ii) ML (303-4-c-ii) Water discharge by level of treatment Note that this is recommended, but not required No treatment ML (clause 2.4.2) X Treatment level [Provide the title for treatment level] ML (clause 2.4.2) X Treatment level [Provide the title for treatment level] ML (clause 2.4.2) X Treatment level [Provide the title for treatment level] ML (clause 2.4.2) X Water consumption [Disclosure 303-5] ALL AREAS AREAS WITH WATER STRESS Total water consumption ML (303-5-a) ML (303-5-b) Change in water storage, if water storage has been identified as having a significant water-related impactML (303-5-c) X Table 2. Example template for presenting facility-level information Table 2 offers an example of how to present information on facilities located in areas with water stress as per the recommendations specified in Disclosures 303-3 (clause 2.2.1) and 303-5 (clause 2.5.1). The reporting organization can amend the table according to its practices, for example by reporting water discharge information. FACILITIES IN AREAS WITH WATER STRESSFACILITY A FACILITY B [FACILITY X] Water withdrawal (clause 2.2.1) Surface water ML ML ML Groundwater ML ML ML Seawater ML ML ML Produced water ML ML ML Third-party water ML ML ML Water consumption (clause 2.5.1) Total water consumption ML ML ML Table 3. Example template for presenting supply chain information Table 3 offers an example of how to present information on the organization’s suppliers as per the recommendations specified in Disclosures 303-3 (clause 2.2.2), 303-4 (clause 2.4.3), and 303-5 (clause 2.5.2). The reporting organization can amend the table according to its practices, for example by reporting the location of suppliers. GRI 303: Water and Effluents 2018 19\n\n[Page 20]\nWater withdrawal (clause 2.2.2) Total water withdrawal in megaliters by suppliers with significant water-related impacts in areas with water stressML Water discharge (clause 2.4.3) Percentage of suppliers with significant water-related impacts from water discharge that have set minimum standards for the quality of their effluent discharge% Water consumption (clause 2.5.2) Total water consumption in megaliters by suppliers with significant water-related impacts in areas with water stressML GRI 303: Water and Effluents 2018 20",
    "new_id": 873
  },
  {
    "id": 77909,
    "question": "Which of the following best reflects the rationale behind requiring organizations to report water discharge volumes sent to third parties separately, as well as their approach to defining 'other water' quality, according to GRI 303: Water and Effluents 2018?",
    "options": {
      "B": "To ensure transparency in how water is reused by external entities and to allow for precise tracking of water stress impacts across regions.",
      "A": "To simplify compliance with national regulations on water discharge limits and reduce the burden of reporting multiple water quality categories.",
      "C": "To enable organizations to avoid accountability for pollutants by shifting responsibility to third-party recipients of discharged water.",
      "D": "To align with global standards that mandate absolute physical and chemical criteria for all discharged water regardless of its destination.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "14",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 303_ Water and Effluents 2018.pdf",
    "source_text": "Guidance for Disclosure 303-4 For an example of how to present information on requirements in Disclosure 303-4, see Table 1. See Guidance for Disclosure 303-3-b for how to assess areas with water stress. Guidance for Disclosure 303-4-a-iv An example of third-party water discharge is when an organization sends water and effluents to other organizations for use. In these instances, the organization is required to report the volume of this water discharge separately. Guidance for Disclosures 303-4-b and 303-4-c The organization is required to provide a breakdown of the water discharged to all areas and to all areas with water stress by the categories freshwater and other water. Other water constitutes any water that has a concentration of total dissolved solids higher than 1,000 mg/L. Other water is therefore all water that does not fall into the freshwater category. The organization is, at a minimum, required to report a figure for other water discharged. The organization can additionally report any further breakdowns for other water discharge based on its water management and reporting practices, as long as it explains the approach used to define water quality using Disclosure 303-4-e. The organization can report additional information on how water quality has been determined, including consideration of the potential value of water to its users, as well as any absolute physical and/or chemical criteria used. Guidance for Disclosure 303-4-d In the context of this Standard, substances of concern are those that cause irreversible damage to the waterbody, ecosystem, or human health. Discharge limits for substances of concern can be based on regulation and/or other factors determined by an organization. In countries where no regulations for discharge limits are available, the organization can develop its own discharge limits. ‘Discharge consent’ is the permission granted to an organization, allowing it to discharge a set amount of a substance. The organization can report any unauthorized discharges that exceed these limits using Disclosure 303-4-d. The organization can also describe any plans to reduce unauthorized discharges in the future. Guidance for clause 2.4.2 Reporting water discharge by level of treatment can provide insight into the effort an organization is making to improve the quality of its water discharge. When reporting how the treatment levels were determined, the organization is expected to include the reasons why a certain level of treatment was set. The level of treatment can be reported for any water or effluents at the point of discharge, whether treated by the organization onsite or sent to a third party for treatment. Water treatment involves physical, chemical or biological processes that improve water quality by removing solids, pollutants, and organic matter from water and effluents. Minimum requirements for treatment might be specified in national, state, or local legislation; however, the organization is expected to consider its overall water discharge impacts and the needs of other water users in setting treatment levels. The organization can break down its water discharge by the following treatment levels: An organization might withdraw and discharge water of good quality that does not requirePrimary treatment, which aims to remove solid substances that settle or float on the water surface;• Secondary treatment, which aims to remove substances and materials that have remained in the water, or are dissolved or suspended in it;• Tertiary treatment, which aims to upgrade water to a higher level of quality before it is discharged. It includes processes that remove, for example, heavy metals, nitrogen, and phosphorus.• GRI 303: Water and Effluents 2018 14",
    "new_id": 874
  },
  {
    "id": 77910,
    "question": "Which scenario best aligns with the guidance for calculating water consumption and contextualizing its reporting, as described in GRI 303: Water and Effluents 2018?",
    "options": {
      "C": "An organization calculates water consumption by subtracting total water discharge from total water withdrawal and reports this along with an explanation of the estimation method, even though direct measurements were unavailable.",
      "A": "An organization excludes areas with water stress from its total water consumption report because it believes these regions do not significantly affect downstream water availability.",
      "B": "An organization reports only the change in water storage without providing any additional information on whether water storage was identified as having a significant water-related impact.",
      "D": "An organization determines water consumption solely through direct measurements and avoids using calculations or estimations, as these methods are deemed insufficient under the guidelines.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "15-16",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 303_ Water and Effluents 2018.pdf",
    "source_text": "treatment. If so, the organization can explain this in its reported information. Guidance for clause 2.4.3 Minimum standards are those that go beyond regulatory requirements in controlling the quality of effluent discharge. For more information on water quality standards, see Disclosure 303-2 in the Topic management disclosures section. To compile this information, the organization can use the following approach: (a) determine the number of suppliers with significant water-related impacts from water discharge, (b) determine how many of these suppliers have set minimum standards for the quality of their effluent discharge, (c) calculate the percentage using the following formula: Percentage of suppliers with significant water-related impacts from water discharge that have set minimum standards for the quality of their effluent discharge = Number of suppliers that have set minimum standards for the quality of their effluent discharge ________________________________________________________________ Number of suppliers with significant water-related impacts from water discharge x 100 For an example of how to present this information, see Table 3. GRI 303: Water and Effluents 2018 15\n\n[Page 16]\nDisclosure 303-5 Water consumption The reporting organization shall report the following information:REQUIREMENTS Total water consumption from all areas in megaliters. a. Total water consumption from all areas with water stress in megaliters. b. Change in water storage in megaliters, if water storage has been identified as having a significant water-related impact .c. Any contextual information necessary to understand how the data have been compiled, such as any standards, methodologies, and assumptions used, including whether the information is calculated, estimated, modeled, or sourced from direct measurements, and the approach taken for this, such as the use of any sector-specific factors.d. RECOMMENDATIONSThe reporting organization should report the following additional information: 2.5 Total water consumption in megaliters at each facility in areas with water stress; 2.5.1 Total water consumption in megaliters by suppliers with significant water-related impacts in areas with water stress.2.5.2 Background Water consumption measures water used by an organization such that it is no longer available for use by the ecosystem or local community in the reporting period . Reporting the volume of water consumption can help the organization understand the overall scale of its impact due to water withdrawal on downstream water availability. Guidance for Disclosure 303-5 For an example how to present information on requirements in Disclosure 303-5, see Table 1. See Guidance for Disclosure 303-3-b for how to assess areas with water stress. If the reporting organization cannot directly measure water consumption, it may calculate this using the following formula: Water consumption = Total water withdrawal - Total water discharge Guidance for Disclosure 303-5-c If the water in storage has been identified as having a significant water-related impact, the organization is required to report change in water storage. The organization may calculate change in water storage using the following formula: Change in water storage = Total water storage at the end of the reporting period - Total water storage at the beginning of the reporting periodGUIDANCE GRI 303: Water and Effluents 2018 16",
    "new_id": 875
  },
  {
    "id": 77928,
    "question": "Which scenario best reflects a situation where an entity may face significant reputational and financial consequences despite adhering to its legal obligations, as described in the Aerospace & Defence – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "An entity implements corrective actions after incurring monetary losses from legal proceedings related to corruption, yet continues operations in regions with weak enforcement of business ethics laws.",
      "A": "An entity avoids disclosing the specific critical material posing operational risks due to competitive harm concerns but describes mitigation strategies for those risks.",
      "B": "An entity discloses all monetary losses from civil, regulatory, and criminal actions while excluding legal defense costs from the reported figures.",
      "C": "An entity refrains from engaging in any unethical practices but incurs major legal expenses defending itself against unfounded allegations of corruption.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "23-24",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Aerospace & Defence.pdf",
    "source_text": "3.1 For example, if an entity determines not to identify a specific critical material that presents a significant risk to its operations because of the competitive harm that could result from the disclosure, the entity shall disclose the existence of such risks, the type of risks and the strategies used to mitigate the risks, but the entity is not required to disclose the relevant critical material. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |AEROSPACE & DEFENCE |23\n\n[Page 24]\nBusiness Ethics Topic Summary Aerospace and defence entities based in jurisdictions with stronger business ethics laws may be vulnerable to regulatory scrutiny of their business ethics because of operations and sales in regions with weaker government enforcement of business ethics laws. Entities in this industry have been found in violation of corruption and anti- bribery laws. Unethical practices may jeopardise future revenue growth and may result in significant legal costs and higher reputational risk. As such, strong governance practices may mitigate the risk of violating business ethics laws and resulting regulatory penalties or brand-value impacts. Metrics RT-AE-510a.1. Total amount of monetary losses as a result of legal proceedings associated with incidents of corruption, bribery or illicit international trade 1The entity shall disclose the total amount of monetary losses incurred during the reporting period resulting from legal proceedings associated with incidents of corruption, bribery or illicit international trade. 2The legal proceedings shall include any adjudicative proceeding involving the entity, whether before a court, a regulator, an arbitrator or otherwise. 3The losses shall include all monetary liabilities to the opposing party or to others (whether as the result of settlement or verdict after trial or otherwise), including fines and other monetary liabilities incurred during the reporting period as a result of civil actions (for example, civil judgements or settlements), regulatory proceedings (for example, penalties, disgorgement or restitution) and criminal actions (for example, criminal judgements, penalties or restitution) brought by any entity (for example, governmental, business or individual). 4The scope of monetary losses shall exclude legal and other fees and expenses incurred by the entity in its defence. 5The scope of the disclosure shall include legal proceedings associated with the enforcement of applicable jurisdictional laws or regulations. Note to RT-AE-510a.1 1The entity shall briefly describe the nature (for example, judgement or order issued after trial, settlement, guilty plea, deferred prosecution agreement or non-prosecution agreement) and context (for example, bribing an official) of all monetary losses resulting from legal proceedings. 2The entity shall describe any corrective actions implemented in response to legal proceedings. This may include specific changes in operations, management, processes, products, business partners, training or technology. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |AEROSPACE & DEFENCE |24",
    "new_id": 876
  },
  {
    "id": 77932,
    "question": "Which scenario would most likely fall outside the scope of monetary losses an entity must disclose under RT-AE-510a.1, as outlined in the Aerospace & Defence – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Legal defense fees incurred during a trial for charges related to illicit international trade practices.",
      "B": "A settlement payment made to resolve a regulatory proceeding alleging bribery of a foreign official.",
      "C": "Fines imposed by a court as part of a criminal judgement for corruption-related activities.",
      "D": "Restitution payments ordered as part of a deferred prosecution agreement involving anti-bribery laws.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "24",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Aerospace & Defence.pdf",
    "source_text": "Business Ethics Topic Summary Aerospace and defence entities based in jurisdictions with stronger business ethics laws may be vulnerable to regulatory scrutiny of their business ethics because of operations and sales in regions with weaker government enforcement of business ethics laws. Entities in this industry have been found in violation of corruption and anti- bribery laws. Unethical practices may jeopardise future revenue growth and may result in significant legal costs and higher reputational risk. As such, strong governance practices may mitigate the risk of violating business ethics laws and resulting regulatory penalties or brand-value impacts. Metrics RT-AE-510a.1. Total amount of monetary losses as a result of legal proceedings associated with incidents of corruption, bribery or illicit international trade 1The entity shall disclose the total amount of monetary losses incurred during the reporting period resulting from legal proceedings associated with incidents of corruption, bribery or illicit international trade. 2The legal proceedings shall include any adjudicative proceeding involving the entity, whether before a court, a regulator, an arbitrator or otherwise. 3The losses shall include all monetary liabilities to the opposing party or to others (whether as the result of settlement or verdict after trial or otherwise), including fines and other monetary liabilities incurred during the reporting period as a result of civil actions (for example, civil judgements or settlements), regulatory proceedings (for example, penalties, disgorgement or restitution) and criminal actions (for example, criminal judgements, penalties or restitution) brought by any entity (for example, governmental, business or individual). 4The scope of monetary losses shall exclude legal and other fees and expenses incurred by the entity in its defence. 5The scope of the disclosure shall include legal proceedings associated with the enforcement of applicable jurisdictional laws or regulations. Note to RT-AE-510a.1 1The entity shall briefly describe the nature (for example, judgement or order issued after trial, settlement, guilty plea, deferred prosecution agreement or non-prosecution agreement) and context (for example, bribing an official) of all monetary losses resulting from legal proceedings. 2The entity shall describe any corrective actions implemented in response to legal proceedings. This may include specific changes in operations, management, processes, products, business partners, training or technology. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |AEROSPACE & DEFENCE |24",
    "new_id": 877
  },
  {
    "id": 77933,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes a scenario where an aerospace and defense entity would NOT be required to disclose the occurrence of a data breach under the provided framework in the Aerospace & Defence – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "The breach occurred in systems containing trade secrets but did not jeopardize the confidentiality, integrity, or availability of the information.",
      "A": "The breach involved personal data but was deemed unlikely to cause economic or social disadvantage to individuals.",
      "C": "The breach compromised confidential business information that could substantially harm the entity's competitive position.",
      "D": "The breach affected classified national security information, but the entity determined it posed no risk to its business performance or customer interests.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "13",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Aerospace & Defence.pdf",
    "source_text": "Data Security Topic Summary Entities in the Aerospace & Defence industry may develop sensitive military and advanced aviation products, and entities in this industry therefore may be at risk for cyber-attacks. A data security breach may be costly for an entity and its clients when information systems are compromised. Ensuring data security may require aerospace and defence entities to invest in research and development and increase capital expenditures in the short to medium term to improve the security of systems and products. Significant or frequent disruptions or security breaches may result in regulatory action, legal action, or adversely affect revenues and brand value. Metrics RT-AE-230a.1. (1) Number of data breaches, (2) percentage involving confidential information 1 The entity shall disclose (1) the total number of data breaches identified during the reporting period. 1.1 Data breach is defined as an unauthorised occurrence on, or conducted through, an entity ’s information systems that jeopardises the confidentiality, integrity or availability of an entity ’s information systems or any information contained therein. 1.1.1 Information systems are defined as information resources, owned or used by the entity, including physical or virtual infrastructure controlled by such information resources, or components thereof, organised for the collection, processing, maintenance, use, sharing, dissemination or disposition of an entity ’s information to maintain or support operations. 1.2 The scope of the disclosure excludes occurrences in which an entity has reasonable and supportable belief that the occurrence (i) does not pose a risk of damage to the entity ’s business performance or prospects, (ii) does not pose a risk of damage to the interests of its customers and (iii) does not pose a risk of economic or social disadvantage to individuals. 2The entity shall disclose (2) the percentage of data breaches in which confidential information was subject to the data breach, where confidential information includes confidential business information, classified national security information and personal data. 2.1 Confidential business information is defined as information that concerns or relates to trade secrets, processes, operations, identification of customers, inventories or other information of commercial value, the disclosure of which is likely to have the effect of causing substantial harm to the competitive position of the person, partnership or entity from which the information was obtained. 2.2 Classified national security information is defined pursuant to applicable jurisdictional laws or regulations. 2.3 Personal data is defined as any information that relates to an identified or identifiable living individual. Different pieces of information, which collected together can lead to the identification of a particular person, also constitute personal data. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |AEROSPACE & DEFENCE |13",
    "new_id": 878
  },
  {
    "id": 77934,
    "question": "Which of the following statements accurately reflects a limitation or requirement regarding how entities must calculate and report recovered quantities of hazardous spills, as described in the Aerospace & Defence – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The reported quantity of recovered hazardous substances excludes amounts recovered during longer-term remediation and those lost due to evaporation, burning, or dispersion.",
      "A": "Entities are required to include in their reported recovered quantities any materials that evaporated, burned, or dispersed during short-term response activities.",
      "B": "Recovered quantities exclude materials retrieved during long-term remediation but may include substances recovered within one year through activities such as land-use controls.",
      "D": "Entities can report recovered quantities without distinguishing between soil and water releases, provided the total recovery aligns with jurisdictional thresholds.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "11-12",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Aerospace & Defence.pdf",
    "source_text": "RT-AE-150a.2. (1) Number and aggregate quantity of reportable spills, (2) quantity recovered 1 The entity shall disclose (1) the total number and quantity (in kilogrammes) of reportable spills, where: 1.1 Reportable spills are defined as any release of a hazardous substance in an amount greater than or equal to the threshold required to be reported to applicable jurisdictional legal or regulatory authorities. 1.1.1 Hazardous substance is defined as a substance or material that an applicable jurisdictional legal or regulatory authority has determined may pose an unreasonable risk to health, safety and property and has been designated as hazardous in accordance with applicable jurisdictional hazardous materials law. 1.1.2 The scope of hazardous substances includes hazardous materials, hazardous wastes, marine pollutants, elevated temperature materials and materials designated as hazardous by the applicable jurisdictional, legal and regulatory framework(s) where the materials are generated. 1.1.3 The entity may use definitions of hazardous waste from the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal . 1.2 The number of reportable spills shall include any leaks, emissions, discharges, injections, disposals and abandonment releases over time, counted once at the time identified. 1.3 The aggregate quantity reported shall represent the total quantity of material released to the environment, and it shall not be reduced by the amount of such hazardous substances that are subsequently recovered, evaporated or otherwise lost. 1.4 The scope of the disclosure includes all spills, across all jurisdictions in which the entity operates. 2The entity shall disclose (2) the quantity of spills recovered, which is calculated as the quantity of spilled hazardous substances (in kilogrammes) removed from the environment through short-term (less than one year from time of spill) release response activities, excluding: 2.1 amounts recovered during longer-term (more than one year from time of spill) remediation at spill sites; and 2.2 amounts evaporated, burned or dispersed. 3 The entity may disclose releases to soil and water separately. 3.1 A release that qualifies as a release to both soil and water may be reported as a single release to water, with the quantity of the release properly apportioned to soil and water. Note to RT-AE-150a.2 1If applicable, the entity shall discuss its activities to remediate spills that occurred in years prior to the reporting period but for which remediation activities are ongoing and long-term. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |AEROSPACE & DEFENCE |11\n\n[Page 12]\n2 Relevant activities may include land-use controls, site monitoring, site maintenance and continued clean-up. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |AEROSPACE & DEFENCE |12",
    "new_id": 879
  },
  {
    "id": 78026,
    "question": "When an organization cannot report required information because an item does not exist, which of the following is NOT a permissible course of action, according to GRI 405: Diversity and Equal Opportunity 2016?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Reference publicly available sources where the item's absence is documented.",
      "A": "Report that the item does not exist and provide no further explanation.",
      "B": "Explain the reasons for not having the item and describe plans to develop it.",
      "C": "State that the item does not exist without being required to implement it.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "5-6",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 405_ Diversity and Equal Opportunity 2016.pdf",
    "source_text": "Figure 1. GRI Standards: Universal, Sector and Topic Standards Apply all three Universal Standards to your reportingUse the Sector Standards that apply to your sectorsSelect Topic Standards to report specific information on your material topicsSector Standards Universal Standards Topic StandardsGRI Standards Requirements and principles for using the GRI Standards Disclosures about the reporting organization Disclosures and guidance about the organization's material topics Using this Standard This Standard can be used by any organization – regardless of size, type, sector, geographic location, or reporting experience – to report information about its impacts related to diversity and equal opportunity at work. In addition to this Standard, disclosures that relate to this topic can be found in GRI 404: Training and Education 2016 and GRI 406: Non-discrimination 2016 . An organization reporting in accordance with the GRI Standards is required to report the following disclosures if it has determined diversity and equal opportunity to be a material topic : See Requirements 4 and 5 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 . Reasons for omission are permitted for these disclosures. If the organization cannot comply with a disclosure or with a requirement in a disclosure (e.g., because the required information is confidential or subject to legal prohibitions), the organization is required to specify the disclosure or the requirement it cannot comply with, and provide a reason for omission together with an explanation in the GRI content index. See Requirement 6 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 for more information on reasons for omission. If the organization cannot report the required information about an item specified in a disclosure because the item (e.g., committee, policy, practice, process) does not exist, it can comply with the requirement by reporting this to be the case. The organization can explain the reasons for not having this item, or describe any plans to develop it. The disclosure does not require the organization to implement the item (e.g., developing a policy), but to report that the item does not exist. If the organization intends to publish a standalone sustainability report, it does not need to repeat information that it has already reported publicly elsewhere, such as on web pages or in its annual report. In such a case, the organization can report a required disclosure by providing a reference in the GRI content index as to where this information can be found (e.g., by providing a link to the web page or citing the page in the annual report where theDisclosure 3-3 in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 (see clause 1.1 in this Standard); • Any disclosures from this Topic Standard that are relevant to the organization’s impacts related to diversity and equal opportunity at work (Disclosure 405-1 through Disclosure 405-2).• GRI 405: Diversity and Equal Opportunity 2016 5\n\n[Page 6]\ninformation has been published). Requirements, guidance and defined terms The following apply throughout this Standard: Requirements are presented in bold font and indicated by the word 'shall'. An organization must comply with requirements to report in accordance with the GRI Standards. Requirements may be accompanied by guidance. Guidance includes background information, explanations, and examples to help the organization better understand the requirements. The organization is not required to comply with guidance. The Standards may also include recommendations. These are cases where a particular course of action is encouraged but not required. The word ‘should’ indicates a recommendation, and the word ‘can’ indicates a possibility or option. Defined terms are underlined in the text of the GRI Standards and linked to their definitions in the Glossary . The organization is required to apply the definitions in the Glossary. 1. Topic management disclosures GRI 405: Diversity and Equal Opportunity 2016 6",
    "new_id": 880
  },
  {
    "id": 78046,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between scenario sensitivity disclosures and the estimation of carbon dioxide emissions from proved hydrocarbon reserves, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 11: Oil & Gas – Exploration & Production?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Scenario sensitivity disclosures are recommended to include factors like policy assumptions and energy pathways, whereas CO2 emissions estimates exclude considerations of downstream use.",
      "B": "Scenario sensitivity disclosures are optional for all entities, while estimating CO2 emissions from proved reserves is mandatory.",
      "C": "Both scenario sensitivity disclosures and estimating CO2 emissions from proved reserves require detailed assumptions about downstream use of hydrocarbons.",
      "D": "Estimating CO2 emissions from proved reserves relies on alternative scenarios such as 2°C or lower pathways, which are also required for sensitivity analyses.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "17",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol11.pdf",
    "source_text": "...continued PRICE CASE PROVED RESERVES PROBABLE RESERVES Current Policies Scenario (base) New Policies Scenario Sustainable Development Scenario 5 The entity may disclose the sensitivity of its reserve levels in other price and demand scenarios in addition to those described above, particularly if these scenarios vary depending on the type of hydrocarbon reserves, regulatory environment in the countries or regions where exploration occurs, end-use of the entity’s products, or other factors. 6 For additional sensitivity analyses, the entity should consider disclosing the following, per the Task Force on Climate- Related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) Recommendations Report Figure 8 as well as the Implementing the Recommendations of the TCFD Report, Section E: 6.1 The alternative scenarios used, including other 2°C or lower scenarios 6.2 Critical input parameters, assumptions and analytical choices for the climate-related scenarios used, particularly as they relate to key areas such as policy assumptions, energy deployment pathways, technology pathways and related timing assumptions 6.3 Time frames used for scenarios, including short-, medium- and long-term milestones (for example, how organisations consider timing of potential future implications under the scenarios used) EM-EP-420a.2. Estimated carbon dioxide emissions embedded in proved hydrocarbon reserves 1 The entity shall calculate and disclose an estimate of the carbon dioxide emissions embedded in its proved hydrocarbon reserves. 1.1 Nota bene — this estimate applies a factor for potential CO 2 only and does not include an estimate for all potential greenhouse gas emissions, as these are dependent on downstream use (for example, utility electricity generation, industrial heating and electricity generation, residential heating and cooling, transportation, or use in petrochemicals, agrochemicals, asphalt and lubricants). 2 Estimated potential carbon dioxide emissions from proved hydrocarbon reserves shall be calculated according to the following formula, derived from Meinshausen et al.: 2.1 E = R × V × C, where: 2.1.1 E are the potential emissions in kilogrammes of carbon dioxide (kg CO2);IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 16 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 881
  },
  {
    "id": 78047,
    "question": "Which scenario would most likely invalidate an entity's determination of water quality deterioration based on the jurisdictional standards, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 11: Oil & Gas – Exploration & Production?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Increase in methane concentration by 4.5 mg/l between sampling periods without other indicators of contamination.",
      "A": "Detection of thermogenic gas in baseline testing but absence of it in subsequent monitoring.",
      "C": "Presence of BTEX compounds at concentrations lower than those recorded during baseline testing.",
      "D": "Failure to conduct ongoing monitoring within a one-half mile radius of a well site after initial baseline sampling.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "14",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol11.pdf",
    "source_text": "EM-EP-140a.4. Percentage of hydraulic fracturing sites where ground or surface water quality deteriorated compared to a baseline 1 The entity shall calculate the percentage as: the total number of hydraulic fracturing well sites for which it detected a deterioration in the ground or surface water surrounding the well site as compared to a baseline measurement, divided by the total number of hydraulic fracturing well sites. 2 Deterioration in water quality is, at a minimum, defined as occurring when testing indicates: 2.1 Presence of thermogenic gas or a mixture of thermogenic and biogenic gas not present in baseline testing. 2.2 An increase in methane concentration by more than 5.0 mg/l between sampling periods. 2.3 Benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylenes (BTEX compounds) or total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) are present in higher concentrations as compared to the baseline. 3 The entity shall determine whether water quality deteriorated against a baseline through monitoring of ground and surface water surrounding hydraulically fractured well sites. 3.1 Determinations shall be consistent with Chapter 3 of the Wyoming Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (WOGCC) Rules and Regulations, the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission ’s (COGCC) Rule 609 — Statewide Groundwater Baseline Sampling and Monitoring, or a jurisdictional equivalent. 3.2 The entity shall disclose the jurisdictional standard, guideline or regulation used for its calculation. 4 The initial baseline sample shall occur: 4.1 Prior to drilling or before installation of a surface oil and gas facility on a location 4.2 Prior to re-stimulation of a well, if more than 12 months have passed since the initial pre-drilling sampling event or the most recent re-stimulation sampling event 5 Ongoing monitoring shall occur with at least the following frequency: 5.1 One subsequent sampling between 12 and 18 months after well completion or facility installation 5.2 A second subsequent sampling between 60 and 78 months after the previous sampling event. Dry holes are exempt from this requirement 6 The entity shall collect initial baseline samples and subsequent monitoring samples from all available water sources within a one-half mile radius of a proposed well, multi-well site, or dedicated injection well.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 13",
    "new_id": 882
  },
  {
    "id": 78062,
    "question": "When calculating the percentage of wood-fibre-based materials certified to multiple third-party certifications, how should entities account for fibre that meets several standards simultaneously, according to the Pulp & Paper Products – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "They must include the full weight of such fibre in calculations for each relevant certification without dividing it.",
      "A": "They must allocate the weight of such fibre proportionally across all relevant certifications.",
      "B": "They must exclude such fibre entirely from calculations to avoid double-counting.",
      "D": "They must assign the fibre to only one certification based on a prioritization scheme.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "21",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Pulp & Paper Products.pdf",
    "source_text": "1.3 The scope of wood-fibre-based materials includes all inputs processed to be sold as a finished good, including recycled raw materials, virgin raw materials, and goods consumed directly in the production process and excluding biomass for energy. 2The percentage of wood-fibre-based materials from third-party certified forestlands shall be calculated as the total weight (in air dried metric tonnes) of the entity ’s wood-fibre-based materials sourced from third-party certified forestlands divided by the total weight (in air dried metric tonnes) of wood-fibre-based materials sourced. 3The entity shall disclose the percentage of the total wood-fibre-based materials from third-party certified forestlands certified to each standard (for example, FSC Chain of Custody, PEFC Chain of Custody and SFI Chain of Custody). 3.1 The entity shall calculate the percentage of wood-fibre-based materials certified to each standard as the amount of wood-fibre-based materials third-party certified to the respective standard divided by the total amount of wood fibre sourced by the entity. 3.2 If wood-fibre is certified to multiple third-party certifications, the entity shall include the amount of such fibre in its calculations for each relevant certification. 4The entity shall disclose the percentage of its total wood-fibre-based materials sourced from non-third-party certified forestlands but meets other fibre sourcing standards, including: 4.1 Responsible fibre sourcing standards (for example, SFI Fibre Sourcing Standard) 4.2 Controlled wood standards (for example, FSC Controlled Wood Certification and PEFC Controlled Wood) 4.3 Recycled fibre standards that include post- and pre-consumer reclaimed material (for example, PEFC Controlled Sources, FSC Recycled Label and SFI Recycled Label) 4.4 Any other due diligence standards that cover sourcing requirements for fibre from non-certified forestlands 5For fibre from non-certified forestlands that meets multiple fibre sourcing standards, the entity shall not account for the weight more than once when calculating the total percentage of fibre from non-certified forestlands that meets other fibre sourcing standards. 6The entity shall disclose the percentage of wood fibre that meets each sourcing standard (for example, FSC Controlled Wood, SFI Fibre Sourcing Standard and PEFC Controlled Sources). 6.1 If wood fibre meets multiple sourcing standards, the entity shall include the amount of such fibre in its calculations for each relevant sourcing standard. Note to RR-PP-430a.1 1The entity shall discuss its due diligence practices for fibre that is not from certified forestlands or certified to other fibre sourcing standards and its policies to verify the forestry management and harvesting practices of suppliers, which may include codes of conduct, audits or contracts, among others. 2 The entity shall disclose how it verifies that its non-certified fibre includes criteria for the following: SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |PULP & PAPER PRODUCTS |21",
    "new_id": 883
  },
  {
    "id": 78065,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the nuanced relationship between recycled fibre use and its environmental and economic trade-offs, as described in the Pulp & Paper Products – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Optimizing recycled fibre use allows manufacturers to address environmental concerns while managing economic challenges, despite potential increases in waste and energy usage.",
      "A": "Using recycled fibre exclusively is the most effective strategy for pulp and paper manufacturers to balance environmental and economic considerations.",
      "B": "Manufacturers optimize recycled fibre use primarily because it guarantees reductions in both waste generation and energy consumption.",
      "C": "Recycled fibre is consistently less expensive than virgin fibre due to widespread availability, making it a preferred choice for manufacturers.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "19-20",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Pulp & Paper Products.pdf",
    "source_text": "6The entity shall discuss whether its water management practices result in any additional lifecycle impacts or trade- offs in its organisation, including trade-offs in land use, energy production and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and why the entity chose these practices despite lifecycle trade-offs. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |PULP & PAPER PRODUCTS |19\n\n[Page 20]\nSupply Chain Management Topic Summary Pulp and paper products entities source wood and wood fibre from forestry management entities, paper fibre recyclers and forests that the entities themselves manage. Supply chain risks include decreased productivity of forestlands because of management practices or climate change, regulations addressing sustainable forest management, and reputational effects. To mitigate such risks and satisfy growing customer demand for sustainably sourced fibre and paper products, manufacturers implement forest certification and fibre chain-of-custody standards which verify that virgin and recycled fibre originate from sustainably managed forests. In addition, pulp and paper manufacturers may face trade-offs from the use of recovered fibre. Products with recycled content are increasingly in demand, providing a possible avenue for product differentiation, while using recycled fibre can minimise the need for virgin fibre. Conversely, manufacturing products with a greater recycled content may increase waste generation and energy consumption, while recycled fibre can be costlier, given demand –supply gaps. Therefore, entities may benefit by optimising recycled fibre use to balance its environmental and economic trade-offs. Metrics RR-PP-430a.1. Percentage of wood fibre sourced from (1) third-party certified forestlands and percentage to each standard and (2) meeting other fibre sourcing standards and percentage to each standard 1The entity shall disclose the percentage of total wood-fibre-based materials sourced from forestlands certified to forest management standards, where: 1.1 Third-party forest management standards are those certifying forests are harvested in a sustainable manner and ensure adherence to environmental and social criteria including legal compliance, land rights, community and worker relations, environmental impact and biodiversity, forest management plans and practices, land use, wildlife habitat conservation, and water conservation, among others. 1.2 Third-party forest management certifications may include those promoted by the following organisations (or the equivalent): 1.2.1 American Tree Farm System (ATFS) (ATFS Certification) 1.2.2 Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) (FSC Forest Management and Chain of Custody certifications) 1.2.3 Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC) (PEFC Chain of Custody certifications) 1.2.4 Forest certification systems endorsed by the PEFC 1.2.5 Sustainable Forest Initiative (SFI) (SFI Forest Management and Chain of Custody certifications) SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |PULP & PAPER PRODUCTS |20",
    "new_id": 884
  },
  {
    "id": 78082,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why an organization's indirect political contributions could pose a higher corruption risk compared to direct contributions, according to the implications in the text?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Indirect contributions are less transparent and can circumvent legislative limits on spending for political influence.",
      "B": "Indirect contributions are always illegal, whereas direct contributions comply with national accounting rules.",
      "C": "Direct contributions are prohibited in all countries, making indirect contributions the only viable option for corruption.",
      "D": "Indirect contributions are larger in monetary value, inherently increasing the risk of corruption.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "7-8",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 415_ Public Policy 2016.pdf",
    "source_text": "1. Topic management disclosures An organization reporting in accordance with the GRI Standards is required to report how it manages each of its material topics . An organization that has determined public policy to be a material topic is required to report how it manages the topic using Disclosure 3-3 in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 (see clause 1.1 in this section). This section is therefore designed to supplement – and not replace – Disclosure 3-3 in GRI 3. REQUIREMENTSThe reporting organization shall report how it manages public policy using Disclosure 3-3 in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 .1.1 RECOMMENDATIONSThe reporting organization should report: 1.2 the significant issues that are the focus of its participation in public policy development and lobbying;1.2.1 its stance on these issues, and any differences between its lobbying positions and any stated policies, goals, or other public positions.1.2.2 GRI 415: Public Policy 2016 7\n\n[Page 8]\n2. Topic disclosures Disclosure 415-1 Political contributions The reporting organization shall report the following information: Compilation requirementsREQUIREMENTS Total monetary value of financial and in-kind political contributions made directly and indirectly by the organization by country and recipient/beneficiary.a. If applicable, how the monetary value of in-kind contributions was estimated. b. When compiling the information specified in Disclosure 415-1, the reporting organization shall calculate financial political contributions in compliance with national accounting rules, where these exist.2.1 Background The purpose of this disclosure is to identify an organization’s support for political causes. This disclosure can provide an indication of the extent to which an organization’s political contributions are in line with its stated policies, goals, or other public positions. Direct or indirect contributions to political causes can also present corruption risks, because they can be used to exert undue influence on the political process. Many countries have legislation that limits the amount an organization can spend on political parties and candidates for campaigning purposes. If an organization channels contributions indirectly through intermediaries, such as lobbyists or organizations linked to political causes, it can improperly circumvent such legislation.GUIDANCE GRI 415: Public Policy 2016 8",
    "new_id": 885
  },
  {
    "id": 78098,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the relationship between the reporting requirements for forced or compulsory labor and the organization’s approach to risk assessment, as outlined in GRI 409: Forced or Compulsory Labor 2016?",
    "options": {
      "B": "The process for identifying at-risk operations and suppliers is flexible and can incorporate both internal organizational approaches and external data sources, provided it aligns with recognized standards.",
      "A": "The guidance explicitly mandates organizations to adopt standardized international frameworks for all risk assessments related to forced labor.",
      "C": "Organizations are required to exclusively rely on ILO and OECD guidelines when identifying operations and suppliers at risk of forced labor incidents.",
      "D": "Risk assessment processes must prioritize elimination measures over identification strategies, focusing primarily on supplier accountability.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "7-8",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 409_ Forced or Compulsory Labor 2016.pdf",
    "source_text": "1. Topic management disclosures An organization reporting in accordance with the GRI Standards is required to report how it manages each of its material topics . An organization that has determined forced or compulsory labor to be a material topic is required to report how it manages the topic using Disclosure 3-3 in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 (see clause 1.1 in this section). This section is therefore designed to supplement – and not replace – Disclosure 3-3 in GRI 3 . REQUIREMENTSThe reporting organization shall report how it manages forced or compulsory labor using Disclosure 3-3 in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 .1.1 GRI 409: Forced or Compulsory Labor 2016 7\n\n[Page 8]\n2. Topic disclosures Disclosure 409-1 Operations and suppliers at significant risk for incidents of forced or compulsory labor The reporting organization shall report the following information:REQUIREMENTS Operations and suppliers considered to have significant risk for incidents of forced or compulsory labor either in terms of: type of operation (such as manufacturing plant) and supplier; i. countries or geographic areas with operations and suppliers considered at risk. ii.a. Measures taken by the organization in the reporting period intended to contribute to the elimination of all forms of forced or compulsory labor.b. Guidance for Disclosure 409-1 The process for identifying operations and suppliers, as specified in Disclosure 409-1, can reflect the reporting organization’s approach to risk assessment on this issue. It can also draw from recognized international data sources, such as the ILO Information and reports on the application of Conventions and Recommendations (see reference [1] in the Bibliography ). When reporting the measures taken, the organization can refer to the ILO ‘Tripartite Declaration of Principles Concerning Multinational Enterprises and Social Policy’ and Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises for further guidance. Background Forced or compulsory labor exists globally in a variety of forms. The most extreme examples are slave labor and bonded labor, but debts can also be used as a means of maintaining workers in a state of forced labor. Indicators of forced labor can also include withholding identity papers, requiring compulsory deposits, and compelling workers, under threat of firing, to work extra hours to which they have not previously agreed. Eliminating forced labor remains an important challenge. Forced labor is not only a serious violation of a fundamental human right, it also perpetuates poverty and is a hindrance to economic and human development. The presence and effective implementation of policies for eliminating all forms of forced or compulsory labor are a basic expectation of responsible business conduct. Organizations with multinational operations are required by law in some countries to provide information on their efforts to eradicate forced labor in their supply chains.GUIDANCE 5 5International Labour Organization (ILO), International Labour Standards on Forced labour http://www.ilo.org/global/standards/subjects-covered-by- international-labour-standards/forced-labour/lang--en/index.htm#P23_4987, accessed on 1 September 2016. GRI 409: Forced or Compulsory Labor 2016 8",
    "new_id": 886
  },
  {
    "id": 78133,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the reason why entities in the Internet Media & Services industry might face reputational risks when providing access to user data to governments, as described in the Internet Media & Services – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Because governments may use the data to limit citizens’ freedoms, raising concerns that the entities are complicit in restricting individual rights.",
      "A": "Because the use of such data by governments could lead to increased regulatory scrutiny and compliance costs for these entities.",
      "B": "Because users may perceive such actions as a violation of their privacy, potentially leading to a loss of trust and reduced user engagement.",
      "D": "Because demographic and behavioural data provided to governments could be used to unfairly target specific populations with advertising.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "11",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Internet Media & Services.pdf",
    "source_text": "Data Privacy, Advertising Standards & Freedom of Expression Topic Summary Entities in the Internet & Media Services industry rely on customer data to innovate new tools and services, generate revenues through advertising sales, and track and prevent criminal behaviour, such as hacking and online predators targeting children. However, the use and storage of a wide range of customer data, such as personal, demographic, content and behavioural data, raises privacy concerns, resulting in increased regulatory scrutiny in many countries. Entities face reputational risks from providing access to user data to governments, which may raise concerns that governments may use the data to limit citizens ’ freedoms. Entities may also face increased costs of compliance associated with the varying local laws or government demands related to censorship of culturally or politically sensitive material on websites. This issue may affect entity profitability through the loss of users and may influence entity decisions to enter, operate in, or exit specific markets. Metrics TC-IM-220a.1. Description of policies and practices relating to targeted advertising and user privacy 1The entity shall describe the nature, scope and implementation of its policies and practices related to user privacy, including its targeted advertising practices, with a specific focus on how it manages the collection, use and retention of user information. 1.1 User information is defined as information that pertains to a user ’s attributes or actions which may include account statements, transaction records, records of communications, content of communications, demographic data, behavioural data, location data and personal data. 1.1.1 Demographic data is defined as information that identifies and distinguishes a given population. Examples of demographic data include gender, age, race/ethnicity, language, disabilities, mobility, home ownership and employment status. 1.1.2 Behavioural data is defined as information that tracks, measures and records individual behaviours, such as online browsing patterns, buying habits, brand preferences and product usage patterns. 1.1.3 Location data is defined as information that describes the physical location or movement patterns of an individual, such as Global Positioning System (GPS) coordinates or other related data that would enable identifying and tracking an individual ’s physical location. 1.1.4 Personal data is defined as information that relates to an identified or identifiable living individual. Various pieces of information, which collected together can lead to the identification of a particular person, also constitute personal data. 1.1.5 The entity may define personal data based on applicable jurisdictional laws or regulations. In such cases, the entity shall disclose the applicable jurisdictional standard or definition used. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |INTERNET MEDIA & SERVICES |11",
    "new_id": 887
  },
  {
    "id": 78144,
    "question": "Which of the following best reflects a logical implication of how entities must handle diversity group representation in relation to their employee categorization and classification systems, as described in the Internet Media & Services – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "If an entity uses a jurisdictional occupation classification system for non-executive management, it must still disclose diversity representation percentages separately for this category.",
      "A": "Entities may classify all employees under 'technical employees' if they perform skilled work, regardless of management roles, as long as diversity representation is disclosed.",
      "B": "Diversity group representation needs to be disclosed only at the aggregate level, without breaking it down by employee categories such as executive or non-executive management.",
      "C": "An entity can avoid disclosing diversity group representation for executive management if it relies on ISCO Sub-Major Group 11 for defining that category.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "22",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Internet Media & Services.pdf",
    "source_text": "1.1 The entity shall categorise the gender of its employees as women, men or not disclosed. 1.1.1 The entity may disclose additional categories of gender identity or expression. 1.2 The entity shall use these employee categories: (a) executive management, (b) non-executive management, (c) technical employees and (d) all other employees. 1.3 Executive management is defined as chief executives and senior officials who formulate and review the entity’s policies, and plan, direct, coordinate and evaluate the overall activities of the entity with the support of other managers. 1.3.1 The entity may refer to the International Standard Classification of Occupations (ISCO) Sub-Major Group 11 or an applicable jurisdictional occupation classification system for a definition of executive management. In such cases, the entity shall disclose the occupation classification standard used to classify executive management. 1.4 Non-executive management is defined as those who plan, direct, coordinate and evaluate the activities of the entity, or of organisational units within it, and formulate and review its policies, rules and regulations, other than executive management. 1.4.1 The entity may refer to the ISCO Major Group 1 (excluding Sub-Major Group 11) or an applicable jurisdictional occupational classification system for a definition of non-executive management. In such cases, the entity shall disclose the occupation classification standard used to classify non- executive management. 1.5 Technical employees are defined as employees who perform highly skilled or highly qualified work generally categorised in the computing, mathematical, architectural and engineering occupations. 1.5.1 The entity may refer to the ISCO Sub-Major Groups 21 and 25 or an applicable jurisdictional occupation classification system for a definition of technical employees. In such cases, the entity shall disclose the occupation classification system used to classify technical employees. 1.6 All other employees are defined as those employees who are not classified as executive management, non- executive management or technical employees. 1.7 The entity shall calculate the percentage of gender representation for each employee category as the number of employees in each gender category divided by the total number of employees in the respective employee category. 2The entity shall disclose (2) the percentage of diversity group representation among its employees for (a) executive management, (b) non-executive management, (c) technical employees and (d) all other employees. 2.1 The entity shall identify diversity groups in its workforce. 2.1.1 Diversity is defined as the presence of people from populations who have been underrepresented in a particular field or are otherwise historically marginalised in a particular society. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |INTERNET MEDIA & SERVICES |22",
    "new_id": 888
  },
  {
    "id": 78145,
    "question": "When calculating the percentage of requests that resulted in disclosure, which factor would disqualify a request from being counted as compliant based on the provided definitions in the Internet Media & Services – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The entity disclosed information without verifying whether two accounts belonged to the same user.",
      "B": "The entity disclosed only aggregated or anonymized data intended to prevent reconfiguration.",
      "C": "The entity disclosed partial information but could not confirm if it fully met the request's intent.",
      "D": "The entity disclosed non-content data exclusively while omitting content data.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "14",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Internet Media & Services.pdf",
    "source_text": "2The entity shall describe any corrective actions implemented in response to the legal proceedings. This may include specific changes in operations, management, processes, products, business partners, training or technology. TC-IM-220a.4. (1) Number of law enforcement requests for user information, (2) number of users whose information was requested, (3) percentage resulting in disclosure 1The entity shall disclose (1) the total number of unique requests for user information, including users ’ content and non-content data, from government or law enforcement agencies. 1.1 Content data includes user-generated information such as emails, texts and recorded phone conversations. 1.2 Non-content data includes information such as an email addresses, names, countries of residence, gender, and system-generated data such as IP addresses and traffic data. 1.3 Both content and non-content data can include personal data. 1.3.1 Personal data is defined as any information that relates to an identified or identifiable living individual. Various pieces of information, which collected together can lead to the identification of a particular person, also constitute personal data. 1.3.2 The entity may define personal data based on applicable jurisdictional laws or regulations. In such cases, the entity shall disclose the applicable jurisdictional standard or definition used. 2The entity shall disclose (2) the total number of unique users whose information was requested by governmental authorities or law enforcement agencies. 2.1 The number of records requested shall be calculated as the sum of unique users whose information was requested in all requests for information received from government or law enforcement agencies during the reporting period. 2.1.1 If the entity is unable to verify that two accounts (user information) belong to the same user, the entity shall consider them two users. 3The entity shall disclose (3) the percentage of governmental and law enforcement requests that resulted in disclosure to the requesting party. 3.1 The percentage shall be calculated as the number of unique requests that resulted in disclosure to the requesting party divided by the total number of unique requests received. 3.2 The scope of requests that resulted in disclosure shall include requests that resulted in either full or partial compliance with the disclosure request within the reporting period. 3.3 The scope of requests that resulted in disclosure shall include disclosure of aggregated, de-identified and anonymised data, which is intended to prevent the recipient from reconfiguring the data to identify an individual ’s actions or identity. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |INTERNET MEDIA & SERVICES |14",
    "new_id": 889
  },
  {
    "id": 78146,
    "question": "Which scenario best illustrates a legal proceeding that would be included in the disclosed monetary losses related to user privacy, as outlined in the Internet Media & Services – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "A settlement resulting from unauthorized monitoring of user activities by a third-party vendor indirectly controlled by the entity.",
      "A": "Legal fees incurred while defending against allegations of violating jurisdictional data protection laws unrelated to user privacy.",
      "C": "Monetary penalties imposed due to an internal audit revealing non-compliance with internal data handling policies but no direct harm to users.",
      "D": "A deferred prosecution agreement involving regulatory proceedings concerning unauthorized sharing of personal data for secondary purposes.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "13",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Internet Media & Services.pdf",
    "source_text": "1.1.4 Personal data is defined as information that relates to an identified or identifiable living individual. Various pieces of information, which collected together can lead to the identification of a particular person, also constitute personal data. 1.1.5 The entity may define personal data based on applicable jurisdictional laws or regulations. In such cases, the entity shall disclose the applicable jurisdictional standard or definition used. 1.2 A secondary purpose is defined as the entity intentionally using data outside the primary purpose for which the data was collected. Examples of secondary purposes may include selling targeted advertisements and transferring data or information to a third-party through sale, rental or sharing. 1.3 User accounts that the entity cannot verify as belonging to the same individual shall be disclosed separately. 2The scope of the disclosure shall include the users whose information is used by the entity for secondary purposes, as well as the users whose information is provided to third parties, including those that directly or indirectly control, are controlled by, or are under common control with the entity, to use for secondary purposes. TC-IM-220a.3. Total amount of monetary losses as a result of legal proceedings associated with user privacy 1The entity shall disclose the total amount of monetary losses incurred during the reporting period resulting from legal proceedings associated with incidents relating to user privacy. 2The legal proceedings shall include any adjudicative proceeding involving the entity, whether before a court, a regulator, an arbitrator or otherwise. 3The losses shall include all monetary liabilities to the opposing party or to others (whether as the result of settlement or verdict after trial or otherwise), including fines and other monetary liabilities incurred during the reporting period as a result of civil actions (for example, civil judgements or settlements), regulatory proceedings (for example, penalties, disgorgement or restitution) and criminal actions (for example, criminal judgements, penalties or restitution) brought by any entity (for example, governmental, business or individual). 4The scope of monetary losses shall exclude legal and other fees and expenses incurred by the entity in its defence. 5The scope of the disclosure shall include legal proceedings associated with the enforcement of applicable jurisdictional laws or regulations. Note to TC-IM-220a.3 1The entity shall briefly describe the nature (for example, judgement or order issued after trial, settlement, guilty plea, deferred prosecution agreement or non-prosecution agreement) and context (for example, unauthorised monitoring, sharing of data or children ’s privacy) of all monetary losses resulting from legal proceedings. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |INTERNET MEDIA & SERVICES |13",
    "new_id": 890
  },
  {
    "id": 78161,
    "question": "Under which condition would an entity be required to disclose the basis for selecting its industry-classification system if it deviates from using GICS, as described in the Exposure Draft: Amendments to Greenhouse Gas Emissions Disclosures – Proposed amendments to IFRS S2 (Comments to be received by 27 June 2025)?",
    "options": {
      "C": "When the entity selects a system that ensures information is useful to users of general purpose financial reports, irrespective of jurisdictional mandates.",
      "A": "When the entity uses a jurisdictional or exchange-required system that aligns with financial reporting but not climate-related disclosures.",
      "B": "When the entity opts for an alternative system due to multiple overlapping jurisdictional requirements without any alignment to GICS.",
      "D": "When the entity applies GICS but modifies it to better reflect its internal classification of lending activities.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "20-21",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Draft.pdf",
    "source_text": "provides relevant information to users of general purpose financial reports. When disaggregating by industry, the entity shall classify counterparties using one of the following industry-classification systems in this order: (a) the Global Industry Classification Standard (GICS) 6-digit industry-level code, reflecting the latest version of the classification system available at the reporting date, if the entity uses GICS in any part of the entity to classify its lending or investment activities at the reporting date. (b) an industry-classification system that the entity or part of the entity uses for reporting climate-related financial information to meet a jurisdictional or exchange requirement, if (a) is not applicable and the entity or any part of the entity is required by a jurisdictional authority or an exchange on which it is listed to use that industry-classification system to classify its lending or investment activities at the reporting date. If the entity is subject to multiple jurisdictional or exchange requirements and uses more than one industry-classification system for such purposes, the entity shall select one classification system to use. (c) an industry-classification system that the entity or part of the entity uses for financial reporting purposes to meet a jurisdictional or exchange requirement, if (a) –(b) are not applicable and the entity or any part of the entity is required by a jurisdictional authority or an exchange on which it is listed to use that industry-classification system to classify its lending or investment activities at the reporting date. If the entity is subject to multiple jurisdictional or exchange requirements and uses more than one industry-classification system for such purposes, the entity shall select one classification system to use. (d) an industry-classification system that enables the entity to classify counterparties by industry in a manner that results in information that is useful to users of general purpose financial reports, if (a) –(c) are not applicable. An entity shall disclose the industry-classification system used to disaggregate its financed emissions information. If the entity does not use GICS for this purpose, the entity shall explain the basis for its industry-classification system selection.B63B B63CAMENDMENTS TO GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS DISCLOSURES —PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO IFRS S2 © IFRS Foundation 19\n\n[Page 21]\nAppendix C Effective date and transition Paragraphs C1A –C1B are added. New text is underlined. Effective date ... Amendments to Greenhouse Gas Emissions Disclosures , issued in [Month, Year]: (a) amended paragraphs 29(a)(ii), 29(a)(vi)(2) , B21–B22, B24, B28, B59, B62(a) and B63(a) ; and (b) added paragraphs 29A , B62A–B62C , B63A–B63C and C1A–C1B. An entity shall apply the amendments listed in paragraph C1A for annual reporting periods beginning on or after [Day, Month, Year]. Earlier application is permitted. If an entity applies these amendments earlier, it shall disclose that fact.C1A C1BEXPOSURE DRAFT—APRIL 2025 20 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 891
  },
  {
    "id": 78184,
    "question": "When an entity is required by a jurisdictional authority or exchange to use a different method for measuring greenhouse gas emissions, under which condition can it deviate from the Greenhouse Gas Protocol without violating the disclosure requirements, as outlined in the Exposure Draft: Amendments to Greenhouse Gas Emissions Disclosures – Proposed amendments to IFRS S2 (Comments to be received by 27 June 2025)?",
    "options": {
      "D": "For as long as the jurisdictional or exchange requirement applies to that part of the entity, provided it discloses the reasons for using the alternative method.",
      "A": "Only if the jurisdictional authority explicitly states that the Greenhouse Gas Protocol is no longer applicable.",
      "B": "If the entity determines that the alternative method results in more accurate greenhouse gas emissions data than the Greenhouse Gas Protocol.",
      "C": "When the alternative method aligns with Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions reporting but not with other scopes.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "16",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Draft.pdf",
    "source_text": "potential values for converting the seven constituent greenhouse gases into a CO2 equivalent value. In such a case, the entity is permitted to instead use the global warming potential values required by such a jurisdictional authority or exchange for the part of the entity to which that requirement applies, for as long as that requirement applies to that part of the entity. Paragraphs B24 and B28 are amended. New text is underlined and deleted text is struck through. The paragraph that is not amended but included for ease of reference is shown in grey. Greenhouse Gas Protocol Paragraph 29(a)(ii) requires an entity to disclose its greenhouse gas emissions measured in accordance with the Greenhouse Gas Protocol: A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard (2004). For the avoidance of doubt, an entity shall apply the requirements in the Greenhouse Gas Protocol: A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard (2004) only to the extent that they do not conflict with the requirements in this Standard. For example, the Greenhouse Gas Protocol: A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard (2004) does not require an entity to disclose its Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions, however, the entity is required to disclose Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions in accordance with paragraph 29(a). An entity is required to use the Greenhouse Gas Protocol: A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard (2004) unless the entity is required , in whole or in part, by a jurisdictional authority or an exchange on which it is listed to use a different method for measuring its greenhouse gas emissions. If the entity is required , in whole or in part, by a jurisdictional authority or an exchange on which it is listed to use a different method for measuring its greenhouse gas emissions, the entity is permitted to use this different method for the part of the entity to which that requirement applies, rather than using the Greenhouse Gas Protocol: A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard (2004) for as long as such the jurisdictional or exchange requirement applies to that part of the entity. ... Measurement approach, inputs and assumptions ... Other methods and measurement approaches When an entity discloses its greenhouse gas emissions measured in accordance with another method, applying paragraphs 29(a)(ii), B24–B25 or C4(a), the entity shall disclose for each alternative method: (a) the applicable method and measurement approach the entity uses to determine its greenhouse gas emissions; and (b) the reason, or reasons, for the entity ’s choice of method and measurement approach and how that approach relates to the disclosure objective in paragraph 27.B23 B24 B28AMENDMENTS TO GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS DISCLOSURES —PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO IFRS S2 © IFRS Foundation 15",
    "new_id": 892
  },
  {
    "id": 78185,
    "question": "Which of the following most accurately reflects the relationship between the amendments to IFRS S2 and their impact on entities applying the SASB Standards, as described in the Exposure Draft: Amendments to Greenhouse Gas Emissions Disclosures – Proposed amendments to IFRS S2 (Comments to be received by 27 June 2025)?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Consequential amendments to SASB Standards are intended to ensure alignment with amended references in IFRS S2, but their adoption is independent of an entity's decision to apply the IFRS S2 amendments early.",
      "B": "Entities are required to adopt consequential amendments to SASB Standards before applying any amendments to IFRS S2.",
      "C": "The ISSB mandates that entities applying IFRS S2 amendments must also simultaneously update all SASB Standards listed in Table A1.",
      "D": "Amendments to IFRS S2 automatically nullify existing SASB Standards, necessitating immediate replacement with updated protocols.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "21-22",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Draft.pdf",
    "source_text": "Appendix C Effective date and transition Paragraphs C1A –C1B are added. New text is underlined. Effective date ... Amendments to Greenhouse Gas Emissions Disclosures , issued in [Month, Year]: (a) amended paragraphs 29(a)(ii), 29(a)(vi)(2) , B21–B22, B24, B28, B59, B62(a) and B63(a) ; and (b) added paragraphs 29A , B62A–B62C , B63A–B63C and C1A–C1B. An entity shall apply the amendments listed in paragraph C1A for annual reporting periods beginning on or after [Day, Month, Year]. Earlier application is permitted. If an entity applies these amendments earlier, it shall disclose that fact.C1A C1BEXPOSURE DRAFT—APRIL 2025 20 © IFRS Foundation\n\n[Page 22]\nConsequential amendments to the SASB Standards Table A1 lists the SASB Standards that reference paragraphs in IFRS S2 for which amendments are proposed. The references to IFRS S2 are made in the technical protocols of these SASB Standards. The ISSB would make necessary consequential amendments to these SASB Standards to align the references with any amendments to IFRS S2. Table A1 —Consequential amendments to the SASB Standards Type of amendment SASB Standards Disclosure topic Updating references to specific paragraphs of IFRS S2 in the technical protocols included in the SASB StandardsAsset Management & Custody ActivitiesFinanced Emissions Commercial Banks Financed Emissions Insurance Financed EmissionsAMENDMENTS TO GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS DISCLOSURES —PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO IFRS S2 © IFRS Foundation 21",
    "new_id": 893
  },
  {
    "id": 78186,
    "question": "Which of the following most accurately reflects a necessary condition for entities to exclude emissions associated with derivatives, facilitated emissions, or insurance-associated emissions under the proposed amendment, as described in the Exposure Draft: Amendments to Greenhouse Gas Emissions Disclosures – Proposed amendments to IFRS S2 (Comments to be received by 27 June 2025)?",
    "options": {
      "B": "The proposed amendment allows entities to voluntarily choose whether to exclude emissions associated with derivatives, facilitated emissions, or insurance-associated emissions.",
      "A": "Entities must disclose all Scope 3 Category 15 greenhouse gas emissions, including those related to derivatives, to comply with IFRS S2.",
      "C": "The exclusion of emissions associated with derivatives is mandatory for all entities reporting under IFRS S2.",
      "D": "Entities are permitted to exclude emissions associated with derivatives only if they also exclude facilitated and insurance-associated emissions.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "7-8",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Draft.pdf",
    "source_text": "(b) entities subject to jurisdictional requirements related to the use of specific GWP values or specific greenhouse gas emissions measurement methods are more likely to be affected than other entities by the proposed amendments related to the jurisdictional relief. When would the proposed amendments be effective? The proposed amendments would make it easier for entities to apply IFRS S2 and assist those in the process of implementing the Standard. The ISSB proposes to make the additional relief and clarification to existing relief proposed in the amendments available to entities as soon as possible. To that end, the ISSB proposes to set the effective date so that the amendments would be effective as early as possible and to permit early application. Next steps The ISSB will analyse and consider the feedback it receives on the Exposure Draft and decide how to proceed. The ISSB intends to redeliberate the proposed amendments in the Exposure Draft in the second half of 2025 based on feedback from stakeholders and will seek to issue the amendments expeditiously.IN8 IN9EXPOSURE DRAFT—APRIL 2025 6 © IFRS Foundation\n\n[Page 8]\nInvitation to comment The ISSB invites comments on the proposals in the Exposure Draft, particularly on the questions set out below. Comments are most helpful if they: (a) address the questions as stated; (b) specify the paragraph(s) in the Exposure Draft to which they relate; (c) contain a clear rationale; (d) identify any wording in the proposals that is not clear or would be difficult to translate; and (e) include any alternative the ISSB should consider, if applicable. Questions for respondents Question 1 —Measurement and disclosure of Scope 3 Category 15 greenhouse gas emissions The ISSB proposes to permit entities to limit their disclosure of Scope 3 Category 15 greenhouse gas emissions. This limitation would permit entities to exclude some of their Scope 3 Category 15 greenhouse gas emissions, including those emissions associated with derivatives, facilitated emissions and insurance-associated emissions, when measuring and disclosing Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions in accordance with paragraph 29(a)(i)(3) of IFRS S2. (a) The ISSB proposes to add paragraph 29A(a), which would permit an entity to limit its disclosure of Scope 3 Category 15 greenhouse gas emissions to financed emissions, as defined in IFRS S2 (being those emissions attributed to loans and investments made by an entity to an investee or counterparty). For the purposes of the limitation, the proposed paragraph 29A(a) would expressly permit an entity to exclude greenhouse gas emissions associated with derivatives. Consequently, this paragraph would permit an entity to exclude emissions associated with derivatives, facilitated emissions or insurance-associated emissions from its disclosure of Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions. The proposed amendment would not prevent an entity from choosing to disclose greenhouse gas emissions associated with derivatives, facilitated emissions or insurance-associated emissions should it elect to do so. Paragraphs BC7 –BC24 of the Basis for Conclusions describe the reasons for the proposed amendment. Do you agree with the proposed amendment? Why or why not? continued...AMENDMENTS TO GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS DISCLOSURES —PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO IFRS S2 © IFRS Foundation 7",
    "new_id": 894
  },
  {
    "id": 78192,
    "question": "Which inference about Diageo's supply chain changes is most strongly supported by the text in A Practical Guide to Sustainability Reporting Using GRI and SASB Standards?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Routine tendering processes and local sourcing initiatives caused minor adjustments in Diageo's supply chain, but no material structural changes occurred during the reporting period.",
      "A": "Diageo's significant supply chain restructuring was primarily driven by geopolitical factors, as evidenced by shifts in supplier locations.",
      "B": "The reduction in imported raw materials from Europe led to a complete overhaul of Diageo’s African supply chain operations.",
      "D": "Diageo explicitly attributes its increased focus on local sourcing to new regulatory requirements imposed on multinational corporations.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "21",
    "ref_doc": "GRI SASB Joint 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "21 GLOBAL REPORTING INITIATIVE / SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARDS BOARDA PRACTICAL GUIDE TO SUSTAINABILITY REPORTING USING GRI AND SASB STANDARDSDiageo Annual Report 2020, page 13, identifies different stakeholders, what matters to them and how those items are addressed. 13 DIAGEO S&R Performance Addendum to the Annual Report 2020How we have met each disclosure Fully disclosed as outlined by the GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards Partially disclosed and missing at least one required indicator Not disclosed Not considered material to our business at this timeGRI Index Universal standards GRI 102: GENERAL DISCLOSURES continued ORGANISATIONAL PROFILE continued Disclosure Our response 102-08 continuedInformation on employees and other workers continuedTotal workforce by employees and supervised workers, and by gender: this information is included in the Our people section of the Annual Report, page 27. Most people who work on behalf of Diageo are employed by Diageo, although, in common with most manufacturing companies, we also employ contractors, the numbers of whom vary significantly by region. For the most part, when we use contractors, it is for the following: • Construction projects, resulting from investments we are making in the business • Logistics (from the end of the packaging line), such as warehouse operators, forklift truck drivers and loaders • Selected sales and merchandising activity • Cleaning, catering and site security. Some aspects of our business use seasonal employment, for example, in agricultural operations or in logistics and packing activities. In general, although seasonal employment is a feature of our business, it is not significant compared to our overall number of employees. 102-09 Supply chain The reporting organisation shall report the following information: a. A description of the organisation’s supply chain, including its main elements as they relate to the organisation’s activities, primary brands, products and services.Around 29,000 direct suppliers from more than 100 countries provide us with the raw materials, expertise and other resources that help us make great brands. Many of those direct suppliers themselves have an extensive supply chain, connecting us with thousands more farmers and businesses. Details of how we work with our suppliers are included in the Pioneer grain-to-glass sustainability section of the Annual Report, pages 28-29. 102-10 Significant changes to the organisation and its supply chain The reporting organisation shall report the following information: a. Significant changes to the organisation’s size, structure, ownership, or supply chain, including: i. changes in the location of, or changes in, operations, including facility openings, closings and expansions; ii. changes in the share capital structure and other capital formation, maintenance, and alteration operations (for private sector organisations); iii. changes in the location of suppliers, the structure of the supply chain, or relationships with suppliers, including selection and termination.For acquisitions and disposals, see Note 8 to the Financial statements in the Annual Report, pages 136-137. For material organisational restructuring programmes, see Note 3 to the Financial statements in the Annual Report, page 172. For changes in share capital structure, see Note 9 to the Financial statements in the Annual Report, page 174. There were no material changes to the overall location of suppliers, structure of the supply chain, or our relationships with suppliers during this reporting period. Other, less material changes in our supply chain occurred as a result of our routine tendering processes. We continue to promote local raw material sourcing, particularly in Africa. In 2020 we sourced 79% of the agricultural raw materials used in our African operations locally. This means we are importing proportionately fewer raw materials from Europe, and promoting economic development in local communities, while maximising the tax benefits of local sourcing. Details are included in the Pioneer grain-to-glass sustainability section of the Annual Report, pages 28-29. 102-11 Precautionary principle or approach The reporting organisation shall report the following information: a. Whether and how the organisation applies the precautionary principle or approach. We take a precautionary approach to our environmental strategy, as described in our work to reduce greenhouse gases in the Pioneering grain-to-glass sust",
    "new_id": 895
  },
  {
    "id": 78254,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the implicit relationship between GRI and SASB standards as described in terms of their complementary roles and implications for organizational reporting in A Practical Guide to Sustainability Reporting Using GRI and SASB Standards?",
    "options": {
      "D": "SASB standards are considered a subset of GRI standards, suggesting that organizations with robust GRI processes already meet most SASB requirements indirectly.",
      "A": "GRI standards primarily address financial materiality, while SASB standards focus on broader stakeholder concerns, making them fundamentally incompatible.",
      "B": "Both GRI and SASB standards prioritize qualitative narratives over quantitative metrics, ensuring alignment across all stakeholder groups without additional effort.",
      "C": "Adopting SASB standards requires an entirely new materiality assessment process, independent of any existing GRI framework implementations.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "36",
    "ref_doc": "GRI SASB Joint 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "36 GLOBAL REPORTING INITIATIVE / SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARDS BOARDA PRACTICAL GUIDE TO SUSTAINABILITY REPORTING USING GRI AND SASB STANDARDSIs using both sets of standards together effective? When Diageo was considering whether to adopt SASB, Harriet was concerned. “Initially, I thought, ‘Oh, no, another framework.’ And then I looked at it, and I realized we could do it already. I think it’s valuable to use both GRI and SASB and it doesn’t need to be difficult.” This is an opinion many interviewees and survey respon- dents shared: if your materiality analysis is in order, and you have GRI data collection processes in place, adding SASB to the mix should not be daunting, and can be highly effective in terms of bringing financial and ESG impacts together. Sharon agreed: “I look at SASB as if it’s a subset of information that’s already within GRI. So I also don’t buy any company’s argument that it’s too onerous.” Harriet said: “If you’re looking at the SASB framework in your industry, and you can’t report against the indicators, you might need to ask yourself if you’ve done a robust enough materiality assessment.” The GRI Standards go beyond quantitative data points that investors want to see, as Sharon said: “GRI drives the discus - sion and the narrative about how a company is managing the material issues to all stakeholders, where SASB is more focused purely on financial materiality.” Taken together, the two sets of standards offer a solution that helps reflect material issues and impacts more real- istically for various stakeholder groups. For example, the harmonization between the standards is especially helpful on climate-related issues. But it’s more than this, as Kris explained:“It’s not just a reporting exercise, it’s really around perfor - mance improvement systems. If the standards can highlight challenges or opportunities for improvement, we should take advantage of them.” GM provides a GRI and SASB index, and reports most of the data in these tables (see GM’s 2019 Sustainability Report, pages 130-143 (GRI) and pages 144-145 (SASB)). By contrast, Suncor includes a combined SASB/GRI table, which has a mix of reported data and cross-referenced data. •GM Sustainability Report 2019, pages 130-143 (GRI), and 144-145 (SASB). This shows a good example of how GRI and SASB content can be included in indexes. As compared to some other reports, this report tends to include the data directly (where possible) rather than referencing other documents, so this is a good example worth highlighting. •Suncor Sustainability report page 112, Suncor notes the complementary nature of GRI and SASB, explaining the use of each. Subsequent approach shows integrated approach to SASB/GRI disclosure, and includes direct responses or links to where information can be found.",
    "new_id": 896
  },
  {
    "id": 78273,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why CDL's quarterly sustainability reporting system is described as an 'ongoing process for tracking' rather than a year-end data collection effort, as outlined in A Practical Guide to Sustainability Reporting Using GRI and SASB Standards?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Because it ensures that all ESG-related KPIs are measured consistently throughout the year, preventing surprises at year-end.",
      "B": "Because it allows the company to avoid disclosing underperforming areas in their annual sustainability report.",
      "C": "Because it enables the company to prioritize green-coded areas over amber and red ones during external audits.",
      "D": "Because it shifts responsibility for sustainability performance exclusively to the Chief Sustainability Officer.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "29",
    "ref_doc": "GRI SASB Joint 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "29 GLOBAL REPORTING INITIATIVE / SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARDS BOARDA PRACTICAL GUIDE TO SUSTAINABILITY REPORTING USING GRI AND SASB STANDARDSThe reporting process A fast turnaround to break down silos Diageo believes it has the fastest published integrated annual report in the world and is the fastest company to publish a full GRI and SASB report. “I have not seen anyone quicker than us, but if there is someone, I really want to know how they do it,” Harriet said. Aligning the timing for collecting and reporting sustain- ability data alongside traditional financial data requires significant up-front planning and organization. At Diageo, the process is currently based on content ownership. There are a number of content owners across the business who are responsible for certain elements of sustainability disclo - sures. The team has a map of every GRI indicator with the name(s) of the owner(s) next to it. The reporting process starts properly in February, with a steering committee of the annual report group. In March and April the team start interviews to get the narratives for the different areas of the sustainability story. The draft content is developed in May, June and July for both the annual report’s sustainability content and the Sustainability and Responsibility Performance Addendum. They go through a series of drafts based on a skeleton of the previous year’s report. Once the information has been collected, near the end of the process, they cross-reference for SASB. Some of these points will link to GRI indicators, others to information in the annual report. The company reports preliminary results slightly earlier than the annual report is published in the UK – that usually means preliminary results are shared on the last Thursday of July and the annual report is published a week later. The US filing is generated from the annual report. But along the way, the company’s decision makers see quarterly perfor - mance updates on all ESG-related KPIs. Quarterly reporting CDL has a similar silo-breaking philosophy, which is reflected in the team structure. There are 13 people in the team, and they act as internal consultants. They are independent from the operation of the company; as Chief Sustainability Officer Esther doesn’t report to the operational head, “because I have to set target goals, and I will have to track their performance and report their performance.” However, they are integrated into the opera- tions by way of Esther chairing the sustainability committee that cuts across all business and operational units. This structure means Esther and the team do not rely on other divisional heads or department heads, but they have to engage them. “I have to rope them in to understand our whole overall corporate sustainability strategy, and to help,” Esther said. CDL has implemented quarterly sustainability reporting, based on a traffic light system. If an area is coded green, it means they’re on track; amber means room for improve - ment, and red is an alarm bell. It’s an ongoing process for tracking because, as Esther pointed out, “what gets measured gets managed.” They measure and track carefully all year, rather than waiting until November, and suddenly realize something is missing. “If you don’t measure, you are going to have a rude shock at the end of the year when you start to collect data,” she said. Engaging people across the business Sustainability reporting has accelerated over the past six years at GM: the company started reporting with SASB and TCFD and moved from GRI core to comprehensive reporting. It also reorganized with the appointment of a Chief Sustainability Officer, moving from public policy to the new corporate function. The reporting process starts with the team engaging a much broader team across the organization: there are 125 subject matter experts, including people in ethics, manufacturing and supply chain. They then build in external inputs, such as inquiries from investors. For example, investor attention recently focused on lobbying. In response to this, GM added a specific mention in the governance area of its sustain- ability report on the board’s oversight of lobbying. Although it already has a separate lobbying report, investor questions highlighted that the company may not have been as clear as it should have been on the governance oversight. This is where a lot of support for SASB and TCFD disclosure has come from – anticipating investor demand for infor - mation. It als",
    "new_id": 897
  },
  {
    "id": 78274,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why GM's engagement with stakeholders, as described, is integral to addressing both social and environmental goals while aligning with investor interests, as discussed in A Practical Guide to Sustainability Reporting Using GRI and SASB Standards?",
    "options": {
      "B": "By integrating insights from diverse stakeholder groups, GM ensures that its sustainability initiatives reflect broader societal values, thereby enhancing long-term value for investors.",
      "A": "GM’s stakeholder engagement primarily focuses on short-term financial performance, which reassures investors about immediate returns.",
      "C": "GM engages stakeholders only to comply with regulatory requirements, ensuring that minimal standards for sustainability reporting are met.",
      "D": "The company prioritizes internal stakeholder opinions over external ones, creating a feedback loop that minimizes the need for third-party collaboration.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "17",
    "ref_doc": "GRI SASB Joint 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "17 GLOBAL REPORTING INITIATIVE / SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARDS BOARDA PRACTICAL GUIDE TO SUSTAINABILITY REPORTING USING GRI AND SASB STANDARDSGM 2019 Sustainability Report, page 28. Identifies different stakeholder groups, why the group matters and engagement strategies. esg management at gm 2019 sustainability report esg management at gm 2019 sustainability report 2019 sustainability report esg management at gm esg management at gm Brand marketing, investor relations, global purchasing, human resources, labor relations and government relations are some of the GM functions that engage stakeholders on a regular basis to understand and address concerns, as well as to advance social and environmental goals. Forms of engagement include, but are not limited to, quantitative consumer research studies, stakeholder focus groups, congressional testimony, blog posts and community meetings. For the past 10 years, our global sustainability team also has engaged with stakeholders through Ceres, a nonprofit organization advocating for corporate sustainability leadership. Recently, this engagement has focused on specific topic areas, such as human rights, when GM has needed to garner insights and perspective from subject matter experts and other third parties.ESG Interest From Investors We continue to see increased interest in nonfinancial issues from investors who believe that these issues and positive contributions to society can be important indicators of long-term performance. In response, we are engaging with investors more often on these topics so that both GM’s financial and nonfinancial performance can be considered together. As an example, GM teams — including our CEO, CFO, corporate secretary and director of investor relations, as well as GM’s lead independent director and the chair of the Board’s governance and corporate responsibility committee — have conducted briefings with some of our largest shareholders. Topics have included corporate governance, company culture, workplace and vehicle safety, and diversity and inclusion. In 2019, members of the Board and senior management engaged with shareholders representing approximately 50 percent of GM’s outstanding shares of common stock.STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT Who We Engage With Why It Matters Examples of How We Engage CUSTOMERS (both individual and fleet)We aim to earn customers for life, which ensures the long-term sustainability of our business in a competitive and changing marketplace. Participating in customer satisfaction surveys to understand what vehicle attributes customers value. Partnering to expand EV charging infrastructure. Educating customers on the benefits of EVs. INVESTORS AND ANALYSTS Investors are increasingly interested in greater disclosure and transparency, particularly related to ESG topics and performance, which they link to long-term value.Publishing an annual Sustainability Report. Holding focused conversations and briefings to put data in context. Reporting to frameworks including SASB and TCFD.Our success depends on relationships inside and outside the company. This core value drives engagement with our stakeholders. We engage these stakeholders in a variety of ways, all with the goal of sharing information and informing business decisions with meaningful dialogue. 282019 SUSTAINABILITY REPORT ESG MANAGEMENT",
    "new_id": 898
  },
  {
    "id": 78292,
    "question": "Which of the following statements accurately reflects a necessary condition for an operator to use alternative technologies as part of pipeline inspections while complying with disclosure requirements, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 34: Gas Utilities & Distributors?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The operator must provide evidence that the alternative technology offers an equivalent understanding of pipeline condition compared to standard methods.",
      "A": "The operator must demonstrate that the technology can address only external corrosion threats effectively.",
      "B": "The operator is required to disclose all technologies used during inspections, regardless of their effectiveness in understanding pipeline condition.",
      "D": "The operator needs to ensure that the technology has been approved by third-party initiatives or industry benchmarks.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "10",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol34.pdf",
    "source_text": "IF-GU-540a.3. Percentage of gas (1) transmission and (2) distribution pipelines inspected 1 The entity shall disclose the percentage, by length, of gas (1) transmission pipelines, and separately, (2) distribution pipelines inspected during the reporting period. 1.1 A transmission pipeline is defined as a pipeline, other than a gathering line, that (1) transports gas from a gathering line or storage facility to a distribution centre, storage facility or large-volume customer that is not downstream from a distribution centre; (2) operates at a hoop stress of 20% or more of the specified minimum yield strength (SMYS); or (3) transports gas within a storage field. 1.2 A distribution pipeline is defined as a pipeline other than a gathering or transmission line. 2 Inspection activities include: 2.1 Internal inspection tool(s) capable of detecting corrosion and any other threats to which the covered segment is susceptible 2.2 Pressure test(s) 2.3 Direct assessment to address threats of external corrosion, internal corrosion or stress corrosion cracking 2.4 Other technology that an operator demonstrates can provide an equivalent understanding of pipeline condition 2.4.1 If other technologies were used by the entity to conduct inspections, the entity shall disclose which technology was used. 3 The percentage is calculated as the length of gas pipelines inspected divided by the total length of gas pipelines. IF-GU-540a.4. Description of efforts to manage the integrity of gas delivery infrastructure, including risks related to safety and emissions 1 The entity shall describe its efforts to manage the integrity of gas delivery infrastructure. 1.1 Gas delivery infrastructure may include transmission pipelines, distribution pipelines, storage facilities, compressor stations, metering and regulation stations, and liquid natural gas facilities. 1.2 Efforts may include those related to employee training, emergency preparedness, process safety and asset integrity management. 1.3 Relevant information to provide may include the use of standards, industry best practices, benchmarking and participation in third-party initiatives. 2 The entity shall describe how it integrates a culture of safety and emergency preparedness throughout its project lifecycles, such as through training, oversight of workforce, rules and guidelines for communicating risks, and use of technology.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 9",
    "new_id": 899
  },
  {
    "id": 78303,
    "question": "Under which condition would an entity fail to claim renewable energy credits (RECs) or Guarantees of Origin (GOs) as part of its renewable energy scope, according to the Solar Technology & Project Developers – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "If the entity generates renewable electricity on-site and sells the associated RECs and GOs.",
      "A": "If the RECs and GOs are retained but not retired or cancelled on behalf of the entity.",
      "B": "If the entity purchases renewable energy through a PPA that explicitly includes RECs or GOs, even if they are not retained.",
      "C": "If the entity relies solely on the renewable portion of the electricity grid mix outside its control.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "9",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Solar Technology & Project Developers.pdf",
    "source_text": "3.3 The scope of renewable energy includes renewable fuel the entity consumed, renewable energy the entity directly produced and renewable energy the entity purchased, if purchased through a renewable power purchase agreement (PPA) that explicitly includes renewable energy certificates (RECs) or Guarantees of Origin (GOs), a Green ‐e Energy Certified utility or supplier programme, or other green power products that explicitly include RECs or GOs, or for which Green ‐e Energy Certified RECs are paired with grid electricity. 3.3.1 For any renewable electricity generated on-site, any RECs and GOs shall be retained (not sold) and retired or cancelled on behalf of the entity for the entity to claim them as renewable energy. 3.3.2 For renewable PPAs and green power products, the agreement shall explicitly include and convey that RECs and GOs be retained or replaced and retired or cancelled on behalf of the entity for the entity to claim them as renewable energy. 3.3.3 The renewable portion of the electricity grid mix that is outside of the control or influence of the entity is excluded from the scope of renewable energy. 3.4 For the purposes of this disclosure, the scope of renewable energy from biomass sources is limited to materials certified to a third-party standard (for example, Forest Stewardship Council, Sustainable Forest Initiative, Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification or American Tree Farm System), materials considered eligible sources of supply according to the Green-e Framework for Renewable Energy Certification, Version 1.0 (2017) or Green-e regional standards, or materials eligible for an applicable jurisdictional renewable portfolio standard. 4The entity shall apply conversion factors consistently for all data reported under this disclosure, such as the use of HHVs for fuel usage (including biofuels) and conversion of kilowatt hours (kWh) to GJ (for energy data including electricity from solar or wind energy). SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |SOLAR TECHNOLOGY & PROJECT DEVELOPERS |9",
    "new_id": 900
  },
  {
    "id": 78317,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the relationship between the SASB Standards' focus on materiality judgements and the role of the identified metrics in addressing sustainability risks for entities in the Solar Technology & Project Developers industry, as described in the Solar Technology & Project Developers – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Materiality judgements allow entities to determine which metrics are financially relevant, while the metrics themselves are designed primarily to meet investor expectations.",
      "B": "The metrics are optional guidelines that entities may use to improve public relations, while materiality judgements ensure regulatory compliance.",
      "C": "The metrics serve as mandatory benchmarks for all entities, while materiality judgements are only relevant for companies operating in multiple SICS® industries.",
      "D": "Materiality judgements guide entities in selecting metrics, but the metrics are intended to address risks and opportunities affecting cash flows regardless of investor interest.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "5-6",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Solar Technology & Project Developers.pdf",
    "source_text": "Use of the Standards SASB Standards are intended to aid entities in disclosing information about sustainability-related risks and opportunities that could reasonably be expected to affect the entity ’s cash flows, its access to finance or cost of capital over the short, medium or long term. An entity determines which Industry Standard(s) and which disclosure topics are relevant to its business, and which associated metrics to report. In general, an entity should use the SASB Standard specific to its primary industry as identified in SICS® . However, companies with substantial business in multiple SICS® industries should refer to and consider the applicability of the disclosure topics and associated metrics in additional SASB Standards. The disclosure topics and associated metrics contained in this Standard have been identified as those that are likely to be useful to investors. However, the responsibility for making materiality judgements and determinations rests with the reporting entity. Industry Description Solar Technology & Project Developers industry entities manufacture solar energy equipment, including solar photovoltaic (PV) modules, polysilicon feedstock, solar thermal electricity-generation systems, solar inverters and other related components. Entities also may develop, build and manage solar energy projects and offer financing or maintenance services to customers. The industry uses two primary technologies: PV and concentrated solar power (CSP). Within solar PV, two main technologies exist: crystalline silicon-based solar and thin-film solar, which includes panels made using copper indium gallium selenide and cadmium telluride. The primary markets for solar panels are residential, non-residential (commercial and industrial) and utility-scale projects. Entities in the industry operate globally. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |SOLAR TECHNOLOGY & PROJECT DEVELOPERS |5\n\n[Page 6]\nSUSTAINABILITY DISCLOSURE TOPICS & METRICS Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORYUNIT OF MEASURECODE Energy Management in Manufacturing(1) Total energy consumed, (2) percentage grid electricity and (3) percentage renewableQuantitativeGigajoules (GJ), Percentage (%)RR-ST -130a.1 Water Management in Manufacturing(1) Total water withdrawn, (2) total water consumed; percentage of each in regions with High or Extremely High Baseline Water StressQuantitativeThousand cubic metres (m³), Percentage (%)RR-ST -140a.1 Description of water management risks and discussion of strategies and practices to mitigate those risksDiscussion and Analysisn/a RR-ST -140a.2 Hazardous Waste Management(1) Amount of hazardous waste generated, (2) percentage recycled 1 QuantitativeMetric tonnes (t), Percentage (%)RR-ST -150a.1 (1) Number and aggregate quantity of reportable spills, (2) quantity recovered 2 QuantitativeNumber, Kilogrammes (kg)RR-ST -150a.2 Ecological Impacts of Project Development(1) Number and (2) duration of project delays related to ecological impactsQuantitative Number, Days RR-ST -160a.1 Description of efforts in solar energy system project development to address community and ecological impactsDiscussion and Analysisn/a RR-ST -160a.2 Management of Energy Infrastructure Integration & Related RegulationsDescription of risks associated with integration of solar energy into existing energy infrastructure and discussion of efforts to manage those risksDiscussion and Analysisn/a RR-ST -410a.1 Description of risks and opportunities associated with energy policy and its effect on the integration of solar energy into existing energy infrastructureDiscussion and Analysisn/a RR-ST -410a.2 continued... 1Note to RR-ST-150a.1 – The entity shall disclose the legal or regulatory framework(s) used to define hazardous waste and recycled hazardous waste, and the amounts of waste defined in accordance with each applicable framework. 2Note to RR-ST-150a.2 – The entity shall discuss its long-term activities to remediate spills that occurred in years prior to the reporting period but for which remediation activities are ongoing. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |SOLAR TECHNOLOGY & PROJECT DEVELOPERS |6",
    "new_id": 901
  },
  {
    "id": 78329,
    "question": "Which scenario would violate the entity's requirements for disclosing the percentage of materials recycled, as outlined in the Solar Technology & Project Developers – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "An entity counts products collected under warranty for repairs as part of the total weight of incoming recovered materials.",
      "A": "An entity calculates the percentage recycled by including only the weight of incoming material reused or reclaimed, excluding externally sent materials.",
      "C": "An entity excludes materials that were discarded in landfills from the numerator but includes them in the total weight of recovered material used to calculate the percentage.",
      "D": "An entity includes co-products and by-products as part of recycled and remanufactured materials when calculating the percentage recycled.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "23",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Solar Technology & Project Developers.pdf",
    "source_text": "3.4 For items partially made of recyclable components, the entity shall only consider those components recyclable if (a) it clearly and prominently qualifies the recyclable claim to avoid deception about which portions are recyclable, and (b) no components significantly limit the ability to disassemble and recycle the product or components of the product (for example, the size, shape or assembly method). RR-ST-410b.2. (1) Weight of end-of-life material recovered, (2) percentage recycled 1The entity shall disclose (1) the weight, in metric tonnes, of materials recovered, including those recovered through recycling services, product take-back programmes, refurbishment services and as manufacturing scrap, in which: 1.1 The scope of the disclosure shall include products, materials, manufacturing scrap and parts at the end of their useful life that would have otherwise been discarded as waste or used for energy recovery, but they have instead been collected. 1.2 The scope of the disclosure shall include both materials physically handled by the entity and materials of which the entity does not take physical possession, but for which it has contracted with a third party the task of collection for the express purpose of reuse, recycling or refurbishment. 1.3 The scope of the disclosure excludes products and parts that are under warranty and have been collected for repairs. 2The entity shall disclose (2) the percentage recycled, which is calculated as the weight of incoming material reused or reclaimed, plus the weight of material recycled or remanufactured (through treatment or processing) by the entity, plus the weight of material sent externally for further recycling, divided by the total weight of incoming recovered material, in which: 2.1 a material is recycled if it is used, reused or reclaimed; 2.2 reclaimed materials are defined as those processed to recover or regenerate a usable product; 2.3 reused materials are defined as those recovered products or components of products used for the same purpose for which they were conceived; 2.4 recycled and remanufactured materials are defined as waste materials reprocessed or treated through production or manufacturing processes and made into a final product or a component for incorporation into a product; 2.5 materials sent for further recycling include those materials transferred to a third party for the express purpose of reuse, recycling or refurbishment; 2.6 the scope of recycled and remanufactured products includes primary recycled materials, co-products (outputs of equal value to primary recycled materials) and by-products (outputs of lesser value than primary recycled materials); 2.7 portions of products and materials discarded in landfills are not considered recycled; SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |SOLAR TECHNOLOGY & PROJECT DEVELOPERS |23",
    "new_id": 902
  },
  {
    "id": 78330,
    "question": "Which implication can be drawn regarding how water management risks are influenced by regulatory and financial constraints versus discharge-related risks, according to the Solar Technology & Project Developers – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Regulatory and financial constraints encompass broader stakeholder concerns, including competition for resources, whereas discharge-related risks emphasize compliance and reputational impacts tied to specific discharge practices.",
      "A": "Regulatory and financial constraints primarily affect the cost of obtaining water rights, while discharge-related risks focus on maintaining control over water temperature.",
      "B": "Both regulatory and financial constraints and discharge-related risks are driven exclusively by the entity’s interactions with municipal water supplies and utilities.",
      "D": "Discharge-related risks are limited to environmental constraints such as drought, while regulatory and financial constraints address only permit acquisition.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "11",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Solar Technology & Project Developers.pdf",
    "source_text": "4The entity shall analyze all of its operations for water risks and identify activities that withdraw and consume water in locations with High (40 –80 percent) or Extremely High (>80 percent) Baseline Water Stress as classified by the World Resources Institute ’s (WRI) Water Risk Atlas tool, Aqueduct. 5The entity shall disclose its water withdrawn in locations with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress as a percentage of the total water withdrawn. 6The entity shall disclose its water consumed in locations with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress as a percentage of the total water consumed. RR-ST-140a.2. Description of water management risks and discussion of strategies and practices to mitigate those risks 1The entity shall describe its water management risks associated with water withdrawals, water consumption and discharge of water or wastewater. 1.1 Risks associated with water withdrawals and water consumption include risks to the availability of adequate, clean water resources, which include: 1.1.1 Environmental constraints —such as operating in water-stressed regions, drought, concerns of aquatic impingement or entrainment, interannual or seasonal variability, and risks from the impact of climate change 1.1.2 Regulatory and financial constraints —such as volatility in water costs, stakeholder perceptions and concerns related to water withdrawals (for example, those from local communities, non- governmental organisations and regulatory agencies), direct competition with and impact from the actions of other users (for example, commercial and municipal users), restrictions to withdrawals because of regulations, and constraints on the entity ’s ability to obtain and retain water rights or permits 1.2 Risks associated with the discharge of water or wastewater include the ability to obtain rights or permits related to discharges, regulatory compliance related to discharges, restrictions to discharges, the ability to maintain control over the temperature of water discharges, liabilities, reputational risks and increased operating costs because of regulation, stakeholder perceptions and concerns related to water discharges (for example, those from local communities, non-governmental organisations and regulatory agencies). 2The entity may describe water management risks in the context of: 2.1 How risks may vary by withdrawal source, including surface water (including water from wetlands, rivers, lakes and oceans), groundwater, rainwater collected directly and stored by the entity, and water and wastewater obtained from municipal water supplies, water utilities or other entities; and 2.2 How risks may vary by discharge destinations, including surface water, groundwater or wastewater utilities. 3The entity may discuss the potential effects that water management risks may have on its operations and the time line over which such risks are expected to manifest. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |SOLAR TECHNOLOGY & PROJECT DEVELOPERS |11",
    "new_id": 903
  },
  {
    "id": 78331,
    "question": "Which interpretation accurately captures the relationship between an entity's obligation to disclose environmental risks in the polysilicon supply chain and its discretion regarding the identification of specific critical materials, as described in the Solar Technology & Project Developers – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "An entity is required to disclose the existence and type of risks along with mitigation strategies but may withhold the identity of critical materials if disclosure would cause competitive harm.",
      "A": "An entity must disclose both the specific critical materials posing risks and the strategies for mitigating those risks, regardless of competitive harm.",
      "B": "Disclosure of environmental risks is optional unless the materials involved are explicitly named within the polysilicon supply chain.",
      "C": "Entities are only obligated to describe risks and mitigation strategies related to supplier noncompliance, not risks associated with specific materials.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "27-28",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Solar Technology & Project Developers.pdf",
    "source_text": "3.1 For example, if an entity determines not to identify a specific critical material that presents a significant risk to its operations because of the competitive harm that could result from the disclosure, the entity shall disclose the existence of such risks, the type of risks, and the strategies used to mitigate the risks, but the entity is not required to disclose the relevant critical material. RR-ST-440a.2. Description of the management of environmental risks associated with the polysilicon supply chain 1The entity shall describe its approach to managing the environmental risks associated with the polysilicon supply chain, which may include risks of suppliers ’ noncompliance with environmental regulations and risks associated with suppliers ’ disposal and handling of manufacturing wastes (including tetrachloride). 2Relevant strategies to discuss include due diligence practices, supply chain auditing, supply chain engagement, codes of conduct, and partnerships with industry groups or nongovernmental development organisations. 3The entity shall describe its process for implementing corrective actions in the event of noncompliance with environmental regulations in the supply chain, including the use of alternative suppliers. 4The entity may identify which materials within the polysilicon supply chain present an environmental risk to operations, which type of risk they represent (for example, regulatory compliance, reputational risk or physical limits on availability and access), and the strategies the entity uses to mitigate the risk. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |SOLAR TECHNOLOGY & PROJECT DEVELOPERS |27\n\n[Page 28]\n| |28 sasb.org/contact",
    "new_id": 904
  },
  {
    "id": 78362,
    "question": "Which statement most accurately reflects the relationship between workforce diversity metrics and their implications for organizational performance, as described in the Professional & Commercial Services – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Metrics such as SV-PS-330a.1 emphasize the importance of diversity among senior management to attract top talent and foster productivity across the organization.",
      "B": "Enhancing diversity at all levels is primarily aimed at improving short-term financial returns through increased operational efficiency.",
      "C": "Workforce diversity metrics are designed to ensure compliance with jurisdictional occupational classification systems rather than drive internal equity or engagement.",
      "D": "The disclosed gender representation percentages are intended to serve as standalone indicators of an entity’s overall success in revenue generation.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "11",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Professional & Commercial Services.pdf",
    "source_text": "Workforce Diversity & Engagement Topic Summary Developing a broad base of valued, respected and supported employees throughout an organisation is essential for the long-term growth prospects of professional and commercial services entities. Human capital is the primary source of revenue generation, contributing knowledge, talent, advice and various technical skills. Although financial and non- financial service providers may hire a diverse workforce among lower-level employees, they may lack diversity among senior management. Enhancing workforce diversity, particularly among management positions, may help entities attract and develop the best talent. Significant employee engagement, fair treatment and equitable levels of pay and advancement opportunities for all workers are all likely to contribute to increased productivity and performance through all levels of the entity. Metrics SV-PS-330a.1. Percentage of (1) gender and (2) diversity group representation for (a) executive management, (b) non-executive management, and (c) all other employees 1The entity shall disclose (1) the percentage of gender representation among its employees for (a) executive management, (b) non-executive management and (c) all other employees. 1.1 The entity shall categorise the gender of its employees as women, men or not disclosed. 1.1.1 The entity may disclose additional categories of gender identity or expression. 1.2 The entity shall use these employee categories: (a) executive management, (b) non-executive management and (c) all other employees. 1.3 Executive management is defined as chief executives and senior officials who formulate and review the entity’s policies, and plan, direct, coordinate and evaluate the overall activities of the entity with the support of other managers. 1.3.1 The entity may refer to the International Standard Classification of Occupations (ISCO) Sub-Major Group 11 or an applicable jurisdictional occupation classification system for a definition of executive management. In such cases, the entity shall disclose the occupation classification standard used to classify executive management. 1.4 Non-executive management is defined as those who plan, direct, coordinate and evaluate the activities of the entity, or of organisational units within it, and formulate and review its policies, rules and regulations, other than executive management. 1.4.1 The entity may refer to the ISCO Major Group 1 (excluding Sub-Major Group 11) or an applicable jurisdictional occupational classification system for a definition of non-executive management. In such cases, the entity shall disclose the occupation classification standard used to classify non- executive management. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |PROFESSIONAL & COMMERCIAL SERVICES |11",
    "new_id": 905
  },
  {
    "id": 78363,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why a company in the Professional & Commercial Services industry might need to consider multiple SASB Standards rather than just the one aligned with its primary industry, as outlined in the Professional & Commercial Services – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Because companies with significant operations across multiple SICS® industries must evaluate the applicability of other standards to ensure comprehensive risk and opportunity disclosure.",
      "A": "Because the SASB Standards mandate that all companies report on every available disclosure topic and metric regardless of relevance.",
      "C": "Because entities are required to adopt additional standards whenever their workforce diversity metrics fall below a specific threshold.",
      "D": "Because data security risks inherently require cross-industry analysis, making single-industry standards insufficient for accurate reporting.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "5-6",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Professional & Commercial Services.pdf",
    "source_text": "Use of the Standards SASB Standards are intended to aid entities in disclosing information about sustainability-related risks and opportunities that could reasonably be expected to affect the entity ’s cash flows, its access to finance or cost of capital over the short, medium or long term. An entity determines which Industry Standard(s) and which disclosure topics are relevant to its business, and which associated metrics to report. In general, an entity should use the SASB Standard specific to its primary industry as identified in SICS® . However, companies with substantial business in multiple SICS® industries should refer to and consider the applicability of the disclosure topics and associated metrics in additional SASB Standards. The disclosure topics and associated metrics contained in this Standard have been identified as those that are likely to be useful to investors. However, the responsibility for making materiality judgements and determinations rests with the reporting entity. Industry Description Professional & Commercial Services industry entities rely on the skills and knowledge of their employees to serve a wide range of clients. Services often are provided on an assignment basis, where an individual or team is responsible for the delivery of client services. Offerings may include management and administration consulting services, such as staffing and executive search services; legal, accounting and tax preparation services; and financial and non-financial information services. Non-financial information service providers may specialise in an array of sectors such as energy, healthcare, real estate, technology and science. Financial information service entities include credit and rating agencies as well as data and portfolio analytics providers. Customers of professional and commercial service providers include private and public for-profit institutions and non-profit organisations. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |PROFESSIONAL & COMMERCIAL SERVICES |5\n\n[Page 6]\nSUSTAINABILITY DISCLOSURE TOPICS & METRICS Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORYUNIT OF MEASURECODE Data SecurityDescription of approach to identifying and addressing data security risksDiscussion and Analysisn/a SV-PS-230a.1 Description of policies and practices relating to collection, usage, and retention of customer informationDiscussion and Analysisn/a SV-PS-230a.2 (1) Number of data breaches, (2) percentage that (a) involve customers ’ confidential business information and (b) are personal data breaches, (3) number of (a) customers and (b) individuals affected 1QuantitativeNumber, Percentage (%)SV-PS-230a.3 Workforce Diversity & EngagementPercentage of (1) gender and (2) diversity group representation for (a) executive management, (b) non-executive management, and (c) all other employees 2QuantitativePercentage (%)SV-PS-330a.1 (1) Voluntary and (2) involuntary turnover rate for employeesQuantitativePercentage (%)SV-PS-330a.2 Employee engagement as a percentage 3QuantitativePercentage (%)SV-PS-330a.3 Professional IntegrityDescription of approach to ensuring professional integrityDiscussion and Analysisn/a SV-PS-510a.1 Total amount of monetary losses as a result of legal proceedings associated with professional integrity 4QuantitativePresentation currencySV-PS-510a.2 Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORYUNIT OF MEASURECODE Number of employees by: (1) full-time and part-time, (2) temporary, and (3) contractQuantitative Number SV-PS-000.A Employee hours worked, percentage billable QuantitativeHours, Percentage (%)SV-PS-000.B 1Note to SV-PS-230a.3 – The disclosure shall include a description of corrective actions implemented in response to data breaches. 2Note to SV-PS-330a.1 – The entity shall describe its policies and programmes for fostering equitable employee representation across its global operations. 3Note to SV-PS-330a.3 – The disclosure shall include a description of the method employed. 4Note to SV-PS-510a.2 – The entity shall briefly describe the nature, context and corrective actions taken because of monetary losses. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |PROFESSIONAL & COMMERCIAL SERVICES |6",
    "new_id": 906
  },
  {
    "id": 78392,
    "question": "Which of the following statements accurately reflects a necessary condition for classifying fuel as renewable according to the provided framework in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 24: Non-Alcoholic Beverages?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The fuel must be derived from renewable biomass, replace or reduce fossil fuels in relevant applications, and achieve net greenhouse gas emissions reduction across its life cycle.",
      "A": "The fuel must be produced exclusively from non-biological sources and demonstrate a life cycle net increase in greenhouse gas emissions.",
      "B": "The fuel must replace or reduce fossil fuel quantities in transportation fuel, heating oil, or jet fuel but is not required to achieve any specific level of greenhouse gas emissions reduction.",
      "D": "The fuel is considered renewable if it reduces operational costs and exposure to fossil fuel price volatility, irrespective of its biomass origin or emissions impact.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "5",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol24.pdf",
    "source_text": "...continued ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Number of production facilities Quantitative Number FB-NB-000.B Total fleet road kilometres travelledQuantitative Kilometres (km)FB-NB-000.C Fleet Fuel Management Topic Summary Non-alcoholic beverages entities generate direct Scope 1 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from large vehicle fleets used for distribution and from manufacturing facilities. Specifically, refrigeration used in manufacturing facilities and in transport vehicles contributes a significant proportion of overall industry emissions. Efficiencies gained in fuel use can reduce costs, mitigate exposure to fossil fuel price volatility and limit emissions from production, storage and transportation of products. Long-term operational savings and regulatory risk mitigation may outweigh short-term capital expenditures in fuel efficient fleets and more energy-efficient technologies. Metrics FB-NB-110a.1. Fleet fuel consumed, percentage renewable 1 The entity shall disclose the total amount of fuel consumed by its fleet vehicles as an aggregate figure, in gigajoules (GJ). 1.1 The calculation methodology for fuel consumed shall be based on actual fuel consumed as opposed to design parameters. 1.2 Acceptable calculation methodologies for fuel consumed may include methodologies based on: 1.2.1 Adding fuel purchases made during the reporting period to beginning inventory at the start of the reporting period, less any fuel inventory at the end of the reporting period; 1.2.2 Tracking fuel consumed by vehicles; and 1.2.3 Tracking fuel expenses. 2 The entity shall disclose the percentage of the total amount of fuel consumed by its fleet vehicles that is renewable fuel. 2.1 Renewable fuel is generally defined as fuel that meets all of these requirements: 2.1.1 Produced from renewable biomass; 2.1.2 Used to replace or reduce the quantity of fossil fuel present in a transportation fuel, heating oil or jet fuel; and 2.1.3 Achieved net greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction on a life cycle basis.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 4 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 907
  },
  {
    "id": 78416,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures an implicit relationship between the operational strategies of airlines and their sustainability reporting obligations under the SASB Standards, as outlined in the Airlines – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Partnerships and alliances among airlines may amplify both competitive advantages and sustainability-related risks, necessitating comprehensive disclosures under the SASB Standards.",
      "A": "The hub-and-spoke model used by full-service carriers inherently reduces sustainability risks, thereby minimizing their reporting requirements under the SASB Standards.",
      "B": "Low-cost carriers are exempt from certain disclosure topics because they operate with a no-frills service model, which implies fewer environmental impacts.",
      "C": "Regional carriers operating under contracts with full-service carriers are solely responsible for reporting on sustainability metrics related to their contracted operations.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "4-5",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Airlines.pdf",
    "source_text": "INTRODUCTION Overview of SASB Standards The SASB Standards are a set of 77 industry-specific sustainability accounting standards ( “SASB Standards ” or “Industry Standards ”), categorised pursuant to the Sustainable Industry Classification System® (SICS®). SASB Standards include: 1. Industry descriptions – which are intended to help entities identify applicable industry guidance by describing the business models, associated activities and other common features that characterise participation in the industry. 2. Disclosure topics – which describe specific sustainability-related risks or opportunities associated with the activities conducted by entities within a particular industry. 3. Metrics – which accompany disclosure topics and are designed to, either individually or as part of a set, provide useful information regarding an entity ’s performance for a specific disclosure topic. 4. Technical protocols – which provide guidance on definitions, scope, implementation and presentation of associated metrics. 5. Activity metrics – which quantify the scale of specific activities or operations by an entity and are intended for use in conjunction with the metrics referred to in point 3 to normalise data and facilitate comparison. Entities using the SASB Standards as part of their implementation of ISSB Standards should consider the relevant ISSB application guidance. For entities using the SASB Standards independently from ISSB Standards, the SASB Standards Application Guidance establishes guidance applicable to the use of all Industry Standards and is considered part of the Standards. Unless otherwise specified in the technical protocols contained in the Industry Standards, the guidance in the SASB Standards Application Guidance applies to the definitions, scope, implementation, compilation and presentation of the metrics in the Industry Standards. Historically, the SASB Conceptual Framework set out the basic concepts, principles, definitions and objectives that guided the SASB Standards Board in its approach to setting standards for sustainability accounting. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |AIRLINES |4\n\n[Page 5]\nUse of the Standards SASB Standards are intended to aid entities in disclosing information about sustainability-related risks and opportunities that could reasonably be expected to affect the entity ’s cash flows, its access to finance or cost of capital over the short, medium or long term. An entity determines which Industry Standard(s) and which disclosure topics are relevant to its business, and which associated metrics to report. In general, an entity should use the SASB Standard specific to its primary industry as identified in SICS® . However, companies with substantial business in multiple SICS® industries should refer to and consider the applicability of the disclosure topics and associated metrics in additional SASB Standards. The disclosure topics and associated metrics contained in this Standard have been identified as those that are likely to be useful to investors. However, the responsibility for making materiality judgements and determinations rests with the reporting entity. Industry Description Airlines industry entities provide air transportation globally to passengers for both leisure and business purposes. This includes commercial full-service, low-cost and regional airlines. Full-service carriers typically use a hub-and-spoke model to design their routes within countries and internationally. Low-cost carriers usually offer a smaller number of routes as well as no-frills service to their customers. Regional carriers typically operate under contract to full-service carriers, expanding the network of the larger carriers. Many airline entities also have a cargo segment in their operations to generate additional revenue. Entities in the industry commonly form partnerships or join alliances to increase network size. Operating as an alliance allows airlines to offer customers access to international or otherwise underserved itineraries on more than one airline under one ticket. At the same time, airlines share some overhead costs and increase their competitive position in the global market without having to operate outside their home country. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |AIRLINES |5",
    "new_id": 908
  },
  {
    "id": 78417,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why legal fees and reputational risks are excluded from the monetary losses reported under TR-AL-520a.1, yet still pose material risks to investors, as outlined in the Airlines – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Because they are considered operational costs rather than liabilities resulting from adjudicative proceedings.",
      "B": "Because they are not directly tied to consumer pricing or anti-competitive practices.",
      "C": "Because they represent indirect financial impacts that fall outside the scope of regulatory enforcement actions.",
      "D": "Because their inclusion would undermine the entity's ability to implement corrective actions effectively.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "14-15",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Airlines.pdf",
    "source_text": "Competitive Behaviour Topic Summary The Airlines industry is characterised by competitive margins because of high fixed capital and labour costs and competition with government-subsidised carriers in some markets. Airlines often seek cost savings using economies of scale with alliances or consolidation, which may result in market concentration. The industry also has high barriers to entry because of limited landing rights and increasing airport congestion. Together, these characteristics may encourage entities to engage in anti-competitive practices that increase consumer prices. As a result, antitrust authorities have scrutinised some airline industry practices such as airport slot management, predatory pricing, and alliances and mergers. Legal fees, reputational risk, delayed merger or acquisition transaction costs, and limits to growth through acquisition or merger may create material risks for investors. Metrics TR-AL-520a.1. Total amount of monetary losses as a result of legal proceedings associated with anti-competitive behaviour regulations 1The entity shall disclose the total amount of monetary losses incurred during the reporting period resulting from legal proceedings associated with anti-competitive behaviour such as those related to price fixing, antitrust behaviour (for example, exclusivity contracts), patent misuse, or network effects, as well as bundling services and products to limit competition. 2The legal proceedings shall include any adjudicative proceeding involving the entity, whether before a court, a regulator, an arbitrator or otherwise. 3The losses shall include all monetary liabilities to the opposing party or to others (whether as the result of settlement, verdict after trial or otherwise), including fines and other monetary liabilities incurred during the reporting period as a result of civil actions (for example, civil judgements or settlements), regulatory proceedings (for example, penalties, disgorgement or restitution) and criminal actions (for example, criminal judgements, penalties or restitution) brought by any entity (for example, governmental, business or individual). 4The scope of monetary losses shall exclude legal and other fees and expenses incurred by the entity in its defence. 5The scope of the disclosure shall include legal proceedings associated with the enforcement of applicable jurisdictional laws or regulations. Note to TR-AL-520a.1 1The entity shall briefly describe the nature (for example, judgement or order issued after trial, settlement, guilty plea, deferred prosecution agreement or non-prosecution agreement) and context (for example, price fixing, patent misuse or antitrust) of all monetary losses resulting from legal proceedings. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |AIRLINES |14\n\n[Page 15]\n2The entity shall describe any corrective actions implemented in response to the legal proceedings. This may include specific changes in operations, management, processes, products, business partners, training or technology. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |AIRLINES |15",
    "new_id": 909
  },
  {
    "id": 78423,
    "question": "When calculating the percentage of governmental and law enforcement requests that resulted in disclosure, which factor would render a request outside the scope of this calculation, according to the Telecommunication Services – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "A request that was denied due to insufficient legal requirements being met, despite involving personal data.",
      "A": "A request that was fully complied with but pertained to aggregated, de-identified, and anonymised data.",
      "C": "A request where compliance was partial, but no personal data was disclosed.",
      "D": "A request for non-content data that was fully complied with but involved unidentifiable living individuals.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "13-14",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Telecommunication Services.pdf",
    "source_text": "1The entity shall briefly describe the nature (for example, judgement or order issued after trial, settlement, guilty plea, deferred prosecution agreement or non-prosecution agreement) and context (for example, unauthorised monitoring, sharing of data or children ’s privacy) of all monetary losses resulting from legal proceedings. 2The entity shall describe any corrective actions implemented in response to the legal proceedings. This may include specific changes in operations, management, processes, products, business partners, training or technology. TC-TL-220a.4. (1) Number of law enforcement requests for customer information, (2) number of customers whose information was requested, (3) percentage resulting in disclosure 1The entity shall disclose (1) the total number of unique requests for customer information, including customer content and non-content data, from government or law enforcement agencies. 1.1 Content data includes customer-generated information such as emails, texts and recorded phone conversations. 1.2 Non-content data includes information such as an email addresses, names, countries of residence, gender, and system-generated data such as IP addresses and traffic data. 1.3 Both content and non-content data can include personal data. 1.3.1 Personal data is defined as any information that relates to an identified or identifiable living individual. Various pieces of information, which collected together can lead to the identification of a particular person, also constitute personal data. 1.3.2 The entity may define personal data based on applicable jurisdictional laws or regulations. In such cases, the entity shall disclose the applicable jurisdictional standard or definition used. 2The entity shall disclose (2) the total number of unique users whose information was requested by governmental authorities or law enforcement agencies. 2.1 The number of records requested shall be calculated as the sum of unique customers whose customer information was requested across all requests for information received from government or law enforcement agencies during the reporting period. 2.1.1 If the entity is unable to verify that two records (customer information) belong to the same customer, the entity shall consider this as two customers. 3The entity shall disclose (3) the percentage of governmental and law enforcement requests that resulted in disclosure to the requesting party. 3.1 The percentage shall be calculated as the number of unique requests that resulted in disclosure to the requesting party divided by the total number of unique requests received. 3.2 The scope of requests that resulted in disclosure shall include requests that resulted in either full or partial compliance with the disclosure request within the reporting period. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |TELECOMMUNICATION SERVICES |13\n\n[Page 14]\n3.3 The scope of requests that resulted in disclosure shall include disclosure of aggregated, de-identified and anonymised data, which is intended to prevent the recipient from reconfiguring the data to identify an individual ’s actions or identity. 3.3.1 The entity may discuss whether these characteristics apply to a portion of its data releases if this discussion would provide necessary context for interpretation of the entity ’s disclosure. 4 The entity additionally may disaggregate its disclosure by region or country. 5The entity may describe its policy for determining whether to comply with a customer data request, including under what conditions it will release customer data, what requirements must be met in the request, and the level of management approval required. 6 The entity may describe its policy for notifying customers about such requests, including the timing of notification. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |TELECOMMUNICATION SERVICES |14",
    "new_id": 910
  },
  {
    "id": 78433,
    "question": "Which of the following best reflects the relationship between business continuity risks and the measures discussed in the text for mitigating them, as outlined in the Telecommunication Services – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The entity must identify critical operations and implement redundancies or other resilience measures, which may include but are not limited to insurance against loss.",
      "A": "The entity is required to solely rely on insurance as the primary method for managing all identified business continuity risks.",
      "B": "Technical failures and cyberattacks are explicitly stated as the only disruptions that necessitate detailed risk management strategies.",
      "D": "Estimates of potential loss are mandated to be calculated exclusively using internal assessments without consideration of third-party or insurance data.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "25-26",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Telecommunication Services.pdf",
    "source_text": "2.1 If relevant, the entity shall show costs incurred, such as those because of organisational change, training or technology expenditures required for remediation, lost revenue, payment of warranties or costs associated with breach of contract. TC-TL-550a.2. Discussion of systems to provide unimpeded service during service disruptions 1 The entity shall discuss business continuity risks associated with service disruptions affecting operations. 1.1 Examples of disruptions may include those caused by technical failures, programming errors, cyberattacks, weather events or natural disasters at hosting facilities. 2The entity shall discuss how it manages business continuity risks, including an identification of critical business operations and redundancies or other measures implemented to enhance resilience of the system or to reduce impact, including insurance against loss. 3The entity may discuss the estimated amount of potential loss, probability of that loss and the associated time frame. These estimates may be based on insurance figures or other third-party or internal assessments of potential loss. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |TELECOMMUNICATION SERVICES |25\n\n[Page 26]\n| |26 sasb.org/contact",
    "new_id": 911
  },
  {
    "id": 78452,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the implications of how work-related incidents are defined and categorized in relation to an entity’s obligations for disclosure under the outlined framework in the Health Care Delivery – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Injuries sustained during travel are considered work-related only if the employee was performing duties specifically benefiting the employer at the time of the incident.",
      "A": "An entity is required to disclose all medical treatments provided to employees, regardless of whether they qualify as first aid, to ensure comprehensive reporting.",
      "B": "Work-related incidents include both new cases and updates to previously recorded injuries or illnesses, ensuring continuity in tracking employee health outcomes.",
      "C": "The definition of a recordable incident excludes any condition diagnosed by a licensed healthcare professional unless it results in tangible consequences such as lost workdays or restricted activity.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "25-26",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Health Care Delivery.pdf",
    "source_text": "Workforce Health & Safety Topic Summary The Health Care Delivery industry is heavily dependent on a skilled workforce, and employees routinely are exposed to injury, illness and infection during regular duties. Relative to other industries, Health Care Delivery has one of the highest rates of injury and illness. Entities that manage this issue more effectively may reduce costs associated with workers’ compensation, productivity, morale and employee retention. Entities often mitigate risks by implementing proactive health and safety management protocols, developing employee training requirements, and conducting regular audits of their own safety practices. Metrics HC-DY-320a.1. Total recordable incident rate (TRIR) for (a) direct employees and (b) contract employees 1 The entity shall disclose its total recordable incident rate (TRIR) for work-related injuries and illnesses. 1.1 An injury or illness is considered a recordable incident if it results in death, days away from work, restricted work or transfer to another job, medical treatment beyond first aid, or loss of consciousness. Additionally, a significant injury or illness diagnosed by a physician or other licensed health care professional is considered a recordable incident, even if it does not result in death, days away from work, restricted work or job transfer, medical treatment beyond first aid, or loss of consciousness. 1.1.1 First aid is defined as emergency care or treatment for an ill or injured person before regular medical aid can be provided. 1.1.2 The entity may use applicable jurisdictional criteria for definitions of a recordable incident and a non-recordable incident such as first aid. The entity shall disclose the legal, regulatory or industry framework used as the source for these criteria and definitions. 2All disclosed rates shall be calculated as: (statistic count × 200,000) / total number of hours worked by all employees in the year reported. 2.1 The 200,000 in the rate calculation represents the total number of hours 100 full-time workers working 40 hours per week for 50 weeks per year can provide annually. 3 The scope of the disclosure includes work-related incidents only. 3.1 Work-related incidents are injuries and illnesses resulting from events or exposures in the work environment. 3.2 The work environment is the establishment and other locations where one or more employees are working or are present as a condition of their employment. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |HEALTH CARE DELIVERY |25\n\n[Page 26]\n3.3 The work environment includes not only physical locations, but also the equipment or materials used by the employee during the course of work. 3.4 Incidents that occur while an employee is travelling are work-related if, at the time of the injury or illness, the employee was engaged in work activities in the interest of the employer. 3.5 A work-related incident must be a new case, not a previously recorded injury or illness being updated. 4 The entity shall disclose the rates for each of these employee categories: 4.1 direct employees, defined as individuals on the entity ’s payroll, whether they are full-time, short service, part-time, executive, labour, salary, seasonal, migrant or hourly employees; and 4.2 contract employees, defined as individuals who are not on the entity ’s payroll, but whom the entity supervises or manages, including independent contractors and those employed by third parties (for example, temp agencies and labour brokers). 5 The scope of the disclosure includes all employees regardless of employee location or type of employment. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |HEALTH CARE DELIVERY |26",
    "new_id": 912
  },
  {
    "id": 78471,
    "question": "Which of the following best reflects a necessary condition for an injury to be classified as a recordable incident under the framework described in the Health Care Delivery – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The injury must be diagnosed by a physician or licensed health care professional, regardless of whether it results in any tangible impact such as lost work time or medical treatment.",
      "B": "The injury must result in either death, days away from work, restricted work, transfer to another job, or medical treatment beyond first aid.",
      "C": "The injury must occur within the physical boundaries of the establishment where the employee typically performs their duties.",
      "D": "The injury must involve equipment or materials used during work and must also meet jurisdictional criteria for classification as first aid.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "25-26",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Health Care Delivery.pdf",
    "source_text": "Workforce Health & Safety Topic Summary The Health Care Delivery industry is heavily dependent on a skilled workforce, and employees routinely are exposed to injury, illness and infection during regular duties. Relative to other industries, Health Care Delivery has one of the highest rates of injury and illness. Entities that manage this issue more effectively may reduce costs associated with workers’ compensation, productivity, morale and employee retention. Entities often mitigate risks by implementing proactive health and safety management protocols, developing employee training requirements, and conducting regular audits of their own safety practices. Metrics HC-DY-320a.1. Total recordable incident rate (TRIR) for (a) direct employees and (b) contract employees 1 The entity shall disclose its total recordable incident rate (TRIR) for work-related injuries and illnesses. 1.1 An injury or illness is considered a recordable incident if it results in death, days away from work, restricted work or transfer to another job, medical treatment beyond first aid, or loss of consciousness. Additionally, a significant injury or illness diagnosed by a physician or other licensed health care professional is considered a recordable incident, even if it does not result in death, days away from work, restricted work or job transfer, medical treatment beyond first aid, or loss of consciousness. 1.1.1 First aid is defined as emergency care or treatment for an ill or injured person before regular medical aid can be provided. 1.1.2 The entity may use applicable jurisdictional criteria for definitions of a recordable incident and a non-recordable incident such as first aid. The entity shall disclose the legal, regulatory or industry framework used as the source for these criteria and definitions. 2All disclosed rates shall be calculated as: (statistic count × 200,000) / total number of hours worked by all employees in the year reported. 2.1 The 200,000 in the rate calculation represents the total number of hours 100 full-time workers working 40 hours per week for 50 weeks per year can provide annually. 3 The scope of the disclosure includes work-related incidents only. 3.1 Work-related incidents are injuries and illnesses resulting from events or exposures in the work environment. 3.2 The work environment is the establishment and other locations where one or more employees are working or are present as a condition of their employment. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |HEALTH CARE DELIVERY |25\n\n[Page 26]\n3.3 The work environment includes not only physical locations, but also the equipment or materials used by the employee during the course of work. 3.4 Incidents that occur while an employee is travelling are work-related if, at the time of the injury or illness, the employee was engaged in work activities in the interest of the employer. 3.5 A work-related incident must be a new case, not a previously recorded injury or illness being updated. 4 The entity shall disclose the rates for each of these employee categories: 4.1 direct employees, defined as individuals on the entity ’s payroll, whether they are full-time, short service, part-time, executive, labour, salary, seasonal, migrant or hourly employees; and 4.2 contract employees, defined as individuals who are not on the entity ’s payroll, but whom the entity supervises or manages, including independent contractors and those employed by third parties (for example, temp agencies and labour brokers). 5 The scope of the disclosure includes all employees regardless of employee location or type of employment. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |HEALTH CARE DELIVERY |26",
    "new_id": 913
  },
  {
    "id": 78472,
    "question": "Under which condition can an entity categorically exclude renewable energy from its total consumption disclosure without violating the outlined standards in the Health Care Delivery – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "When the renewable energy constitutes part of the electricity grid mix that the entity cannot control or influence.",
      "A": "When the renewable energy originates from on-site generation but the associated RECs or GOs are sold to third parties.",
      "C": "When the renewable energy is derived from biomass materials not certified by any third-party standard or state renewable portfolio.",
      "D": "When the renewable energy is purchased through a PPA that does not explicitly include or convey RECs or GOs.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "8-9",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Health Care Delivery.pdf",
    "source_text": "Energy Management Topic Summary Health Care Delivery entities operate energy-intensive facilities and rely on both purchased electricity and fuel. The consumption of both can contribute to environmental impacts, including climate change and pollution. Legislative attempts to limit these impacts and to incentivise energy efficiency and renewable energy may result in price volatility associated with fossil fuels and conventional electricity. Entities that improve energy efficiency may decrease costs and limit exposure to energy price fluctuations. Metrics HC-DY-130a.1. (1) Total energy consumed, (2) percentage grid electricity and (3) percentage renewable 1 The entity shall disclose (1) the total amount of energy it consumed as an aggregate figure, in gigajoules (GJ). 1.1 The scope of energy consumption includes energy from all sources, including energy purchased from external sources and energy produced by the entity itself (self-generated). For example, direct fuel usage, purchased electricity, and heating, cooling and steam energy are all included within the scope of energy consumption. 1.2 The scope of energy consumption includes only energy directly consumed by the entity during the reporting period. 1.3 In calculating energy consumption from fuels and biofuels, the entity shall use higher heating values (HHV), also known as gross calorific values (GCV), which are measured directly or taken from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2The entity shall disclose (2) the percentage of energy it consumed that was supplied from grid electricity. 2.1 The percentage shall be calculated as purchased grid electricity consumption divided by total energy consumption. 3The entity shall disclose (3) the percentage of energy it consumed that was renewable energy. 3.1 Renewable energy is defined as energy from sources that are replenished at a rate greater than or equal to their rate of depletion, such as geothermal, wind, solar, hydro and biomass. 3.2 The percentage shall be calculated as renewable energy consumption divided by total energy consumption. 3.3 The scope of renewable energy includes renewable fuel the entity consumed, renewable energy the entity directly produced and renewable energy the entity purchased, if purchased through a renewable power purchase agreement (PPA) that explicitly includes renewable energy certificates (RECs) or Guarantees of Origin (GOs), a Green ‐e Energy Certified utility or supplier programme, or other green power products that explicitly include RECs or GOs, or for which Green ‐e Energy Certified RECs are paired with grid electricity. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |HEALTH CARE DELIVERY |8\n\n[Page 9]\n3.3.1 For any renewable electricity generated on-site, any RECs and GOs shall be retained (not sold) and retired or cancelled on behalf of the entity for the entity to claim them as renewable energy. 3.3.2 For renewable PPAs and green power products, the agreement shall explicitly include and convey that RECs and GOs be retained or replaced and retired or cancelled on behalf of the entity for the entity to claim them as renewable energy. 3.3.3 The renewable portion of the electricity grid mix that is outside of the control or influence of the entity is excluded from the scope of renewable energy. 3.4 For the purposes of this disclosure, the scope of renewable energy from biomass sources is limited to materials certified to a third-party standard (for example, Forest Stewardship Council, Sustainable Forest Initiative, Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification, or American Tree Farm System), materials considered eligible sources of supply according to the Green-e Framework for Renewable Energy Certification, Version 1.0 (2017) or Green-e regional standards, and/or materials that are eligible for an applicable state renewable portfolio standard. 4The entity shall apply conversion factors consistently for all data reported under this disclosure, such as the use of HHVs for fuel usage (including biofuels) and conversion of kilowatt hours (kWh) to GJ (for energy data including electricity from solar or wind energy). SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |HEALTH CARE DELIVERY |9",
    "new_id": 914
  },
  {
    "id": 78473,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between the entity's disclosure of monetary losses from legal proceedings and its corrective actions, as described in the Health Care Delivery – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The entity is required to describe both the nature of monetary losses and any corrective actions taken in response to legal proceedings associated with data security and privacy.",
      "A": "The entity must disclose all monetary losses, including legal fees, to provide a comprehensive view of financial impacts.",
      "B": "Corrective actions are only required to be disclosed if they result directly from a guilty plea or deferred prosecution agreement.",
      "D": "Monetary losses from regulatory proceedings are excluded from disclosure unless they involve criminal actions.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "16-17",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Health Care Delivery.pdf",
    "source_text": "HC-DY-230a.4. Total amount of monetary losses as a result of legal proceedings associated with data security and privacy 1The entity shall disclose the total amount of monetary losses incurred during the reporting period resulting from legal proceedings associated with data security and privacy. 2The legal proceedings shall include any adjudicative proceeding involving the entity, whether before a court, a regulator, an arbitrator or otherwise. 3The losses shall include all monetary liabilities to the opposing party or to others (whether as the result of settlement, verdict after trial or otherwise), including fines and other monetary liabilities incurred during the reporting period as a result of civil actions (for example, civil judgements or settlements), regulatory proceedings (for example, penalties, disgorgement or restitution) and criminal actions (for example, criminal judgements, penalties or restitution) brought by any entity (for example, governmental, business or individual). 4The scope of monetary losses shall exclude legal and other fees and expenses incurred by the entity in its defence. 5The scope of the disclosure shall include legal proceedings associated with the enforcement of applicable jurisdictional laws or regulations. Note to HC-DY-230a.4 1The entity shall briefly describe the nature (for example, judgement or order issued after trial, settlement, guilty plea, deferred prosecution agreement or non-prosecution agreement) and context (for example, cyberattack or employee error) of all monetary losses resulting from legal proceedings. 2The entity shall describe any corrective actions implemented in response to the legal proceedings. This may include specific changes in operations, management, processes, products, business partners, training or technology. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |HEALTH CARE DELIVERY |16\n\n[Page 17]\nAccess for Low-Income Patients Topic Summary Some care delivery entities will continue to face challenges associated with serving uninsured and low-income patients. Health care delivery entities that develop innovative pricing structures that allow them to profit from increased private insurance enrolment and to expand their patient base may create a positive effect on revenue. Disclosure on how entities manage the provision of care to uninsured populations may allow users to understand the associated risks and opportunities. Metrics HC-DY-240a.1. Discussion of strategy to manage the mix of patient insurance status 1The entity shall discuss its strategy to manage the effects of having patients with a mix of insurance statuses at its facilities. 2If relevant, the entity should discuss how it manages risks and opportunities associated with patients within these categories: 2.1 those with private insurance; 2.2 those with government sponsored insurance; and 2.3 those who are uninsured. 3Alternative pricing mechanisms may include discounted or sliding fee schedules, care given for charity (as a write- off), or discounts for prompt payment for uninsured customers. 4The entity shall discuss programmes it implements for uninsured individuals, which may include financial assistance programmes and participation in indigent care programmes. 4.1 Financial assistance programmes are defined as those typically administered by hospitals that provide no- cost or discounted cost care for patients who demonstrate an inability to pay for health care services. 4.2 Indigent care programmes are defined as those typically administered by jurisdictions that provide financial discounts for patients who demonstrate an inability to pay for health care services. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |HEALTH CARE DELIVERY |17",
    "new_id": 915
  },
  {
    "id": 78474,
    "question": "Which of the following best reflects an implicit requirement for entities when disclosing corrective actions in response to legal proceedings, according to the Health Care Delivery – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Entities are expected to provide comprehensive details about operational or procedural adjustments made.",
      "A": "Entities must prioritize changes in technology over other types of corrective actions.",
      "B": "Entities should focus solely on training as the primary corrective measure.",
      "C": "Entities are required to report only those actions that involve business partners.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "32-33",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Health Care Delivery.pdf",
    "source_text": "2The entity shall describe any corrective actions it has implemented in response to the legal proceedings. This may include specific changes in operations, management, processes, products, business partners, training or technology. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |HEALTH CARE DELIVERY |32\n\n[Page 33]\n| |33 sasb.org/contact",
    "new_id": 916
  },
  {
    "id": 78475,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes why health care delivery entities must carefully assess the materiality of sustainability disclosure topics, according to the Health Care Delivery – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Because determining relevance and materiality allows entities to focus on risks and opportunities impacting cash flows, cost of capital, or access to finance.",
      "B": "Because the SASB Standards mandate uniform reporting across all industries to ensure comparability.",
      "C": "Because entities are required to report on every metric listed in the Standard regardless of relevance to their operations.",
      "D": "Because regulatory bodies conduct audits to penalize non-compliance with sustainability disclosures.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "5-6",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Health Care Delivery.pdf",
    "source_text": "Use of the Standards SASB Standards are intended to aid entities in disclosing information about sustainability-related risks and opportunities that could reasonably be expected to affect the entity ’s cash flows, its access to finance or cost of capital over the short, medium or long term. An entity determines which Industry Standard(s) and which disclosure topics are relevant to its business, and which associated metrics to report. In general, an entity should use the SASB Standard specific to its primary industry as identified in SICS® . However, companies with substantial business in multiple SICS® industries should refer to and consider the applicability of the disclosure topics and associated metrics in additional SASB Standards. The disclosure topics and associated metrics contained in this Standard have been identified as those that are likely to be useful to investors. However, the responsibility for making materiality judgements and determinations rests with the reporting entity. Industry Description The Health Care Delivery industry owns and manages hospitals, clinics and other health care related facilities. Entities provide a range of services, including inpatient and outpatient care, surgery, mental health, rehabilitation and clinical laboratory services. Demand for health care delivery services is driven largely by insurance coverage rates, demographics, illness and injury rates. The industry is characterised by high fixed labour and facilities costs, and an increased regulatory focus on reduced costs of care and improved outcomes. Health care delivery entities also face significant competition for patients and resources from private, non-profit and religious health care systems. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |HEALTH CARE DELIVERY |5\n\n[Page 6]\nSUSTAINABILITY DISCLOSURE TOPICS & METRICS Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORYUNIT OF MEASURECODE Energy Management(1) Total energy consumed, (2) percentage grid electricity and (3) percentage renewableQuantitativeGigajoules (GJ), Percentage (%)HC-DY -130a.1 Waste ManagementTotal amount of medical waste: percentage (a) incinerated, (b) recycled or treated and (c) landfilledQuantitativeMetric tonnes (t)HC-DY -150a.1 Total amount of: (1) hazardous and (2) non-hazardous pharmaceutical waste, percentage (a) incinerated, (b) recycled or treated and (c) landfilledQuantitativeMetric tonnes (t), Percentage (%)HC-DY -150a.2 Patient Privacy & Electronic Health RecordsDescription of policies and practices to secure customers ’ personal health data records and other personal dataDiscussion and Analysisn/a HC-DY -230a.2 (1) Number of data breaches, (2) percentage involving (a) personal data only and (b) personal health data, (3) number of customers affected in each category, (a) personal data only and (b) personal health data 1QuantitativeNumber, Percentage (%)HC-DY -230a.3 Total amount of monetary losses as a result of legal proceedings associated with data security and privacy 2QuantitativePresentation currencyHC-DY -230a.4 Access for Low-Income PatientsDiscussion of strategy to manage the mix of patient insurance statusDiscussion and Analysisn/a HC-DY -240a.1 Quality of Care & Patient SatisfactionNumber of serious reportable events Quantitative Number HC-DY -250a.2 Hospital-acquired condition rates per hospitalQuantitativePercentage (%)HC-DY -250a.3 Number of (1) unplanned and (2) total readmissions per hospitalQuantitative Number HC-DY -250a.6 Management of Controlled SubstancesDescription of policies and practices to manage the number of prescriptions issued for controlled substancesDiscussion and Analysisn/a HC-DY -260a.1 continued... 1Note to HC-DY-230a.3 – The disclosure shall include a description of corrective actions implemented in response to data breaches. 2Note to HC-DY-230a.4 – The entity shall briefly describe the nature, context and any corrective actions taken because of monetary losses. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |HEALTH CARE DELIVERY |6",
    "new_id": 917
  },
  {
    "id": 78513,
    "question": "When preparing the GRI content index, which scenario would justify excluding specific disclosures without violating reporting requirements, as outlined in GRI 1: Foundation 2021?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Disclosures omitted based on confidentiality constraints, accompanied by an explanation of why confidentiality applies.",
      "A": "Disclosures omitted due to their irrelevance to the organization’s industry, with detailed reasoning provided in the index.",
      "C": "Disclosures excluded because they overlap with another framework’s requirements, with cross-references included in the index.",
      "D": "Disclosures excluded as they are deemed too complex to report, with a general statement about resource limitations.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "36-37",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 1_ Foundation 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Omissions The organization is required to include in the GRI content index the reasons for omission it has used for each disclosure or requirement it cannot comply with, as specified in Requirement 7-a-xii in this Standard. If the organization cannot comply with a disclosure or with a requirement in a disclosure for which reasons for omission are permitted, the organization is required to specify the disclosure or the requirement it cannot comply with in the content index. It is also required to provide one of the permitted reasons for omission and the required explanation for that reason. The four permitted reasons for omission are: not applicable, legal prohibitions, confidentiality constraints, and information unavailable / incomplete. See Requirement 6 in this Standard for more information on reasons for omission. GRI Sector Standard reference numbers When listing the GRI disclosures and additional sector disclosures from the applicable GRI Sector Standards in the GRI content index, the organization is required to include the GRI Sector Standard reference numbers, as specified in Requirement 7-a-x in this Standard. The GRI Sector Standard reference number refers to the unique identifier for each disclosure listed in a Sector Standard (e.g., S11.1.1). This identifier helps information users assess which of the disclosures listed in the Sector Standards are included in the organization’s reporting. Material topics The organization is required to list its material topics in the GRI content index, as specified in Requirement 7-a-v in this Standard. The list of material topics included in the content index is the same as the list of material topics reported under 3-2-a in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 . Topics in the applicable GRI Sector Standards determined as not material The organization is required to list in the GRI content index any topics from the applicable GRI Sector Standards that it has determined as not material and explain why they are not material, as specified in Requirement 7-a-vi in this Standard. See Requirement 3-b in this Standard for more information on using the Sector Standards to determine material topics. Appendix 2. GRI content index with reference A5 GRI 1: Foundation 2021\n\n[Page 37]\nAppendix 2. GRI content index with reference GRI content index Statement of use [Name of organization] has reported the information cited in this GRI content index for the period [ reporting period start and end dates] with reference to the GRI Standards. GRI 1 used GRI 1: Foundation 2021 GRI STANDARD DISCLOSURE LOCATION [Title of GRI Standard] [Disclosure title] [Title of GRI Standard] [Disclosure title] Guidance This Appendix provides guidance on how to prepare the GRI content index when reporting with reference to the GRI Standards. It includes an example that the organization can use to prepare the content index. The organization can use a different format for the content index than the one provided here, as long as it complies with the requirements for the content index specified in ‘ Reporting with reference to the GRI Standards ’ at the end of section 3 of this Standard. The organization can also use the content index specified for reporting in accordance with the GRI Standards in Appendix 1, if suitable. In such a case, the statement of use in Appendix 1, which is for reporting in accordance with the GRI Standards, must be replaced by the statement of use for reporting with reference to the GRI Standards. The organization can include additional information in the content index, beyond what is required by the GRI Standards. For example, the organization can show how the disclosures it has reported using the GRI Standards are related to those required by other reporting standards or frameworks. The organization should make sure that such additions do not compromise the readability of the content index. This can be done by providing any additional information in separate columns or rows that are included at the end of the content index, after all the required information has been specified. The organization should not report the information required by the disclosures directly in the content index. Exceptions can be made if the information is brief and easier to find in the content index than in other locations (e.g., information on the reporting period may be easier to find when stated directly in the content index). Detailed reporting in the content index should be avoided. A6 GRI 1: Foundation 2021",
    "new_id": 918
  },
  {
    "id": 78572,
    "question": "Which scenario would most likely invalidate an organization's claim of reporting with reference to the GRI Standards, according to GRI 1: Foundation 2021?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The organization provides a standalone sustainability report but fails to include a link or reference to the GRI content index within the report itself.",
      "A": "The organization includes a GRI content index that lists disclosures from unrelated standards without specifying their connection to the GRI Standards.",
      "B": "The organization uses selected GRI Standards for specific purposes, such as complying with climate change regulations, while omitting Disclosure 3-3 in GRI 3.",
      "D": "The organization notifies GRI of its use of the GRI Standards but does not include the contact details of a designated person in the notification email.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "17-18",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 1_ Foundation 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "‘ABC Limited has reported in accordance with the GRI Standards for the period from 1 January 2022 to 31 December 2022.’ The organization is required to report whether the highest governance body is responsible for reviewing and approving the reported information, including the organization’s material topics , under Disclosure 2-14 in GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 . Requirement 9: Notify GRI Guidance The organization should include the following information in the email: There is no cost associated with notifying GRI of the use of the GRI Standards. Reporting with reference to the GRI StandardsThe organization shall notify GRI of the use of the GRI Standards and the statement of use by sending an email to reportregistration@globalreporting.org .a. The legal name of the organization.• The link to the GRI content index.• The link to the report, if publishing a standalone sustainability report.• The statement of use.• A contact person in the organization and their contact details.• GRI 1: Foundation 2021 17\n\n[Page 18]\nReporting with reference to the GRI Standards An organization can report with reference to the GRI Standards if it cannot comply with all the requirements for reporting in accordance with the GRI Standards. The organization should transition to reporting in accordance with the GRI Standards in time as it will provide a comprehensive picture of the organization’s most significant impacts on the economy, environment, and people, including impacts on their human rights . The organization can also report with reference to the GRI Standards if it uses selected GRI Standards, or parts of their content, to report information about specific topics for specific purposes, such as complying with a reporting regulation on climate change. The organization must comply with all three requirements in this section to report with reference to the GRI Standards. The organization should also apply the reporting principles specified in section 4 of this Standard to ensure high- quality reporting. Additionally, the organization should explain how it manages its impacts for the topics it reports on using Disclosure 3-3 in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 . Overview of requirements for reporting with reference to the GRI Standards Publish a GRI content index Provide a statement of use Notify GRI Publish a GRI content index The organization shall: Guidance The information reported using the GRI Standards can be published or made accessible in a range of formats (e.g., electronic, paper-based) across one or more locations (e.g., a standalone sustainability report, web pages, an annual report). The GRI content index provides an overview of the organization’s reported information, shows where the reported information can be found, and helps information users access this information. The content index also shows which GRI Standards and disclosures the organization has used. Appendix 2 of this Standard provides guidance on how to prepare the GRI content index when reporting with reference to the GRI Standards. It includes an example that the organization can use to prepare the content index. The organization can use a different format for the content index than the one provided in Appendix 2, as long as it complies with the requirements for the content index. The organization can also use the content index specified for reporting in accordance with the GRI Standards in Appendix 1 of this Standard, if suitable. In such a case, the statement of use in Appendix 1, which is for reporting in accordance with the GRI Standards, must be replaced by the statement of use for reporting with reference to the GRI Standards. publish a GRI content index that includes: the title: GRI content index; i. the statement of use; ii. the title of GRI 1 used ; iii. a list of the reported disclosures from the GRI Standards, including the disclosure titles; iv. the titles of the GRI Standards that the reported disclosures come from; v. the location where the information reported for each disclosure can be found; vi.a. if it publishes a standalone sustainability report and the GRI content index is not included in the report itself, provide a link or reference to the GRI content index in the report.b. GRI 1: Foundation 2021 18",
    "new_id": 919
  },
  {
    "id": 78573,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the logical relationship between the GRI Standards' purpose and their alignment with authoritative intergovernmental instruments, as outlined in GRI 1: Foundation 2021?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The GRI Standards enhance transparency and accountability by enabling organizations to disclose impacts in a manner consistent with intergovernmental norms, without prescribing specific performance benchmarks.",
      "A": "The GRI Standards derive their reporting requirements directly from thresholds and benchmarks established by instruments like the OECD Guidelines and UN Guiding Principles.",
      "B": "The GRI Standards prioritize organizational accountability by mandating specific goals and targets based on intergovernmental expectations for responsible business conduct.",
      "C": "The GRI Standards serve as an enforcement mechanism for compliance with the OECD Guidelines and UN Guiding Principles, ensuring organizations meet predefined thresholds for sustainable development.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "4",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 1_ Foundation 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Introduction GRI 1: Foundation 2021 introduces the purpose and system of the GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards (GRI Standards) and explains key concepts for sustainability reporting. It also specifies the requirements and reporting principles that organizations must comply with to report in accordance with the GRI Standards. GRI 1 is the first Standard that organizations should consult to understand how to report using the GRI Standards. GRI 1 is structured as follows: 1. Purpose and system of GRI Standards 1.1 Purpose of the GRI Standards Through their activities and business relationships , organizations can have an effect on the economy, environment, and people, and in turn make negative or positive contributions to sustainable development. Sustainable development refers to ‘development which meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs’ [ 8]. The objective of sustainability reporting using the GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards (GRI Standards) is to provide transparency on how an organization contributes or aims to contribute to sustainable development. The GRI Standards enable an organization to publicly disclose its most significant impacts on the economy, environment, and people, including impacts on their human rights and how the organization manages these impacts. This enhances transparency on the organization’s impacts and increases organizational accountability. The Standards contain disclosures that allow an organization to report information about its impacts consistently and credibly. This enhances the global comparability and quality of reported information on these impacts, which supports information users in making informed assessments and decisions about the organization’s impacts and contribution to sustainable development. The GRI Standards are based on expectations for responsible business conduct set out in authoritative intergovernmental instruments, such as the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises [3] and the United Nations (UN) Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights [5] (see the Bibliographies of the GRI Standards for a list of authoritative instruments used in developing the GRI Standards). Information reported using the GRI Standards can help users assess whether an organization meets the expectations set out in these instruments. It is important to note that the GRI Standards do not set allocations, thresholds, goals, targets, or any other benchmarks for good or bad performance. 1.2 Users Any organization can use the GRI Standards – regardless of size, type, geographic location, or reporting experience – to report information about its impacts on the economy, environment, and people, including impacts on their human rights . The reported information can be used by the organization in its decision-making, for example, when setting goals and targets, or when assessing and implementing its policies and practices.Section 1 introduces the purpose and the system of the GRI Standards. • Section 2 explains the key concepts that are used throughout the GRI Standards. • Section 3 specifies the requirements for reporting in accordance with the GRI Standards. • Section 4 specifies the reporting principles, which are fundamental to ensuring the quality of the reported information.• Section 5 presents recommendations for the organization to align its sustainability reporting with other types of reporting and to enhance the credibility of its sustainability reporting.• The Glossary contains defined terms with a specific meaning when used in the GRI Standards. The terms are underlined in the text of the GRI Standards and linked to the definitions.• The Bibliography lists authoritative intergovernmental instruments used in developing this Standard. • The Appendixes provide guidance on how to prepare a GRI content index. • GRI 1: Foundation 2021 4",
    "new_id": 920
  },
  {
    "id": 78575,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between internal controls for financial reporting and their application to sustainability reporting, according to GRI 1: Foundation 2021?",
    "options": {
      "A": "If internal controls for financial reporting are used for sustainability reporting, the organization should evaluate their relevance and supplement them if necessary.",
      "B": "Internal controls designed for financial reporting are always sufficient for assessing the credibility of sustainability reporting.",
      "C": "An organization must establish entirely new internal controls if existing financial reporting controls are deemed inadequate for sustainability reporting.",
      "D": "Corporate governance codes universally require organizations to confirm the adequacy of internal controls for both financial and sustainability reporting.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "25",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 1_ Foundation 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "5. Additional recommendations for reporting This section presents recommendations for an organization to align its sustainability reporting with other types of reporting and to enhance the credibility of its sustainability reporting. 5.1 Aligning sustainability reporting with other reporting An organization should align its sustainability reporting with other statutory and regulatory reporting, in particular its financial reporting. This means that the organization should report the information for the same reporting period and for the same group of entities as covered in its financial reporting. The organization should also publish the information at the same time as its financial reporting, where this is possible. 5.2 Enhancing the credibility of sustainability reporting There are several ways in which an organization can enhance the credibility of its sustainability reporting. These include the use of internal controls, external assurance, and stakeholder or expert panels. The organization is not required to apply these methods when reporting in accordance with the GRI Standards but is encouraged to do so. Internal controls The organization should set up internal controls to strengthen the integrity and credibility of its sustainability reporting. Internal controls are processes designed and implemented by the organization, generally its management, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the achievement of its objectives. Internal controls can be implemented in day-to-day operations and through compliance functions. The organization can also establish and maintain an internal audit function as part of its processes for risk management to further improve the credibility of its sustainability reporting. In some jurisdictions, corporate governance codes require the highest governance body to inquire and, if it is satisfied, to confirm the adequacy of an organization’s internal controls in the annual report. This confirmation may only relate to the adequacy of the internal controls for financial reporting. It may not provide information about whether the same internal controls are also adequate to assess the credibility of the organization’s sustainability reporting. If the organization relies on internal controls set up for financial reporting, it should assess the relevance of these controls for its sustainability reporting. In cases where these controls are inadequate, the organization should identify and use additional internal controls to assess the credibility of its sustainability reporting. External assurance In addition to internal controls, the organization should seek external assurance for its sustainability reporting. Disclosure 2-5 in GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 requires the organization to describe its policy and practice for seeking external assurance for its sustainability reporting. If the sustainability reporting has been externally assured, the organization is also required to describe what was assured and on what basis. External assurance comprises activities carried out by assurance providers to assess the quality and credibility of the qualitative and quantitative information reported by the organization. External assurance can also be used to assess the organization's systems or processes to prepare the information (e.g., the process of determining material topics ). External assurance is different from activities used to assess or validate the performance, such as compliance assessments or the issuing of performance certifications. External assurance results in published assurance reports or conclusions that can be used to verify that the information has been prepared in accordance with reporting standards. It can also be used to reduce risk in data quality and increase trust in the reported information. This, in turn, helps information users and the organization rely on the reported information for their decision-making. External assurance should be conducted by competent assurance providers with appropriate experience and qualifications. Assurance providers should be: independent from the organization and therefore able to reach impartial and objective conclusions about the organization’s reporting and to publish these conclusions in a report that is publicly available;• demonstrably competent in the subject matter and assurance practices;• GRI 1: Foundation 2021 25",
    "new_id": 921
  },
  {
    "id": 78576,
    "question": "Which of the following most accurately reflects a necessary condition for an entity to be considered a business partner, while also accounting for exclusions and definitions provided in GRI 1: Foundation 2021?",
    "options": {
      "B": "An entity must engage in a direct and formal relationship with the organization to meet business objectives, but cannot include entities controlled by the organization.",
      "A": "An entity must have a formal engagement with the organization and be directly linked to its value chain, including beyond the first tier.",
      "C": "An entity must be controlled by the organization, such as subsidiaries or affiliates, to qualify as a business partner.",
      "D": "An entity qualifies as a business partner if it is involved in delivering support to local communities alongside the organization.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "26-27",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 1_ Foundation 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Stakeholder or expert panels The organization can also convene a stakeholder or expert panel to seek views on its approach to sustainability reporting or for advice on the information to be reported.competent in applying quality control procedures to the assurance engagement;• able to conduct the engagement in a manner that is systematic, documented, evidence-based, and characterized by defined procedures in line with professional standards for assurance;• able to consider the selection of the information reported as well as its accuracy, and to assess whether the reporting provides a comprehensive picture of the organization’s most significant impacts and how it manages these impacts;• able to assess the extent to which the organization has applied the GRI Standards in formulating opinions or reaching conclusions.• GRI 1: Foundation 2021 26\n\n[Page 27]\nGlossary This glossary provides definitions for terms used in this Standard. The organization is required to apply these definitions when using the GRI Standards. The definitions included in this glossary may contain terms that are further defined in the complete GRI Standards Glossary . All defined terms are underlined. If a term is not defined in this glossary or in the complete GRI Standards Glossary , definitions that are commonly used and understood apply. business partner entity with which the organization has some form of direct and formal engagement for the purpose of meeting its business objectives Source: Shift and Mazars LLP, UN Guiding Principles Reporting Framework , 2015; modified Examples: affiliates, business-to-business customers, clients, first-tier suppliers , franchisees, joint venture partners, investee companies in which the organization has a shareholding position Note: Business partners do not include subsidiaries and affiliates that the organization controls. business relationships relationships that the organization has with business partners , with entities in its value chain including those beyond the first tier, and with any other entities directly linked to its operations, products, or services Source: United Nations (UN), Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework , 2011; modified Note: Examples of other entities directly linked to the organization’s operations, products, or services are a non-governmental organization with which the organization delivers support to a local community or state security forces that protect the organization’s facilities. child person under the age of 15 years, or under the age of completion of compulsory schooling, whichever is higher Note 1: Exceptions can occur in certain countries where economies and educational facilities are insufficiently developed, and a minimum age of 14 years applies. These countries of exception are specified by the International Labour Organization (ILO) in response to a special application by the country concerned and in consultation with representative organizations of employers and workers. Note 2: The ILO Minimum Age Convention, 1973, (No. 138), refers to both child labor and young workers. due diligence process to identify, prevent, mitigate , and account for how the organization addresses its actual and potential negative impacts Source: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises , 2011; modified United Nations (UN), Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework , 2011; modified Note: See section 2.3 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 for more information on ‘due diligence’. employee individual who is in an employment relationship with the organization according to national law GRI 1: Foundation 2021 27",
    "new_id": 922
  },
  {
    "id": 78577,
    "question": "Which scenario best illustrates an organization failing to meet the conditions for reporting in accordance with the GRI Standards, as defined in GRI 1: Foundation 2021?",
    "options": {
      "C": "An organization applies all reporting principles from GRI 1, reports all disclosures in GRI 2, yet omits Disclosure 2-5 without providing any reason in the GRI content index.",
      "A": "An organization provides reasons for omission for all disclosures in GRI 2 except Disclosure 2-1 and includes these reasons in the GRI content index.",
      "B": "An organization complies with all nine requirements but does not specify its reporting period or frequency in Disclosure 2-3.",
      "D": "An organization identifies material topics as required but fails to include a statement of use while still notifying GRI.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "11",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 1_ Foundation 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "3. Reporting in accordance with the GRI Standards Reporting in accordance with the GRI Standards enables an organization to provide a comprehensive picture of its most significant impacts on the economy, environment, and people, including impacts on their human rights , and how it manages these impacts. This allows information users to make informed assessments and decisions about the organization’s impacts and its contribution to sustainable development . The organization must comply with all nine requirements in this section to report in accordance with the GRI Standards. Overview of in accordance requirements Requirement 1: Apply the reporting principles Requirement 2: Report the disclosures in GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 Requirement 3: Determine material topics Requirement 4: Report the disclosures in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 Requirement 5: Report disclosures from the GRI Topic Standards for each material topic Requirement 6: Provide reasons for omission for disclosures and requirements that the organization cannot comply with Requirement 7: Publish a GRI content index Requirement 8: Provide a statement of use Requirement 9: Notify GRI If the organization does not comply with all nine requirements, it cannot claim that it has prepared the reported information in accordance with the GRI Standards. In such a case, the organization may be able to claim that it has prepared the reported information with reference to the GRI Standards, provided it complies with the requirements specified in ‘ Reporting with reference to the GRI Standards ’ at the end of this section. Requirement 1: Apply the reporting principles Requirement 2: Report the disclosures in GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 Guidance Reasons for omission are permitted for all disclosures in GRI 2 except for: If the organization cannot comply with a disclosure or with a requirement in a disclosure for which reasons for omission are permitted, then the organization is required to specify in the GRI content index the disclosure or theThe organization shall apply all the reporting principles specified in section 4 of GRI 1: Foundation 2021 . a. The organization shall report all disclosures in GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 . a. Disclosure 2-1 Organizational details• Disclosure 2-2 Entities included in the organization’s sustainability reporting• Disclosure 2-3 Reporting period, frequency and contact point• Disclosure 2-4 Restatements of information• Disclosure 2-5 External assurance• GRI 1: Foundation 2021 11",
    "new_id": 923
  },
  {
    "id": 78580,
    "question": "Which scenario would most likely be excluded from the reporting requirements for Disclosure 416-2 despite involving health and safety impacts, according to GRI 416: Customer Health and Safety 2016?",
    "options": {
      "D": "An incident of non-compliance in which the organization was determined not to be at fault, even if it involved health and safety risks.",
      "A": "An incident where the organization was fined for non-compliance with health and safety regulations during the reporting period.",
      "B": "A warning issued to the organization for failing to adhere to voluntary codes related to product safety within the reporting period.",
      "C": "A labeling-related non-compliance incident formally resolved during the reporting period but occurring in a prior period.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "8-9",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 416_ Customer Health and Safety 2016.pdf",
    "source_text": "2. Topic disclosures Disclosure 416-1 Assessment of the health and safety impacts of product and service categories The reporting organization shall report the following information:REQUIREMENTS Percentage of significant product and service categories for which health and safety impacts are assessed for improvement.a. Guidance for Disclosure 416-1 This measure helps to identify the existence and range of systematic efforts to address health and safety across the life cycle of a product or service. In reporting the information in Disclosure 416-1, the reporting organization can also describe the criteria used for the assessment.GUIDANCE GRI 416: Customer Health and Safety 2016 8\n\n[Page 9]\nDisclosure 416-2 Incidents of non-compliance concerning the health and safety impacts of products and services The reporting organization shall report the following information: Compilation requirementsREQUIREMENTS Total number of incidents of non-compliance with regulations and/or voluntary codes concerning the health and safety impacts of products and services within the reporting period , by: incidents of non-compliance with regulations resulting in a fine or penalty; i. incidents of non-compliance with regulations resulting in a warning; ii. incidents of non-compliance with voluntary codes. iii.a. If the organization has not identified any non-compliance with regulations and/or voluntary codes, a brief statement of this fact is sufficient.b. When compiling the information specified in Disclosure 416-2, the reporting organization shall:2.1 exclude incidents of non-compliance in which the organization was determined not to be at fault;2.1.1 exclude incidents of non-compliance related to Incidents related to labeling are reported in Disclosure 417-2 of GRI 417: Marketing and Labelling 2016 ;2.1.2 if applicable, identify any incidents of non-compliance that relate to events in periods prior to the reporting period.2.1.3 Guidance for Disclosure 416-2 The incidents of non-compliance that occur within the reporting period can relate to incidents formally resolved during the reporting period, whether they occurred in periods prior to the reporting period or not. Background Protection of health and safety is a recognized goal of many national and international regulations. Customers expect products and services to perform their intended functions satisfactorily, and not pose a risk to health and safety. Customers have a right to non-hazardous products. Where their health and safety is affected, customers also have the right to seek redress. This disclosure addresses the life cycle of the product or service once it is available for use, and therefore subject to regulations and voluntary codes concerning the health and safety of products and services.GUIDANCE GRI 416: Customer Health and Safety 2016 9",
    "new_id": 924
  },
  {
    "id": 78585,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures an implicit relationship between the entity's approach to deceptive advertising and its policies for maintaining journalistic integrity, as described in the Media & Entertainment – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Both deceptive advertising and journalistic integrity are managed through policies that emphasize truthfulness, with deceptive advertising specifically requiring clarity about product placement.",
      "B": "Deceptive advertising is primarily addressed through transparency in sponsorship identification, which directly ensures editorial independence.",
      "C": "The mitigation of conflicts of interest in journalism mirrors the management of deceptive advertising by focusing on consumer decision-making.",
      "D": "Sponsored content falls under deceptive advertising, while journalistic integrity is upheld by avoiding inducements, establishing a clear distinction between commercial and editorial practices.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "12-13",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Media & Entertainment.pdf",
    "source_text": "2The entity shall describe any corrective actions implemented in response to the legal proceedings. This may include specific changes in operations, management, processes, products, business partners, training or technology. SV-ME-270a.2. Revenue from embedded advertising 1 The entity shall disclose its total revenue from embedded advertising. 1.1 Embedded advertising is defined as the inclusion of sponsored brands into entertainment and editorial media content, including product placement, product integration and sponsored content. Product placement is defined as the insertion of branded products into programming in exchange for fees or other consideration, and it includes the placement of a visual or aural reference to a commercial product, brand or service in media content as a prop. 1.2 Product integration is defined as the prominent positioning of a commercial product, brand or service into media content. 1.3 Sponsored content is defined as advertisements designed to mimic regular editorial content. 2The entity may describe the degree to which its policies and practices manage deceptive advertising. 2.1 Entities engage in deceptive advertising when they mislead consumers, acting reasonably under the circumstances, about the advertisement ’s nature or source, and such a misleading impression is likely to affect a consumer ’s decisions or conduct regarding the advertised product or the advertising. SV-ME-270a.3. Description of approach for ensuring journalistic integrity of news programming related to: (1) truthfulness, accuracy, objectivity, fairness, and accountability, (2) independence of content or transparency of potential bias, and (3) protection of privacy and limitation of harm 1The scope of the disclosure shall include all news programming the entity produces or distributes (for example, international, national and regional news as well as political news, financial news and entertainment news) across all forms of produced media (for example, television, radio and internet). 2The entity shall describe (1) how it ensures the journalistic principles of truthfulness, accuracy, objectivity, fairness and accountability, including policies to: 2.1 ensure that copyright protection is maintained across all the entity ’s produced media, such that all disseminated content acknowledges and respects the intellectual property (IP) rights of all authors; 2.2 mitigate and disclose potential conflicts of interest; and 2.3 address corruption and any related codes of conduct. 3The entity shall describe (2) how it ensures the journalistic principles of independence of content or transparency of potential bias, including: SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |MEDIA & ENTERTAINMENT |12\n\n[Page 13]\n3.1 disclosure and transparency around sponsorship identification, paid product placement, and political advertising, as well as around the concentration of media ownership, among other topics; 3.2 policies and processes to maintain editorial independence from the influence of government, business or interest groups; 3.3 transparent discussion of potential bias where such potential bias may exist; and 3.4 approach to receiving benefits, including inducement, charging for coverage, and, in the case of journalists, paying sources illicitly for news content. 4The entity shall describe (3) how it ensures the journalistic principles of protection of privacy and limitation of harm, including: 4.1 privacy of people (especially children) who may appear or are referenced in content; 4.2 privacy in gathering content and undertaking business activities (for example, maintaining the confidentiality of sources, protecting sources ’ privacy when taken to court and avoiding violation of privacy during news gathering); and 4.3 privacy in agreements for information provided by sources (for example, on-the-record, off-record, Chatham House Rule or embargos). SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |MEDIA & ENTERTAINMENT |13",
    "new_id": 925
  },
  {
    "id": 78588,
    "question": "Under EM-IS-130a.1, what must an entity do to claim on-site generated renewable electricity as renewable energy, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 9: Iron & Steel Producers?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Retain and retire (or cancel) the associated RECs or Guarantees of Origin on the entity’s behalf.",
      "A": "Sell the associated Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs) in an open market.",
      "C": "Generate the electricity within the reporting entity’s headquarters region.",
      "D": "Submit an annual declaration to the ISSB confirming renewable status.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "9",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol9.pdf",
    "source_text": "For any renewable electricity generated on-site, any RECs and GOs shall be retained (not sold) and retired or cancelled on behalf of the entity for the entity to claim them as renewable energy.",
    "new_id": 926
  },
  {
    "id": 78604,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why an entity might disclose corrective actions alongside monetary losses from legal proceedings associated with money laundering, as outlined in the Casinos & Gaming – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "To provide transparency regarding improvements in internal processes and mitigate reputational damage.",
      "A": "To demonstrate compliance with jurisdictional laws and reduce future monetary liabilities.",
      "B": "To fulfill a mandatory requirement for disclosing all types of operational changes, regardless of their relevance to the legal proceedings.",
      "D": "To justify the exclusion of legal defense fees from the reported monetary losses.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "14-15",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Casinos & Gaming.pdf",
    "source_text": "SV-CA-510a.2. Total amount of monetary losses as a result of legal proceedings associated with money laundering 1The entity shall disclose the total amount of monetary losses incurred during the reporting period resulting from legal proceedings associated with money laundering. 2The legal proceedings shall include any adjudicative proceeding involving the entity, whether before a court, a regulator, an arbitrator or otherwise. 3The losses shall include all monetary liabilities to the opposing party or to others (whether as the result of settlement, verdict after trial or otherwise), including fines and other monetary liabilities incurred during the reporting period as a result of civil actions (for example, civil judgements or settlements), regulatory proceedings (for example, penalties, disgorgement or restitution) and criminal actions (for example, criminal judgements, penalties or restitution) brought by any entity (for example, governmental, business or individual). 4The scope of monetary losses shall exclude legal and other fees and expenses incurred by the entity in its defence. 5The scope of the disclosure shall include legal proceedings associated with the enforcement of applicable jurisdictional laws or regulations. Note to SV-CA-510a.2 1The entity shall briefly describe the nature (for example, judgement or order issued after trial, settlement, guilty plea, deferred prosecution agreement or non-prosecution agreement) and context (for example, improper recordkeeping) of all monetary losses resulting from legal proceedings. 2The entity shall describe any corrective actions implemented in response to each incident. This may include specific changes in operations, management, processes, products, business partners, training or technology. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |CASINOS & GAMING |14\n\n[Page 15]\n| |15 sasb.org/contact",
    "new_id": 927
  },
  {
    "id": 78610,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes why entities are required to consider both the climate-related and non-climate-related metrics in the SASB Standards when identifying sustainability-related risks and opportunities, as outlined in the Wind Technology & Project Developers – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Because IFRS S1 requires entities to assess how such metrics could reasonably affect their long-term prospects.",
      "A": "Because the ISSB mandates the exclusive use of SASB Standards for all financial disclosures.",
      "B": "Because early adoption of the December 2023 amendments is mandatory for all entities reporting after January 1, 2025.",
      "C": "Because the alignment of SASB Standards with IFRS S2 focuses solely on enhancing global comparability.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "1-2",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Wind Technology & Project Developers.pdf",
    "source_text": "INDUSTRY STANDARD | VERSION 2023-12sasb.org Sustainability Accounting Standard © 2023 The IFRS Foundation. All Rights Reserved.RENEWABLE RESOURCES & ALTERNATIVE ENERGY SECTOR Sustainable Industry Classification System® (SICS®) Under Stewardship of the International Sustainability Standards BoardRR-WTWind Technology & Project Developers\n\n[Page 2]\nABOUT THE SASB STANDARDS As of August 2022, the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB) of the IFRS Foundation assumed responsibility for the SASB Standards. The ISSB has committed to maintain, enhance and evolve the SASB Standards and encourages preparers and investors to continue to use the SASB Standards. IFRS S1 General Requirements for Disclosure of Sustainability-related Financial Information (IFRS S1) requires entities to refer to and consider the applicability of disclosure topics in the SASB Standards when identifying sustainability-related risks and opportunities that could reasonably be expected to affect an entity ’s prospects. Similarly, IFRS S1 requires entities to refer to and consider the applicability of metrics in the SASB Standards when determining what information to disclose regarding sustainability-related risks and opportunities. In June 2023, the ISSB amended climate-related topics and metrics in the SASB Standards to align them with the industry-based guidance accompanying IFRS S2 Climate-related Disclosures . In December 2023, the ISSB amended the non-climate-related topics and metrics in connection with the International Applicability of SASB Standards project. Effective Date This version 2023-12 of the Standard is effective for all entities for annual periods beginning or after January 1, 2025. Early adoption is permitted for all entities. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |WIND TECHNOLOGY & PROJECT DEVELOPERS |2",
    "new_id": 928
  },
  {
    "id": 78611,
    "question": "Which strategy for mitigating risks associated with critical materials is explicitly identified as a potential means to address both supply constraints and environmental or social risks, according to the Wind Technology & Project Developers – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Sourcing materials from regions with minimal environmental or social risks while ensuring supply chain transparency.",
      "B": "Diversification of suppliers to reduce reliance on regions with high geopolitical risks.",
      "C": "Development or procurement of alternative and substitute materials to minimize physical limits on availability.",
      "D": "Investments in recycling technology aimed exclusively at reducing input cost volatility.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "12-13",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Wind Technology & Project Developers.pdf",
    "source_text": "Materials Sourcing Topic Summary Wind technology entities source materials from global supply chains for use in turbines, including critical materials, such as neodymium and dysprosium, and critical minerals including tantalum and tungsten. Materials sourcing risks result from a low substitution ratio, the concentration of deposits in a few countries, geopolitical considerations, and competition from other industries. Direct drive turbines, which increasingly are being used for reliability, may require significantly more critical materials than more traditional drive trains. Entities may minimise negative externalities and protect themselves from related input cost volatility and supply constraints by creating transparent supply chains, sourcing materials from reliable suppliers or regions that have minimal environmental or social risks associated with them, supporting research into alternative inputs, and reducing reliance on these materials. Metrics RR-WT-440a.1. Description of the management of risks associated with the use of critical materials 1The entity shall describe how it manages the risks associated with the use of critical materials in its products, including physical limits on availability and access, changes in price, and regulatory and reputational risks, in which: 1.1 a critical material is defined as a material both essential in use and subject to the risk of supply restriction; and 1.2 examples of critical materials may include: 1.2.1 antimony, cobalt, fluorspar, gallium, germanium, graphite, indium, magnesium, niobium, tantalum and tungsten; 1.2.2 platinum group metals (platinum, palladium, iridium, rhodium, ruthenium and osmium); and 1.2.3 rare earth elements, which include yttrium, scandium, lanthanum and the lanthanides (cerium, praseodymium, neodymium, promethium, samarium, europium, gadolinium, terbium, dysprosium, holmium, erbium, thulium, ytterbium and lutetium). 2The entity shall identify the critical materials that present a significant risk to its operations, the type of risks they represent and the strategies the entity uses to mitigate the risks. 2.1 Relevant strategies may include diversification of suppliers, stockpiling of materials, development or procurement of alternative and substitute materials, and investments in recycling technology for critical materials. 3All disclosure shall be sufficient such that it is specific to the risks the entity faces, but that disclosure itself would not compromise the entity ’s ability to maintain confidential information. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |WIND TECHNOLOGY & PROJECT DEVELOPERS |12\n\n[Page 13]\n3.1 For example, if an entity determines not to identify a specific critical material that presents a significant risk to its operations because of the competitive harm that could result from the disclosure, the entity shall disclose the existence of such risks, the type of risks and the strategies used to mitigate the risks, but the entity is not required to disclose the relevant critical material. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |WIND TECHNOLOGY & PROJECT DEVELOPERS |13",
    "new_id": 929
  },
  {
    "id": 78635,
    "question": "Which of the following statements is NOT consistent with the entity's disclosure requirements regarding forestland conservation status and endangered species habitats, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 41: Forestry Management?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Certification suspensions or terminations due to unresolved non-conformities are subject to mandatory disclosure, including total acreage affected, while voluntary suspensions need not be reported.",
      "A": "An entity must disclose areas of forestland with protected conservation status only if they are actively managed by or for the entity, excluding areas exclusively set aside for conservation.",
      "C": "The entity may discuss the likelihood of changes to the area of its forestland considered to have protected conservation status but is not required to disclose whether these areas overlap with endangered species habitats.",
      "D": "Forestlands located in endangered species habitats must be disclosed by acreage, provided that the species inhabiting them are classified as endangered under jurisdictional laws or regulations, regardless of certification status.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "7",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol41.pdf",
    "source_text": "4 The entity shall disclose whether any forest management certifications were involuntarily suspended or terminated during the reporting period (for failure to meet the standard or resolve major non-conformities). 5 The entity shall disclose which certification(s) was suspended or terminated, the total acreage of land for which certification was suspended or terminated, the reason stated by the certification body or bodies for why the certification was suspended or terminated, and any other explanatory information about the suspension or termination. 6 The entity may discuss any relevant corrective actions taken in response to a certification being suspended or terminated. RR-FM-160a.2. Area of forestland with protected conservation status 1 The entity shall disclose the area of owned, leased or managed forestland (by acreage) that has protected conservation status, where an area is considered to have protected conservation status if it is located within: 1.1 Areas legally designated as protected by government regulation, including national parks, national wildlife refuge sites, wilderness areas, state forests, state parks and areas under conservation easement, as well as sites categorised as such by NatureServe and State Natural Resource Agencies, and agencies associated with the network of Natural Heritage or Conservation Data Centres, or Natura 2000 sites. 1.1.1 These sites may be listed in the World Database of Protected Areas (WDPA) and mapped on ProtectedPlanet.net. 2 The scope includes areas of conservation status actively managed by or for the entity and excludes areas of conservation status exclusively set aside for conservation and not actively managed. 2.1 The scope includes areas of conservation status that are government- owned and managed by the entity. 3 The entity may disclose the percentage of the area of forestland with protected conservation status certified to a third-party forest management standard. 4 The entity may discuss the likelihood of a change to the area of its owned, leased or managed forestland that is considered to have protected conservation status. 5 The entity may separately identify forestland areas with additional ecological, biodiversity or conservation designations, such as those listed by the A –Z Guide of Areas of Biodiversity Importance prepared by the United Nations Environment Programme ’s World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC). RR-FM-160a.3. Area of forestland in endangered species habitat 1 The entity shall disclose the area of owned, leased or managed forestland (by acreage) located in endangered species habitat. 2 Forestlands are considered to be an endangered species habitat if a species that is classified by applicable jurisdictional laws or regulations as endangered or threatened inhabits the entity ’s forestlands.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 6 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 930
  },
  {
    "id": 78651,
    "question": "When an organization determines that both supplier social and environmental assessments are material, which of the following is a necessary condition for it to combine its disclosures for GRI 308 and GRI 414: Supplier Social Assessment 2016?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The organization must apply the same approach for managing both supplier social and environmental assessments.",
      "A": "The organization must ensure that all required disclosures are confidential or subject to legal prohibitions.",
      "B": "The organization must demonstrate that it uses distinct approaches for managing supplier social and environmental impacts.",
      "D": "The organization must develop a new policy specifically addressing combined social and environmental impacts.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "5-6",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 414_ Supplier Social Assessment 2016.pdf",
    "source_text": "to particular topics. The organization uses the Topic Standards according to the list of material topics it has determined using GRI 3 . Figure 1. GRI Standards: Universal, Sector and Topic Standards Apply all three Universal Standards to your reportingUse the Sector Standards that apply to your sectorsSelect Topic Standards to report specific information on your material topicsSector Standards Universal Standards Topic StandardsGRI Standards Requirements and principles for using the GRI Standards Disclosures about the reporting organization Disclosures and guidance about the organization's material topics Using this Standard This Standard can be used by any organization – regardless of size, type, sector, geographic location, or reporting experience – to report information about its social impacts in its supply chain . In addition to this Standard, disclosures that relate to this topic can be found in GRI 308: Supplier Environmental Assessment 2016 . If the reporting organization has determined both supplier social assessment and supplier environmental assessment to be material, it can combine its disclosures for GRI 308 and GRI 414 . For example, if the organization uses the same approach for managing both topics, it can provide one combined explanation of how the organization manages both topics. An organization reporting in accordance with the GRI Standards is required to report the following disclosures if it has determined supplier social assessment to be a material topic : See Requirements 4 and 5 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 . Reasons for omission are permitted for these disclosures. If the organization cannot comply with a disclosure or with a requirement in a disclosure (e.g., because the required information is confidential or subject to legal prohibitions), the organization is required to specify the disclosure or the requirement it cannot comply with, and provide a reason for omission together with an explanation in the GRI content index. See Requirement 6 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 for more information on reasons for omission. If the organization cannot report the required information about an item specified in a disclosure because the item (e.g., committee, policy, practice, process) does not exist, it can comply with the requirement by reporting this to be the case. The organization can explain the reasons for not having this item, or describe any plans to develop it. TheDisclosure 3-3 in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 (see clause 1.1 in this Standard); • Any disclosures from this Topic Standard that are relevant to the organization’s social impacts in its supply chain (Disclosure 414-1 through Disclosure 414-2).• GRI 414: Supplier Social Assessment 2016 5\n\n[Page 6]\ndisclosure does not require the organization to implement the item (e.g., developing a policy), but to report that the item does not exist. If the organization intends to publish a standalone sustainability report, it does not need to repeat information that it has already reported publicly elsewhere, such as on web pages or in its annual report. In such a case, the organization can report a required disclosure by providing a reference in the GRI content index as to where this information can be found (e.g., by providing a link to the web page or citing the page in the annual report where the information has been published). Requirements, guidance and defined terms The following apply throughout this Standard: Requirements are presented in bold font and indicated by the word 'shall'. An organization must comply with requirements to report in accordance with the GRI Standards. Requirements may be accompanied by guidance. Guidance includes background information, explanations, and examples to help the organization better understand the requirements. The organization is not required to comply with guidance. The Standards may also include recommendations. These are cases where a particular course of action is encouraged but not required. The word ‘should’ indicates a recommendation, and the word ‘can’ indicates a possibility or option. Defined terms are underlined in the text of the GRI Standards and linked to their definitions in the Glossary . The organization is required to apply the definitions in the Glossary. GRI 414: Supplier Social Assessment 2016 6",
    "new_id": 931
  },
  {
    "id": 78661,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the relationship between risk management strategies and their intended outcomes, as detailed in the Semiconductors – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The use of personal protective equipment and participation in long-term health studies are described as complementary approaches to mitigating both acute and chronic health risks.",
      "A": "Implementing engineering controls is primarily aimed at reducing short-term risks, while phasing out hazardous materials addresses long-term risks exclusively.",
      "B": "Automation of processes and substituting hazardous materials are presented as sufficient measures to eliminate both acute and chronic health risks entirely.",
      "C": "Efforts such as ambient air monitoring and automation of processes are considered necessary but not sufficient for addressing chronic health risks associated with carcinogens.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "17",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Semiconductors.pdf",
    "source_text": "Workforce Health & Safety Topic Summary The long-term effects of chemical usage in semiconductor manufacturing on worker health is a major area of concern for the industry. Workers in fabrication facilities, particularly maintenance workers, are at risk of exposure to chemicals known to be hazardous to human health. Violations of health and safety standards may result in monetary penalties and additional costs of corrective actions, with effects on net profits and contingent liabilities. Furthermore, such violations also may result in non-monetary penalties and reputational impacts which may decrease revenues, as well as market share. Effective management of health and safety issues include implementing effective engineering controls, introducing less hazardous chemicals if possible or using smaller amounts, and seeking chemicals presenting the fewest risks to the workforce. In addition to protecting brand value, entities taking these measures may also protect themselves from adverse legal outcomes related to both regulated and unregulated hazardous substances. Metrics TC-SC-320a.1. Description of efforts to assess, monitor, and reduce exposure of workforce to human health hazards 1The entity shall discuss efforts to assess, monitor and reduce exposure of its workforce to human health hazards. 1.1 Human health hazards may include solvents, corrosives, lead (and its compounds), arsenic (and its compounds), cadmium and sulphuric acid, as well as known or suspected carcinogens, teratogens and mutagens. 1.2 Relevant efforts to discuss may include risk assessments, risk monitoring, participation in long-term health studies, ambient air monitoring in cleanrooms, implementation of technology to control worker exposure, worker use of personal protective equipment, automation of processes, and phasing out, substituting or using alternatives to hazardous materials. 1.3 The discussion shall include: 1.3.1 efforts to reduce the occurrence of events such as fires, explosions, freeze burns and electrocution; and 1.3.2 a description of management ’s approach to mitigating short-term (acute) and long-term (chronic) risks. 2The workforce includes any personnel conducting company business on behalf of the entity, including all direct employees and contract employees. 2.1 Direct employees are defined as individuals on the entity ’s payroll, whether they are full-time, short service, part-time, executive, labour, salary, seasonal, migrant or hourly employees. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |SEMICONDUCTORS |17",
    "new_id": 932
  },
  {
    "id": 78694,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes why an entity must disclose both total production and percentage of production from owned facilities, according to the Semiconductors – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "To distinguish between the operational control over owned facilities versus contracted ones for accurate accountability in sustainability metrics.",
      "B": "To ensure transparency in the geographical distribution of manufacturing facilities and their environmental impact.",
      "C": "To clarify how production volumes correlate with energy consumption and emissions data provided elsewhere in the disclosure.",
      "D": "To demonstrate alignment with International SEMATECH Manufacturing Initiative standards across all product categories.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "6-7",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Semiconductors.pdf",
    "source_text": "SUSTAINABILITY DISCLOSURE TOPICS & METRICS Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORYUNIT OF MEASURECODE Greenhouse Gas Emissions(1) Gross global Scope 1 emissions and (2) amount of total emissions from perfluorinated compoundsQuantitativeMetric tonnes (t) CO₂-eTC-SC-110a.1 Discussion of long- and short-term strategy or plan to manage Scope 1 emissions, emissions reduction targets, and an analysis of performance against those targetsDiscussion and Analysisn/a TC-SC-110a.2 Energy Management in Manufacturing(1) Total energy consumed, (2) percentage grid electricity and (3) percentage renewableQuantitativeGigajoules (GJ), Percentage (%)TC-SC-130a.1 Water Management(1) Total water withdrawn, (2) total water consumed; percentage of each in regions with High or Extremely High Baseline Water StressQuantitativeThousand cubic metres (m³), Percentage (%)TC-SC-140a.1 Waste Management(1) Amount of hazardous waste from manufacturing, (2) percentage recycledQuantitativeMetric tonnes (t), Percentage (%)TC-SC-150a.1 Workforce Health & SafetyDescription of efforts to assess, monitor, and reduce exposure of workforce to human health hazardsDiscussion and Analysisn/a TC-SC-320a.1 Total amount of monetary losses as a result of legal proceedings associated with employee health and safety violations 1QuantitativePresentation currencyTC-SC-320a.2 Recruiting & Managing a Global & Skilled WorkforcePercentage of employees that require a work visa 2 QuantitativePercentage (%)TC-SC-330a.1 continued... 1Note to TC-SC-320a.2 – The entity shall briefly describe the nature, context and any corrective actions taken because of monetary losses. 2Note to TC-SC-330a.1 – The disclosure shall include a description of any potential risks of recruiting employees that require a work visa and how the entity manages these risks. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |SEMICONDUCTORS |6\n\n[Page 7]\n...continued TOPIC METRIC CATEGORYUNIT OF MEASURECODE Product Lifecycle ManagementPercentage of products by revenue that contain IEC 62474 declarable substances 3QuantitativePercentage (%)TC-SC-410a.1 Processor energy efficiency at a system- level for: (1) servers, (2) desktops and (3) laptops 4QuantitativeVarious, by product categoryTC-SC-410a.2 Materials SourcingDescription of the management of risks associated with the use of critical materialsDiscussion and Analysisn/a TC-SC-440a.1 Intellectual Property Protection & Competitive BehaviourTotal amount of monetary losses as a result of legal proceedings associated with anti-competitive behaviour regulations 5QuantitativePresentation currencyTC-SC-520a.1 Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORYUNIT OF MEASURECODE Total production6Quantitative See note TC-SC-000.A Percentage of production from owned facilities QuantitativePercentage (%)TC-SC-000.B 3Note to TC-SC-410a.1 – Disclosure shall include a discussion of efforts to minimise usage of these substances. 4Note to TC-SC-410a.2 – Disclosure shall include a discussion of efforts to design for new and emerging usage patterns with respect to energy efficiency in all product categories (i.e., applications for servers, desktops, laptops, workstations, netbooks, tablets, mobile phones, and storage). 5Note to TC-SC-520a.1 – The entity shall briefly describe the nature, context and any corrective actions taken because of monetary losses. 6Note to TC-SC-000.A – The entity shall disclose total production from its own manufacturing facilities and those with which it contracts for manufacturing services. For semiconductor equipment manufacturers the total production shall be reported on a per unit basis. For semiconductor device manufacturers the total production shall be reported consistent with International SEMATECH Manufacturing Initiative’s Semiconductor Key Environment Performance Indicators Guidance , Technology Transfer #09125069A-ENG. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |SEMICONDUCTORS |7",
    "new_id": 933
  },
  {
    "id": 78695,
    "question": "Which scenario would most likely lead to a semiconductor manufacturer being considered non-compliant with the disclosed sustainability standards in the Semiconductors – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "The manufacturer incinerates hazardous waste for energy recovery and includes it in their recycling percentage disclosure.",
      "A": "The manufacturer reports hazardous waste recycled through an entity certified under the e-Steward® Standard but fails to disclose the total weight of hazardous waste generated.",
      "C": "The manufacturer reuses hazardous waste within its operations and provides a clear breakdown of reused versus recycled waste according to applicable jurisdictional frameworks.",
      "D": "The manufacturer transfers electronic waste to a third-party recycler compliant with the Responsible Recycling Practices (R2) Standard and discloses this process.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "15-16",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Semiconductors.pdf",
    "source_text": "Waste Management Topic Summary Semiconductor manufacturing requires hazardous materials, many of which are subject to environmental, health and safety regulations, and generate harmful waste, which may be released into the environment in the form of water and air emissions, as well as solid waste. The handling and disposal of hazardous wastes produced during manufacturing may result in increased operating costs, capital expenditures, and in some instances, regulatory costs. Entities that reduce waste produced during manufacturing and ensure it is reused, recycled or disposed of appropriately may achieve a lower risk profile and face reduced regulatory risks as local, regional and national environmental laws place increasing emphasis on resource conservation and waste management. Metrics TC-SC-150a.1. (1) Amount of hazardous waste from manufacturing, (2) percentage recycled 1The entity shall disclose (1) the total weight of hazardous waste generated, in metric tonnes, from manufacturing operations. 1.1 Hazardous wastes are defined in accordance with applicable jurisdictional legal or regulatory frameworks where the waste was generated. 2The entity shall disclose (2) the percentage of hazardous waste recycled as the weight of hazardous waste generated from manufacturing operations that was recycled, divided by the total weight of all hazardous waste generated. 2.1 Hazardous waste that is reused, reclaimed or remanufactured shall be considered within the scope of recycled. 2.2 Recycled, reused, reclaimed and remanufactured hazardous waste is defined in accordance with applicable jurisdictional legal or regulatory frameworks where the waste was generated. 2.3 Materials incinerated, including for energy recovery, shall not be considered within the scope of recycled. 2.3.1 Energy recovery is defined as the use of combustible waste to generate energy through direct incineration, with or without other waste, but with recovery of the heat. 2.3.2 The entity may disclose separately the percentage of hazardous waste generated that was incinerated. 2.4 Electronic waste material (e-waste) shall be considered recycled only if the entity can demonstrate this material was transferred to entities with third-party certification to a standard for e-waste recycling, such as the e-Steward® Standard for Responsible Recycling and Reuse of Electronic Equipment or the Responsible Recycling Practices (R2) Standard for Electronics Recyclers. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |SEMICONDUCTORS |15\n\n[Page 16]\n2.5 The entity shall disclose the standards with which the entities it has transferred e-waste to are compliant. 3The entity may use the United Nations Environmental Programme ’s (UNEP) Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal (Basel Convention) for the purposes of defining hazardous waste or recycled hazardous waste for operations located in jurisdictions that lack applicable legal or regulatory definitions. 4The entity shall disclose the frameworks used to define hazardous waste and recycled hazardous waste, and the quantities and percentages defined in accordance with each applicable framework. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |SEMICONDUCTORS |16",
    "new_id": 934
  },
  {
    "id": 78696,
    "question": "Which scenario would most likely result in the highest regulatory compliance risk for a semiconductor manufacturer under the disclosed waste management metrics in the Semiconductors – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The manufacturer reuses 70% of its hazardous waste, recycles 20%, and disposes of the remaining 10% without third-party certification for e-waste handling.",
      "A": "The manufacturer incinerates 50% of its hazardous waste for energy recovery and recycles the remaining 50%, while adhering to local legal frameworks.",
      "B": "The manufacturer transfers all e-waste to entities certified under the e-Steward® Standard but fails to disclose the percentage of total hazardous waste recycled.",
      "D": "The manufacturer defines hazardous waste according to the Basel Convention in a jurisdiction with no applicable legal framework and reports recycling 90% of its hazardous waste.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "15-16",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Semiconductors.pdf",
    "source_text": "Waste Management Topic Summary Semiconductor manufacturing requires hazardous materials, many of which are subject to environmental, health and safety regulations, and generate harmful waste, which may be released into the environment in the form of water and air emissions, as well as solid waste. The handling and disposal of hazardous wastes produced during manufacturing may result in increased operating costs, capital expenditures, and in some instances, regulatory costs. Entities that reduce waste produced during manufacturing and ensure it is reused, recycled or disposed of appropriately may achieve a lower risk profile and face reduced regulatory risks as local, regional and national environmental laws place increasing emphasis on resource conservation and waste management. Metrics TC-SC-150a.1. (1) Amount of hazardous waste from manufacturing, (2) percentage recycled 1The entity shall disclose (1) the total weight of hazardous waste generated, in metric tonnes, from manufacturing operations. 1.1 Hazardous wastes are defined in accordance with applicable jurisdictional legal or regulatory frameworks where the waste was generated. 2The entity shall disclose (2) the percentage of hazardous waste recycled as the weight of hazardous waste generated from manufacturing operations that was recycled, divided by the total weight of all hazardous waste generated. 2.1 Hazardous waste that is reused, reclaimed or remanufactured shall be considered within the scope of recycled. 2.2 Recycled, reused, reclaimed and remanufactured hazardous waste is defined in accordance with applicable jurisdictional legal or regulatory frameworks where the waste was generated. 2.3 Materials incinerated, including for energy recovery, shall not be considered within the scope of recycled. 2.3.1 Energy recovery is defined as the use of combustible waste to generate energy through direct incineration, with or without other waste, but with recovery of the heat. 2.3.2 The entity may disclose separately the percentage of hazardous waste generated that was incinerated. 2.4 Electronic waste material (e-waste) shall be considered recycled only if the entity can demonstrate this material was transferred to entities with third-party certification to a standard for e-waste recycling, such as the e-Steward® Standard for Responsible Recycling and Reuse of Electronic Equipment or the Responsible Recycling Practices (R2) Standard for Electronics Recyclers. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |SEMICONDUCTORS |15\n\n[Page 16]\n2.5 The entity shall disclose the standards with which the entities it has transferred e-waste to are compliant. 3The entity may use the United Nations Environmental Programme ’s (UNEP) Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal (Basel Convention) for the purposes of defining hazardous waste or recycled hazardous waste for operations located in jurisdictions that lack applicable legal or regulatory definitions. 4The entity shall disclose the frameworks used to define hazardous waste and recycled hazardous waste, and the quantities and percentages defined in accordance with each applicable framework. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |SEMICONDUCTORS |16",
    "new_id": 935
  },
  {
    "id": 78720,
    "question": "Which scenario demonstrates the most nuanced application of the GRI Standards regarding reporting on marketing and labeling, according to GRI 417: Marketing and Labeling 2016?",
    "options": {
      "D": "An organization provides a reference to a publicly available webpage for a required disclosure instead of including the information directly in its report.",
      "A": "An organization excludes a required disclosure because it determines that no material impacts exist in its marketing and labeling practices.",
      "B": "An organization avoids reporting on a specific policy because it claims confidentiality, without providing any explanation or reason for omission in the GRI content index.",
      "C": "An organization implements a new policy solely to comply with a disclosure requirement, despite previously not having the item specified in the disclosure.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "5-6",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 417_ Marketing and Labeling 2016.pdf",
    "source_text": "Figure 1. GRI Standards: Universal, Sector and Topic Standards Apply all three Universal Standards to your reportingUse the Sector Standards that apply to your sectorsSelect Topic Standards to report specific information on your material topicsSector Standards Universal Standards Topic StandardsGRI Standards Requirements and principles for using the GRI Standards Disclosures about the reporting organization Disclosures and guidance about the organization's material topics Using this Standard This Standard can be used by any organization – regardless of size, type, sector, geographic location, or reporting experience – to report information about its impacts related to marketing and labeling. An organization reporting in accordance with the GRI Standards is required to report the following disclosures if it has determined marketing and labeling to be a material topic : See Requirements 4 and 5 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 . Reasons for omission are permitted for these disclosures. If the organization cannot comply with a disclosure or with a requirement in a disclosure (e.g., because the required information is confidential or subject to legal prohibitions), the organization is required to specify the disclosure or the requirement it cannot comply with, and provide a reason for omission together with an explanation in the GRI content index. See Requirement 6 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 for more information on reasons for omission. If the organization cannot report the required information about an item specified in a disclosure because the item (e.g., committee, policy, practice, process) does not exist, it can comply with the requirement by reporting this to be the case. The organization can explain the reasons for not having this item, or describe any plans to develop it. The disclosure does not require the organization to implement the item (e.g., developing a policy), but to report that the item does not exist. If the organization intends to publish a standalone sustainability report, it does not need to repeat information that it has already reported publicly elsewhere, such as on web pages or in its annual report. In such a case, the organization can report a required disclosure by providing a reference in the GRI content index as to where this information can be found (e.g., by providing a link to the web page or citing the page in the annual report where the information has been published). Requirements, guidance and defined termsDisclosure 3-3 in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 (see clause 1.1 in this Standard); • Any disclosures from this Topic Standard that are relevant to the organization’s marketing and labeling-related impacts (Disclosure 417-1 through Disclosure 417-3).• GRI 417: Marketing and Labeling 2016 5\n\n[Page 6]\nThe following apply throughout this Standard: Requirements are presented in bold font and indicated by the word 'shall'. An organization must comply with requirements to report in accordance with the GRI Standards. Requirements may be accompanied by guidance. Guidance includes background information, explanations, and examples to help the organization better understand the requirements. The organization is not required to comply with guidance. The Standards may also include recommendations. These are cases where a particular course of action is encouraged but not required. The word ‘should’ indicates a recommendation, and the word ‘can’ indicates a possibility or option. Defined terms are underlined in the text of the GRI Standards and linked to their definitions in the Glossary . The organization is required to apply the definitions in the Glossary. GRI 417: Marketing and Labeling 2016 6",
    "new_id": 936
  },
  {
    "id": 78744,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the relationship between corruption in the coal sector and its potential to exacerbate inequalities, based on the mechanisms described in GRI 12: Coal Sector 2022?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Corruption primarily increases inequalities by diverting resource revenues to private beneficiaries, which directly reduces public investments in infrastructure and services.",
      "B": "Corruption fosters inequalities most significantly by enabling less qualified organizations to secure licenses, leading to environmental degradation and reduced community benefits.",
      "C": "Corruption exacerbates inequalities mainly through opaque licensing procedures that obstruct public scrutiny, indirectly increasing poverty levels and conflicts over resources.",
      "D": "Corruption amplifies inequalities predominantly by influencing policies and regulations to favor connected companies, undermining equitable distribution of resource revenues.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "53",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 12_ Coal Sector 2022.pdf",
    "source_text": "Topic 12.20 Anti-corruption Anti-corruption refers to how an organization manages the potential of being involved with corruption. Corruption is practices such as bribery, facilitation payments, fraud, extortion, collusion, money laundering, or the offer or receipt of an inducement to do something dishonest or illegal. This topic covers impacts related to corruption and an organization’s approach related to contract and ownership transparency. Corruption in the coal sector can occur throughout the value chain and has been linked to various negative impacts , such as misallocation of resource revenues, damage to the environment, abuse of democracy and human rights , and political instability. In addition, corruption can divert resource revenues to private beneficiaries, at the expense of, for example, investments in infrastructure or services. This can be particularly critical in countries with high poverty levels, where it can increase inequalities and conflicts over coal resources. Likelihood of corruption can be higher in areas of conflict, where increased pressure on the supply of resources and instability might be exploited. Corruption can in turn foster conflict and lead to instability (see also topic 12.12 Conflict and security ). Characteristics of the coal sector that contribute to the potential for corruption include frequent interaction between coal organizations and politically exposed persons, such as government officials for licenses and other regulatory approvals. Other relevant sector characteristics include the complex financial transactions and the international reach of the sector. State-owned enterprises (SOEs) face specific challenges in relation to corruption because they may have less effective internal controls and be subject to partial independent oversight. In addition to driving profit, SOEs may also pursue broader objectives such as community development. However, without adequate oversight, measures for community development may be abused for corrupt purposes. Organizations in the coal sector partnering with SOEs in joint ventures may face additional risks related to corruption as a result of this business relationship . Corruption can occur during bidding processes for exploration and production licenses, for example, with the aim to obtain confidential information, influence decision-making, or avoid environmental or local content requirements. This may result in licenses being awarded to less qualified organizations, jeopardizing public investments, or negatively impacting the environment and local communities . Opaque licensing procedures may also obstruct public scrutiny of investments and transactions that could result in reduced public revenue. Corrupt practices can also be aimed at blocking or shaping policies and regulations or to influence their enforcement. This might include land and resource rights regulations, taxes and other government levies, or environmental protection. A lack of transparency in procurement procedures in the coal sector can also create a risk of corruption and fraud. Examples of this can include paying bribes to get regulations or quality requirements waived, receiving kickbacks for securing contracts at inflated prices, profiting from inflated prices charged by an entity established as a front organization, and favoring companies connected to local regulators. To combat corruption and prevent the negative impacts that stem from it, organizations in the coal sector are expected by the marketplace, international norms, and stakeholders to demonstrate their adherence to integrity, governance, and responsible business practices. 15 15 Politically exposed person is defined by the Financial Action Taskforce (FATF) as 'an individual who is or has been entrusted with a prominent public function' [269]. GRI 12: Coal Sector 2022 53",
    "new_id": 937
  },
  {
    "id": 78762,
    "question": "Which scenario best reflects the nuanced requirements for an organization determining material topics and disclosures under this Standard, as outlined in GRI 12: Coal Sector 2022?",
    "options": {
      "B": "An organization identifies a topic as material, reports only the relevant Topic Standards disclosures, and lists unrelated disclosures in the GRI content index with 'not applicable' reasoning.",
      "A": "An organization excludes all sector-specific disclosures from its GRI content index because they are not explicitly mandatory.",
      "C": "An organization determines that none of the listed topics are material, provides no explanations in the GRI content index, and omits all related disclosures.",
      "D": "An organization deems certain additional sector disclosures irrelevant, does not report them, but includes them in the GRI content index with clear justification.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "7",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 12_ Coal Sector 2022.pdf",
    "source_text": "Using this Standard An organization in the coal sector reporting in accordance with the GRI Standards is required to use this Standard when determining its material topics and then when determining what information to report for the material topics. Determining material topics Material topics represent an organization’s most significant impacts on the economy, environment, and people, including their human rights . Section 1 of this Standard provides contextual information that can help the organization in identifying and assessing its impacts. Section 2 outlines the topics that are likely to be material for organizations in the coal sector. The organization is required to review each topic described and determine whether it is a material topic for it. The organization needs to use this Standard when determining its material topics. However, circumstances for each organization vary, and the organization needs to determine its material topics according to its specific circumstances, such as its business model; geographic, cultural, and legal operating context; ownership structure; and the nature of its impacts. Because of this, not all topics listed in this Standard may be material for all organizations in the coal sector. See GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 for step-by-step guidance on how to determine material topics. If the organization has determined any of the topics included in this Standard as not material, then the organization is required to list them in the GRI content index and explain why they are not material. See Requirement 3 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 and Box 5 in GRI 3 for more information on using Sector Standards to determine material topics. Determining what to report For each material topic, an organization reports information about its impacts and how it manages these impacts. Once an organization has determined a topic included in this Standard to be material, the Standard also helps the organization identify disclosures to report information about its impacts relating to that topic. For each topic in section 2 of this Standard, a reporting sub-section is included. These sub-sections list disclosures from the GRI Topic Standards that are relevant to the topic. They may also list additional sector disclosures and recommendations for the organization to report. This is done in cases where the Topic Standards do not provide disclosures, or where the disclosures from the Topic Standards do not provide sufficient information about the organization’s impacts in relation to a topic. These additional sector disclosures and recommendations may be based on other sources. Figure 2 illustrates how the reporting included in each topic is structured. The organization is required to report the disclosures from the Topic Standards listed for those topics it has determined to be material. If any of the Topic Standards disclosures listed are not relevant to the organization’s impacts, the organization is not required to report them. However, the organization is required to list these disclosures in the GRI content index and provide ‘not applicable’ as the reason for omission for not reporting the disclosures. See Requirement 6 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 for more information on reasons for omission. The additional sector disclosures and recommendations outline further information which has been identified as relevant for organizations in the coal sector to report in relation to a topic. The organization should provide sufficient information about its impacts in relation to each material topic, so that information users can make informed assessments and decisions about the organization. For this reason, reporting these additional sector disclosures and recommendations is encouraged, however it is not a requirement. When the organization reports additional sector disclosures, it is required to list them in the GRI content index (see Requirement 7 in GRI 1 ). If the organization reports information that applies to more than one material topic, it does not need to repeat it for each topic. The organization can report this information once, with a clear explanation of all the topics it covers. If the organization intends to publish a standalone sustainability report, it does not need to repeat information that it has already reported publicly elsewhere, such as on web pages or in its annual report. In such a case, the organization can report on a required disclosure by providing a reference in the GRI content index as to whe",
    "new_id": 938
  },
  {
    "id": 78796,
    "question": "Which of the following scenarios would most likely result in a legacy of environmental issues and financial burden for communities, based on the interplay of factors described in GRI 12: Coal Sector 2022?",
    "options": {
      "C": "A coal company allocates sufficient funds for closure but fails to assign clear responsibility for long-term monitoring.",
      "A": "A coal company plans for economic revitalization but does not address potential contamination risks during rehabilitation.",
      "B": "A coal company conducts extensive land rehabilitation but neglects to stabilize underground workings, leading to subsidence.",
      "D": "A coal company collaborates with local governments on worker reskilling programs but omits allocating funds specifically for methane emissions management post-closure.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "19",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 12_ Coal Sector 2022.pdf",
    "source_text": "Topic 12.3 Closure and rehabilitation At the end of commercial use, organizations are expected to close assets and facilities and rehabilitate operational sites. Impacts can occur during and after closure. This topic covers an organization’s approach to closure and rehabilitation, including how the organization considers the impacts on the environment, local communities, and workers. Following the closure of coal mines, potential environmental impacts include soil and water contamination, changes to landforms, and disturbance of biodiversity and wildlife. Closure can also lead to lasting socioeconomic consequences for local communities (see also topic 12.9). Preparation for and implementation of responsible closure is becoming increasingly important for the coal sector due to the need to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and the transition to a low-carbon economy (see topic 12.2 Climate adaptation, resilience, and transition ). This urgency will lead to more frequent and earlier closures of coal activities. Impacts from closure can differ between surface and underground mining. For example, surface mining requires more land use and substantial rehabilitation, whereas abandoned underground mines may emit coal mine methane even after active mining has ceased, making an ongoing contribution to GHG emissions (see also topic 12.1). Closure often requires planning already in the early phases of a project’s life cycle to anticipate potential impacts, including impacts on local communities and their livelihoods. Closure and rehabilitation activities can include: Once complete, closure and rehabilitation of operational sites should result in a stable and sustainable ecosystem compatible with planned post-closure land use that considers the needs of local stakeholders . Failure to close assets and rehabilitate sites effectively can render land unusable for other productive uses and can result in health and safety hazards due to contamination or the presence of hazardous materials. Impacts from closure can be exacerbated if there is insufficient notice or lack of adequate planning for economic revitalization, social protection, and labor transition. Without clearly assigned responsible parties or allocated funds, closed coal facilities can leave a legacy of environmental issues and financial burden for communities and governments. However, the closure and rehabilitation phase may also offer additional employment opportunities. This can involve an influx of additional workers for an extended period, potentially exacerbating other environmental pressures. Once this phase is completed, workers may be retrenched and local communities face economic downturns and social disruption. This is especially relevant for those communities that depend on the coal sector for employment, income, taxes and other payments, community development, and other benefits. A collaboration between local and national governments, coal organizations, workers, and unions is essential to mitigate negative impacts and ensure a just transition that enables decent jobs, social inclusion and economic opportunities while transitioning to a low-carbon economy [ 101]. Examples of actions organizations may take include offering early retirement, reskilling, retraining, worker transfer programs, and relocation assistance programs.stabilization of open-pit or underground workings, such as landfilling to prevent subsidence;• removal or conversion of infrastructure to ensure the safety of people;• rehabilitation of waste rock stockpiles and tailings facilities to control erosion and land degradation;• management of waste , surface water , and groundwater quality issues resulting from abandoned mine drainage, waste rock, and leaching from tailings (see also topics 12.6 Waste and 12.7 Water and effluents ); and• post-closure environmental and socio-economic monitoring.• GRI 12: Coal Sector 2022 19",
    "new_id": 939
  },
  {
    "id": 78826,
    "question": "Which of the following scenarios would most directly challenge an organization's ability to ensure compliance with forced labor and modern slavery regulations, based on the complexities described in GRI 12: Coal Sector 2022?",
    "options": {
      "D": "A coal company conducts social screening for new suppliers but does not extend this process to existing long-term suppliers operating in low human rights enforcement areas.",
      "A": "A coal organization implements comprehensive due diligence across all its primary operations but excludes joint ventures with state-owned enterprises in high-risk regions.",
      "B": "A coal organization shifts its recruitment processes entirely in-house, thereby avoiding reliance on third-party employment agencies known for overcharging migrant workers.",
      "C": "A coal company adopts global reporting standards while maintaining limited oversight of shipping and construction activities within its supply chain.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "47-48",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 12_ Coal Sector 2022.pdf",
    "source_text": "Topic 12.17 Forced labor and modern slavery Forced labor is defined as all work or service which is exacted from any person under the menace of penalty and for which a person has not offered themselves voluntarily. Freedom from forced labor is a human right and a fundamental right at work. This topic covers an organization’s approach to identifying and addressing forced labor and modern slavery. Coal is a product at risk of being mined using forced labor or modern slavery in several countries [ 252] [259]. Additionally, coal organizations may be involved with human rights violations and other instances of exploitation via interaction with suppliers , which may include those operating in countries with low rates of enforcement of human rights . Coal organizations may also be involved with incidences of forced labor and modern slavery as a result of their joint ventures and other business relationships , including those with state-owned enterprises in countries where international human rights violations are documented. Conducting due diligence within the large and complex supply chains common in the sector may also pose difficulties for detecting and addressing incidents of forced labor and modern slavery. There are documented cases of human rights violations throughout the supply chain concerning activities such as coal shipping and construction. Migrant workers can face higher risks of modern slavery when dealing with third-party employment agencies, such as those found to overcharge workers for visas and flights or demand recruitment costs be paid by workers rather than employers. As part of a global effort, several governments have issued legislation requiring public reporting on addressing traditional and emerging forced labor practices, including modern slavery. Such legislation applies to many organizations in the coal sector. GRI 12: Coal Sector 2022 47\n\n[Page 48]\nReporting on forced labor and modern slavery If the organization has determined forced labor and modern slavery to be a material topic , this sub-section lists the disclosures identified as relevant for reporting on the topic by the coal sector. STANDARD DISCLOSURE SECTOR STANDARD REF. NO. Management of the topic GRI 3: Material Topics 2021Disclosure 3-3 Management of material topics 12.17.1 Topic Standard disclosures GRI 409: Forced or Compulsory Labor 2016Disclosure 409-1 Operations and suppliers at significant risk for incidents of forced or compulsory labor12.17.2 GRI 414: Supplier Social Assessment 2016Disclosure 414-1 New suppliers that were screened using social criteria 12.17.3 References and resources GRI 409: Forced or Compulsory Labor 2016 and GRI 414: Supplier Social Assessment 2016 list authoritative intergovernmental instruments and additional references relevant to reporting on this topic. The additional authoritative instruments and references used in developing this topic, as well as resources that may be helpful for reporting on forced labor and modern slavery by the coal sector are listed in the Bibliography . GRI 12: Coal Sector 2022 48",
    "new_id": 940
  },
  {
    "id": 78871,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why water management in coal activities poses a heightened risk to ecosystems and human populations in arid or water-stressed regions, according to GRI 12: Coal Sector 2022?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The inability to substitute freshwater with alternative water sources in water-scarce areas intensifies the impact of coal activities on local water supplies.",
      "B": "The increased likelihood of extreme weather events directly depletes local water resources, leaving insufficient reserves for competing demands.",
      "C": "Coal operations in such areas tend to rely exclusively on freshwater sources, which exacerbates competition and reduces availability for other uses.",
      "D": "Water-intensive processes like dust suppression and slurry transportation are more prevalent in arid regions, amplifying the strain on already scarce resources.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "27-28",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 12_ Coal Sector 2022.pdf",
    "source_text": "Topic 12.7 Water and effluents Recognized as a human right, access to fresh water is essential for human life and well-being. The amount of water withdrawn and consumed by an organization and the quality of its discharges can have impacts on ecosystems and people. This topic covers impacts related to the withdrawal and consumption of water and the quality of water discharged. Coal activities can reduce water availability for local communities and other sectors that rely on water. They can have impacts on the quality of surface water , groundwater , and seawater , which can translate into long-term impacts on ecosystems and biodiversity, cause health and development problems for humans, and impair food security. Water is used in coal activities for cooling and cutting; dust suppression during mining and hauling; washing to improve coal quality; re-vegetation of surface mines; and long-distance coal slurry transportation. The amount of water needed for activities depends on whether mining occurs on the surface or underground and on operational efficiency. The amount of water withdrawn also varies according to an organization’s ability to substitute the use of freshwater , the quality of water required, reservoir characteristics, and recycling infrastructure. A coal organization’s impacts on water also depend on the quantity of local water resources. A large proportion of the world’s coal resources are found in areas that are arid or experience water stress . In such areas, the sector’s activities are likely to increase competition for water. This may exacerbate tensions between, as well as within, sectors or local communities. Droughts, floods, and other extreme weather events due to climate change will likely pose more frequent challenges to water availability and quality in the future. Coal activities’ impacts on water quality can be due to leaching from tailings, failure of tailings facilities, and acid mine drainage containing acidic water and heavy metals. Certain mining methods can involve substantive vegetation clearance and land-use changes, leading to erosion and sediment flows (see also topic 12.5 Biodiversity ), which together with alterations in water flows can affect water quality and aquatic and terrestrial habitats. Underground operations might also disrupt or contaminate aquifers. Transportation accidents and related coal spills can contaminate waterways and wetlands with harmful materials, such as arsenic, lead, mercury, and sulfur compounds (see also topic 12.13 Asset integrity and critical incident management ). GRI 12: Coal Sector 2022 27\n\n[Page 28]\nReporting on water and effluents If the organization has determined water and effluents to be a material topic , this sub-section lists the disclosures identified as relevant for reporting on the topic by the coal sector. STANDARD DISCLOSURE SECTOR STANDARD REF. NO. Management of the topic GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 Disclosure 3-3 Management of material topics 12.7.1 Topic Standard disclosures GRI 303: Water and Effluents 2018 Disclosure 303-1 Interactions with water as a shared resource Additional sector recommendations 12.7.2 Disclosure 303-2 Management of water discharge-related impacts 12.7.3 Disclosure 303-3 Water withdrawal 12.7.4 Disclosure 303-4 Water discharge 12.7.5 Disclosure 303-5 Water consumption 12.7.6 References and resources GRI 303: Water and Effluents 2018 lists authoritative intergovernmental instruments and additional references relevant to reporting on this topic. The additional references used in developing this topic, as well as resources that may be helpful for reporting on water and effluents by the coal sector are listed in the Bibliography .Describe actions taken to prevent or mitigate negative impacts from acid mine drainage. • GRI 12: Coal Sector 2022 28",
    "new_id": 941
  },
  {
    "id": 78924,
    "question": "Which scenario best exemplifies a situation where the 'highest governance body' might be considered to have failed in its responsibilities regarding human rights, as described in GRI 12: Coal Sector 2022?",
    "options": {
      "B": "An executive management board independently addresses environmental impacts without consulting the supervisory board, despite local laws requiring dual-tier oversight.",
      "A": "The organization lacks a routinized grievance mechanism for workers to report violations of rights set out in the UN International Bill of Human Rights.",
      "C": "Groundwater contamination occurs due to hazardous waste disposal, but no fatality or long-term injury results from the incident.",
      "D": "Indigenous peoples are affected by operations, but their grievances are resolved within six months, avoiding any long-term consequences.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "65",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 12_ Coal Sector 2022.pdf",
    "source_text": "Source: United Nations (UN), Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework , 2011 grievance mechanism routinized process through which grievances can be raised and remedy can be sought Source: United Nations (UN), Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework , 2011; modified Note: See Guidance to Disclosure 2-25 in GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 for more information on ‘grievance mechanism’. groundwater water that is being held in, and that can be recovered from, an underground formation Source: International Organization for Standardization. ISO 14046:2014. Environmental management — Water footprint — Principles, requirements and guidelines . Geneva: ISO, 2014; modified hazardous waste waste that possesses any of the characteristics contained in Annex III of the Basel Convention, or that is considered to be hazardous by national legislation Source: United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal , 1989 high-consequence work-related injury work-related injury that results in a fatality or in an injury from which the worker cannot, does not, or is not expected to recover fully to pre-injury health status within six months highest governance body governance body with the highest authority in the organization Note: In some jurisdictions, governance systems consist of two tiers, where supervision and management are separated or where local law provides for a supervisory board drawn from non-executives to oversee an executive management board. In such cases, both tiers are included under the definition of highest governance body. human rights rights inherent to all human beings, which include, at a minimum, the rights set out in the United Nations (UN) International Bill of Human Rights and the principles concerning fundamental rights set out in the International Labour Organization (ILO) Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work Source: United Nations (UN), Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework , 2011; modified Note: See Guidance to 2-23-b-i in GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 for more information on ‘human rights’. impact effect the organization has or could have on the economy, environment, and people, including on their human rights , which in turn can indicate its contribution (negative or positive) to sustainable development Note 1: Impacts can be actual or potential, negative or positive, short-term or long-term, intended or unintended, and reversible or irreversible. Note 2: See section 2.1 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 for more information on ‘impact’. indigenous peoples Indigenous Peoples are generally identified as: GRI 12: Coal Sector 2022 65",
    "new_id": 942
  },
  {
    "id": 78947,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why addressing discriminatory practices in the coal sector requires understanding specific groups' experiences across different locations, as outlined in GRI 12: Coal Sector 2022?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Because discrimination manifests uniquely based on location-specific factors like cultural customs, worker status, and ethnic biases.",
      "A": "Because local laws in resource-rich countries uniformly mandate equal treatment, making discrimination less likely.",
      "B": "Because the coal sector exclusively employs migrant workers, who face no documented cases of discrimination.",
      "D": "Because all coal sector jobs are inherently hazardous, eliminating any possibility of unequal treatment.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "51",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 12_ Coal Sector 2022.pdf",
    "source_text": "Topic 12.19 Non-discrimination and equal opportunity Freedom from discrimination is a human right and a fundamental right at work. Discrimination can impose unequal burdens on individuals or deny fair opportunities on the basis of individual merit. This topic covers impacts from discrimination and practices related to diversity, inclusion, and equal opportunity. The conditions, locations, necessary skills, and types of work associated with the coal sector can be a barrier for entry, hinder employee diversity, and result in discrimination . Discriminatory practices can impede access to jobs and career development, as well as lead to inequalities in treatment, remuneration , and benefits . Documented cases of discrimination in the coal sector concern race, color, sex, gender, religion, national extraction, and worker status. For example, jobseekers from local communities may be excluded from the hiring process because of a recruitment system bias that favors a dominant ethnic group or utilizes migrant workers. Local workers may receive significantly lower pay for equal work than expatriate employees. The sector’s widespread use of contract workers, often with differing terms of employment and lower remuneration and benefits compared to employees, can also be conducive to discrimination (see also topic 12.15 Employment practices ). The coal sector is characterized by a significant gender imbalance. In many countries, the percentage of women working in this sector is significantly lower than the percentage of women working overall nationwide. Women are also significantly underrepresented in senior management positions. One cause of this imbalance may be that fewer women graduate with degrees pertinent to the sector, such as in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Other barriers for women and primary caregivers include fly-in fly-out work arrangements, long hours, and limited parental leave arrangements and childcare facilities at mining sites. Social or cultural customs, beliefs, and biases can also limit women’s access to jobs in this sector or prevent them from taking on specific roles. In addition, some resource-rich countries have laws that prevent women from working in hazardous or arduous occupations. The coal sector has also been linked to domestic and gender-based violence, both at operational sites and within local communities adjacent to the organization’s operations. Male-dominated cultures, imbalanced gender distribution, and gendered organizational norms have been identified as contributing to the likelihood of sexual harassment (see also topic 12.14 Occupational health and safety ). Understanding how specific groups may be subject to discrimination across different locations where coal organizations operate can help organizations in effectively address discriminatory practices. Other measures, such as providing specific training to workers on preventing discrimination can help address impacts related to discrimination and create a respectful workplace. GRI 12: Coal Sector 2022 51",
    "new_id": 943
  },
  {
    "id": 78948,
    "question": "Which statement accurately captures the relationship between lobbying by the coal sector and its implications for sustainable development, based on the described effects and mechanisms in GRI 12: Coal Sector 2022?",
    "options": {
      "D": "While lobbying may support local economic stability, it has also been used to obstruct environmental policies and hinder progress toward a low-carbon economy.",
      "A": "Lobbying efforts primarily aim to align corporate strategies with publicly stated climate goals, ensuring consistency in policy advocacy.",
      "B": "The coal sector's lobbying activities are focused exclusively on opposing carbon pricing without influencing broader regulatory frameworks or subsidies.",
      "C": "Increased access to government representatives guarantees equitable representation of societal interests, minimizing undue influence over public policy decisions.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "58-59",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 12_ Coal Sector 2022.pdf",
    "source_text": "References and resources GRI 201: Economic Performance 2016 and GRI 207: Tax 2019 list authoritative intergovernmental instruments and additional references relevant to reporting on this topic. The additional authoritative instruments and references used in developing this topic, as well as resources that may be helpful for reporting on payments to governments by the coal sector are listed in the Bibliography . 19 This additional sector recommendation is based on Requirement 2.6 State participation in the EITI Standard 2019 [289]. 20 This additional sector recommendation is based on Requirement 4.1 Comprehensive disclosure of taxes and revenues and Requirement 4.7. Level of disaggregation in the EITI Standard 2019 . A definition for project can be found in the EITI Standard 2019 [289]. 21 The EITI Standard 2019 specifies that in countries implementing the EITI, the multi-stakeholder group for the country agree which payments and revenues are material, including appropriate thresholds [289]. The organization can use the relevant threshold set by the EITI multi-stakeholder group. If there is no relevant threshold set, the organization can use a threshold equivalent to that established for the European Union, which specifies that ‘Payments, whether a single payment or a series of related payments, below EUR 100,000 within the reporting period can be excluded’ [279]. 22 This additional sector disclosure is based on Requirement 4.2 Sale of the state’s share of production or other revenues collected in kind in the EITI Standard 2019 [289] and EITI Reporting Guidelines for companies buying oil, gas and minerals from governments [288]. GRI 12: Coal Sector 2022 58\n\n[Page 59]\nTopic 12.22 Public policy An organization can participate in public policy development, directly or through an intermediary organization, by means of lobbying or making financial or in-kind contributions to political parties, politicians, or causes. While an organization can encourage the development of public policy that benefits society, participation can also be associated with corruption, bribery, undue influence, or an imbalanced representation of the organization’s interests. This topic covers an organization’s approach to public policy advocacy and the impacts that can result from the influence an organization exerts. In regions where coal generates significant revenue for governments, organizations in the sector may get better access to, and representation in meetings with, government representatives, which may lead to increased influence over public policy decisions. Lobbying by the coal sector can obstruct sustainable development, for example, by misaligning policy, regulation, and subsidies with the transition to a low-carbon economy. The coal sector has advocated against ambitious climate policies through individual organizations in the sector and industry bodies. These activities have often been targeted against enforcing meaningful carbon pricing, carbon budgets, or other measures to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions that could leave coal assets and resources stranded. These efforts have sometimes contradicted publicly stated corporate strategies and positions that support policies addressing climate change (see also topic 12.2 Climate adaptation, resilience, and transition ). The coal sector has also lobbied for government subsidies, contributing to increased dependence on fossil fuels and discouraging investment in renewable energy and energy efficiency. While lobbying activities may aim to safeguard existing jobs and the livelihoods of communities living adjacent to coal mining areas, advocacy and lobbying activities by the coal sector have also contributed to hindering environmental policies; blocking or amending legislation on environmental and social assessments of projects, or fair participation of all stakeholders ; overturning restrictions on resource development; and lowering labor standards, corporate taxes, and resource royalties. GRI 12: Coal Sector 2022 59",
    "new_id": 944
  },
  {
    "id": 78949,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the relationship between contract transparency and the management of corruption risks in procurement, as implied by GRI 12: Coal Sector 2022?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Public availability of contracts is a necessary condition for mitigating corruption risks, unless specific justifications prevent it.",
      "B": "Contract transparency is optional but recommended for managing corruption risks in procurement practices.",
      "C": "The absence of public contracts inherently indicates ineffective anti-corruption measures in procurement and supply chain management.",
      "D": "Contract transparency directly eliminates corruption risks in procurement without requiring additional safeguards.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "55",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 12_ Coal Sector 2022.pdf",
    "source_text": "Reporting on anti-corruption If the organization has determined anti-corruption to be a material topic , this sub-section lists the disclosures identified as relevant for reporting on the topic by the coal sector. STANDARD DISCLOSURE SECTOR STANDARD REF. NO. Management of the topic GRI 3: Material Topics 2021Disclosure 3-3 Management of material topics Additional sector recommendations12.20.1 Topic Standard disclosures GRI 205: Anti- corruption 2016Disclosure 205-1 Operations assessed for risks related to corruption 12.20.2 Disclosure 205-2 Communication and training about anti-corruption policies and procedures12.20.3 Disclosure 205-3 Confirmed incidents of corruption and actions taken 12.20.4 Additional sector disclosures 12.20.5 List the organization’s beneficial owners and explain how the organization identifies the beneficial owners of business partners , including joint ventures and suppliers .12.20.6 References and resources GRI 205: Anti-corruption 2016 lists authoritative intergovernmental instruments and additional references relevant to reporting on this topic. The additional authoritative instruments and references used in developing this topic, as well as resources that may be helpful for reporting on anti-corruption by the coal sector are listed in the Bibliography .Describe how potential impacts of corruption or risks of corruption are managed in the organization’s procurement practices and throughout the supply chain.• Describe the approach to contract transparency, including: whether contracts and licenses are made publicly available and, if so, where they are published;- if contracts or licenses are not publicly available, the reason for this and actions taken to make them public in the future.16-• 17 16 This additional sector disclosure is based on Requirement 2.4. Contracts in the EITI Standard 2019 . Definitions for contracts and licenses can be found in the EITI Standard 2019 [278]. 17 This additional sector disclosure is based on Requirement 2.5. Beneficial ownership c., d., and f. in the EITI Standard 2019 [278]. GRI 12: Coal Sector 2022 55",
    "new_id": 945
  },
  {
    "id": 78950,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why the mitigation hierarchy tool is described as prioritizing avoidance over remediation in managing biodiversity impacts, as outlined in GRI 12: Coal Sector 2022?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Because once biodiversity damage occurs, restoration may be incomplete or impossible, making prevention critical.",
      "A": "Because avoidance strategies are less costly and more effective than any form of remediation.",
      "C": "Because remediation efforts often lead to increased habitat fragmentation, exacerbating biodiversity loss.",
      "D": "Because regulatory frameworks universally mandate avoidance as the only acceptable approach.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "23",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 12_ Coal Sector 2022.pdf",
    "source_text": "Topic 12.5 Biodiversity Biodiversity is the variability among living organisms. It includes diversity within species, between species and of ecosystems. Biodiversity not only has intrinsic value, but is also vital to human health, food security, economic prosperity, and mitigation of climate change and adaptation to its impacts. This topic covers impacts on biodiversity, including on plant and animal species, genetic diversity, and natural ecosystems. Coal activities typically require large-scale infrastructure development that has direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts on biodiversity in the short and long term. Biodiversity impacts from coal activities include contamination of air, soil, and water; deforestation; soil erosion; and sedimentation of waterways. Other impacts can include animal mortality or increased vulnerability to predators, habitat fragmentation and conversion, and the introduction of invasive species and pathogens. Impacts on biodiversity can limit the availability, accessibility, or quality of natural resources, which may affect the well- being and livelihoods of local communities and indigenous peoples (see also topics 12.9 Local communities and 12.11 Rights of indigenous peoples ). Impacts can be exacerbated when activities occur in protected areas or areas of high biodiversity value , and may extend well beyond the geographic boundaries of activities and the lifetime of operational sites (see also topic 12.3 Closure and rehabilitation ). Different mining methods present distinct risks for biodiversity. Open-pit mines generate more severe impacts than underground mines due to the progressive deepening and widening of the mining site, increasing affected areas over time. Impacts on biodiversity can result from: The sector’s activities can also contribute to cumulative impacts on biodiversity. For example, when coal activities expand and new access routes are installed, the resulting land clearance not only causes habitat fragmentation and conversion, but can also increase the area’s use or encourage other sectors to establish operations in the same areas, leading to intensified impacts. Changes to land use to accommodate open-pit mining can exacerbate the effects of climate change if they result in the removal of carbon sinks. In turn, climate change is likely to affect all aspects of biodiversity, including individual organisms, populations, species distribution, and the composition and function of ecosystems, and the impacts are anticipated to worsen with increasing temperatures (see also topics 12.1 GHG emissions and 12.2 Climate adaptation, resilience, and transition ). To limit and manage impacts on biodiversity, many coal organizations use the mitigation hierarchy tool to help inform their actions. The tool presents a prioritized sequence of measures for the sustainable management of natural resources, with preventive actions taking precedence over remediation . Priority is given to avoidance and, where avoidance is not possible, to minimization of impacts. Remediation measures are only feasible after the adoption of all preventative steps. Remediation includes the rehabilitation or restoration of degradation or damage, and offsetting residual impacts after all other measures have been applied [ 121].land clearance for pits, access routes, and expansion into new areas;• habitat fragmentation from access roads and other linear infrastructure;• ground subsidence from underground mines;• disruption of surface water , wetland, and groundwater ecosystems; and • effluent discharges, groundwater, or surface water contamination from acid mine drainage, tailings ponds, or overburden piles (see also topics 12.6 Waste and 12.7 Water and effluents ).• GRI 12: Coal Sector 2022 23",
    "new_id": 946
  },
  {
    "id": 78951,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why beneficial ownership transparency is considered crucial in the coal sector, according to GRI 12: Coal Sector 2022?",
    "options": {
      "C": "It helps deter conflicts of interest, corruption, tax avoidance, and evasion by clarifying who benefits from financial transactions.",
      "A": "It ensures that all financial transactions are publicly disclosed, eliminating the need for audits.",
      "B": "It primarily serves to simplify tax reporting processes for governments and organizations.",
      "D": "It guarantees equal profit-sharing between local communities and coal organizations.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "54-55",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 12_ Coal Sector 2022.pdf",
    "source_text": "Box 3. Transparency about contracts and ownership structures Publication of government contracts is a growing practice. It is endorsed by organizations such as the United Nations (UN), International Monetary Fund (IMF), International Finance Corporation (IFC), the International Bar Association (IBA), and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Contracts governing the extraction of coal resources are commonly devised by organizations in the sector and governments on behalf of citizens or local communities without public oversight. Fair terms for sharing risks and rewarding benefits, including those related to a just transition, are particularly relevant because of the long-term time horizons and widespread impacts of projects. Contract transparency helps local communities hold governments and organizations accountable for their negotiated terms and obligations. It also reduces information asymmetries between governments and coal organizations and helps level the playing field in negotiations. Lack of transparency about ownership structures can make it difficult to determine who benefits from financial transactions. Beneficial ownership transparency has been identified as a significant opportunity to deter conflicts of interest , corruption, tax avoidance, and evasion. See references [ 268] and [ 276] in the Bibliography. GRI 12: Coal Sector 2022 54\n\n[Page 55]\nReporting on anti-corruption If the organization has determined anti-corruption to be a material topic , this sub-section lists the disclosures identified as relevant for reporting on the topic by the coal sector. STANDARD DISCLOSURE SECTOR STANDARD REF. NO. Management of the topic GRI 3: Material Topics 2021Disclosure 3-3 Management of material topics Additional sector recommendations12.20.1 Topic Standard disclosures GRI 205: Anti- corruption 2016Disclosure 205-1 Operations assessed for risks related to corruption 12.20.2 Disclosure 205-2 Communication and training about anti-corruption policies and procedures12.20.3 Disclosure 205-3 Confirmed incidents of corruption and actions taken 12.20.4 Additional sector disclosures 12.20.5 List the organization’s beneficial owners and explain how the organization identifies the beneficial owners of business partners , including joint ventures and suppliers .12.20.6 References and resources GRI 205: Anti-corruption 2016 lists authoritative intergovernmental instruments and additional references relevant to reporting on this topic. The additional authoritative instruments and references used in developing this topic, as well as resources that may be helpful for reporting on anti-corruption by the coal sector are listed in the Bibliography .Describe how potential impacts of corruption or risks of corruption are managed in the organization’s procurement practices and throughout the supply chain.• Describe the approach to contract transparency, including: whether contracts and licenses are made publicly available and, if so, where they are published;- if contracts or licenses are not publicly available, the reason for this and actions taken to make them public in the future.16-• 17 16 This additional sector disclosure is based on Requirement 2.4. Contracts in the EITI Standard 2019 . Definitions for contracts and licenses can be found in the EITI Standard 2019 [278]. 17 This additional sector disclosure is based on Requirement 2.5. Beneficial ownership c., d., and f. in the EITI Standard 2019 [278]. GRI 12: Coal Sector 2022 55",
    "new_id": 947
  },
  {
    "id": 78953,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why discriminatory practices in the coal sector may disproportionately affect women despite the absence of explicit gender-based policies, as discussed in GRI 12: Coal Sector 2022?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Structural barriers, such as long work hours and limited childcare facilities, intersect with social biases to hinder women’s participation.",
      "A": "Women are less likely to seek employment in hazardous or arduous occupations due to personal preferences.",
      "B": "The sector's reliance on contract workers inherently favors male-dominated recruitment systems.",
      "C": "Discrimination against women is primarily driven by their underrepresentation in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics fields.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "50-51",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 12_ Coal Sector 2022.pdf",
    "source_text": "Reporting on freedom of association and collective bargaining If the organization has determined freedom of association and collective bargaining to be a material topic , this sub- section lists the disclosures identified as relevant for reporting on the topic by the coal sector. STANDARD DISCLOSURE SECTOR STANDARD REF. NO. Management of the topic GRI 3: Material Topics 2021Disclosure 3-3 Management of material topics 12.18.1 Topic Standard disclosures GRI 407: Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining 2016Disclosure 407-1 Operations and suppliers in which the right to freedom of association and collective bargaining may be at risk12.18.2 References and resources GRI 407: Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining 2016 lists authoritative intergovernmental instruments relevant to reporting on this topic. The additional authoritative instruments and references used in developing this topic, as well as resources that may be helpful for reporting on freedom of association and collective bargaining by the coal sector are listed in the Bibliography . GRI 12: Coal Sector 2022 50\n\n[Page 51]\nTopic 12.19 Non-discrimination and equal opportunity Freedom from discrimination is a human right and a fundamental right at work. Discrimination can impose unequal burdens on individuals or deny fair opportunities on the basis of individual merit. This topic covers impacts from discrimination and practices related to diversity, inclusion, and equal opportunity. The conditions, locations, necessary skills, and types of work associated with the coal sector can be a barrier for entry, hinder employee diversity, and result in discrimination . Discriminatory practices can impede access to jobs and career development, as well as lead to inequalities in treatment, remuneration , and benefits . Documented cases of discrimination in the coal sector concern race, color, sex, gender, religion, national extraction, and worker status. For example, jobseekers from local communities may be excluded from the hiring process because of a recruitment system bias that favors a dominant ethnic group or utilizes migrant workers. Local workers may receive significantly lower pay for equal work than expatriate employees. The sector’s widespread use of contract workers, often with differing terms of employment and lower remuneration and benefits compared to employees, can also be conducive to discrimination (see also topic 12.15 Employment practices ). The coal sector is characterized by a significant gender imbalance. In many countries, the percentage of women working in this sector is significantly lower than the percentage of women working overall nationwide. Women are also significantly underrepresented in senior management positions. One cause of this imbalance may be that fewer women graduate with degrees pertinent to the sector, such as in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Other barriers for women and primary caregivers include fly-in fly-out work arrangements, long hours, and limited parental leave arrangements and childcare facilities at mining sites. Social or cultural customs, beliefs, and biases can also limit women’s access to jobs in this sector or prevent them from taking on specific roles. In addition, some resource-rich countries have laws that prevent women from working in hazardous or arduous occupations. The coal sector has also been linked to domestic and gender-based violence, both at operational sites and within local communities adjacent to the organization’s operations. Male-dominated cultures, imbalanced gender distribution, and gendered organizational norms have been identified as contributing to the likelihood of sexual harassment (see also topic 12.14 Occupational health and safety ). Understanding how specific groups may be subject to discrimination across different locations where coal organizations operate can help organizations in effectively address discriminatory practices. Other measures, such as providing specific training to workers on preventing discrimination can help address impacts related to discrimination and create a respectful workplace. GRI 12: Coal Sector 2022 51",
    "new_id": 948
  },
  {
    "id": 78954,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why coal organizations might fail to detect forced labor and modern slavery within their supply chains, according to GRI 12: Coal Sector 2022?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The complexity and size of supply chains making due diligence challenging.",
      "B": "The absence of international human rights legislation applicable to the coal sector.",
      "C": "The voluntary nature of reporting requirements for social criteria in supplier assessments.",
      "D": "The reliance on state-owned enterprises that prioritize economic goals over human rights.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "46-47",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 12_ Coal Sector 2022.pdf",
    "source_text": "Reporting on child labor If the organization has determined child labor to be a material topic , this sub-section lists the disclosures identified as relevant for reporting on the topic by the coal sector. STANDARD DISCLOSURE SECTOR STANDARD REF. NO. Management of the topic GRI 3: Material Topics 2021Disclosure 3-3 Management of material topics 12.16.1 Topic Standard disclosures GRI 408: Child labor 2016Disclosure 408-1 Operations and suppliers at significant risk for incidents of child labor12.16.2 GRI 414: Supplier Social Assessment 2016Disclosure 414-1 New suppliers that were screened using social criteria 12.16.3 References and resources GRI 408: Child labor 2016 and GRI 414: Supplier Social Assessment 2016 list authoritative intergovernmental instruments and additional references relevant to reporting on this topic. The additional authoritative instruments and references used in developing this topic, as well as resources that may be helpful for reporting on child labor by the coal sector are listed in the Bibliography . GRI 12: Coal Sector 2022 46\n\n[Page 47]\nTopic 12.17 Forced labor and modern slavery Forced labor is defined as all work or service which is exacted from any person under the menace of penalty and for which a person has not offered themselves voluntarily. Freedom from forced labor is a human right and a fundamental right at work. This topic covers an organization’s approach to identifying and addressing forced labor and modern slavery. Coal is a product at risk of being mined using forced labor or modern slavery in several countries [ 252] [259]. Additionally, coal organizations may be involved with human rights violations and other instances of exploitation via interaction with suppliers , which may include those operating in countries with low rates of enforcement of human rights . Coal organizations may also be involved with incidences of forced labor and modern slavery as a result of their joint ventures and other business relationships , including those with state-owned enterprises in countries where international human rights violations are documented. Conducting due diligence within the large and complex supply chains common in the sector may also pose difficulties for detecting and addressing incidents of forced labor and modern slavery. There are documented cases of human rights violations throughout the supply chain concerning activities such as coal shipping and construction. Migrant workers can face higher risks of modern slavery when dealing with third-party employment agencies, such as those found to overcharge workers for visas and flights or demand recruitment costs be paid by workers rather than employers. As part of a global effort, several governments have issued legislation requiring public reporting on addressing traditional and emerging forced labor practices, including modern slavery. Such legislation applies to many organizations in the coal sector. GRI 12: Coal Sector 2022 47",
    "new_id": 949
  },
  {
    "id": 78955,
    "question": "Which of the following best reflects a logical consequence or synthesis of the relationship between 'work-related incidents' and 'hazards', as described in GRI 12: Coal Sector 2022?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Hazards represent potential sources of harm, while work-related incidents encompass occurrences that may or may not result in injury or ill health, indicating they are distinct yet interconnected concepts.",
      "A": "All work-related incidents are preventable if hazards are completely eliminated from the workplace environment.",
      "C": "Work-related incidents include both actual injuries and near-misses, with hazards being the sole cause of such incidents.",
      "D": "Near-misses are less significant than actual injuries because they do not directly contribute to ill health or physical harm.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "71",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 12_ Coal Sector 2022.pdf",
    "source_text": "Note: In the GRI Standards, in some cases, it is specified whether a particular subset of workers is required to be used. work-related hazard source or situation with the potential to cause injury or ill health Source: International Labour Organization (ILO) Guidelines on Occupational Safety and Health Management Systems, 2001; modified International Organization for Standardization. ISO 45001:2018. Occupational health and safety management systems — Requirements with guidance for use. Geneva: ISO, 2018; modified Definitions that are based on or come from the ISO 14046:2014 and ISO 45001:2018 standards are reproduced with the permission of the International Organization for Standardization, ISO. Copyright remains with ISO. Note: Hazards can be: work-related incident occurrence arising out of or in the course of work that could or does result in injury or ill health Source: International Organization for Standardization. ISO 45001:2018. Occupational health and safety management systems — Requirements with guidance for use. Geneva: ISO, 2018; modified Definitions that are based on or come from the ISO 14046:2014 and ISO 45001:2018 standards are reproduced with the permission of the International Organization for Standardization, ISO. Copyright remains with ISO. Note 1: Incidents might be due to, for example, electrical problems, explosion, fire; overflow, overturning, leakage, flow; breakage, bursting, splitting; loss of control, slipping, stumbling and falling; body movement without stress; body movement under/with stress; shock, fright; workplace violence or harassment (e.g., sexual harassment). Note 2: An incident that results in injury or ill health is often referred to as an ‘accident’. An incident that has the potential to result in injury or ill health but where none occurs is often referred to as a ‘ close call', ‘near-miss’, or ‘near-hit’. work-related injury or ill health negative impacts on health arising from exposure to hazards at work Source: International Labour Organization (ILO), Guidelines on Occupational Safety and Health Management Systems, ILO-OSH 2001 , 2001; modified Note 1: ‘Ill health’ indicates damage to health and includes diseases, illnesses, and disorders. The terms ‘disease’, ‘illness’, and ‘disorder’ are often used interchangeably and refer to conditions with specific symptoms and diagnoses. physical (e.g., radiation, temperature extremes, constant loud noise, spills on floors or tripping hazards, unguarded machinery, faulty electrical equipment);• ergonomic (e.g., improperly adjusted workstations and chairs, awkward movements, vibration);• chemical (e.g., exposure to solvents, carbon monoxide, flammable materials, or pesticides);• biological (e.g., exposure to blood and bodily fluids, fungi, bacteria, viruses, or insect bites);• psychosocial (e.g., verbal abuse, harassment, bullying);• related to work-organization (e.g., excessive workload demands, shift work, long hours, night work, workplace violence).• GRI 12: Coal Sector 2022 71",
    "new_id": 950
  },
  {
    "id": 78957,
    "question": "Which of the following conclusions about the coal sector's GHG emissions reporting requirements can be inferred as necessary based on the interplay between direct (Scope 1) and indirect (Scope 2 and Scope 3) disclosures, as described in GRI 12: Coal Sector 2022?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The coal sector must separately report stationary combustion, process, and fugitive emissions under Scope 1, alongside intensities for Scopes 1, 2, and 3.",
      "A": "The coal sector must report Scope 1 emissions intensity but is not required to differentiate these by source type.",
      "B": "Reporting gross direct (Scope 1) CH4 emissions as a percentage is optional if fugitive emissions data is unavailable.",
      "D": "The coal sector only needs to disclose energy consumption within the organization to meet all mandatory GHG reporting criteria.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "14",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 12_ Coal Sector 2022.pdf",
    "source_text": "Reporting on GHG emissions If the organization has determined GHG emissions to be a material topic , this sub-section lists the disclosures identified as relevant for reporting on the topic by the coal sector. STANDARD DISCLOSURE SECTOR STANDARD REF. NO. Management of the topic GRI 3: Material Topics 2021Disclosure 3-3 Management of material topics 12.1.1 Topic Standard disclosures GRI 302: Energy 2016Disclosure 302-1 Energy consumption within the organization 12.1.2 Disclosure 302-2 Energy consumption outside of the organization 12.1.3 Disclosure 302-3 Energy intensity 12.1.4 GRI 305: Emissions 2016 Disclosure 305-1 Direct (Scope 1) GHG emissions Additional sector recommendations 12.1.5 Disclosure 305-2 Energy indirect (Scope 2) GHG emissions 12.1.6 Disclosure 305-3 Other indirect (Scope 3) GHG emissions 12.1.7 Disclosure 305-4 GHG emissions intensity 12.1.8 References and resources GRI 302: Energy 2016 and GRI 305: Emissions 2016 list authoritative intergovernmental instruments and additional references relevant to reporting on this topic. The additional authoritative instruments and references used in developing this topic, as well as resources that may be helpful for reporting on GHG emissions by the coal sector are listed in the Bibliography .Report the percentage of gross direct (Scope 1) GHG emissions from CH4. • Report the breakdown of gross direct (Scope 1) GHG emissions by type of source (stationary combustion, process, fugitive). 3• 3This additional sector recommendation is based on clause 2.2.5.3 in GRI 305: Emissions 2016 . GRI 12: Coal Sector 2022 14",
    "new_id": 951
  },
  {
    "id": 78958,
    "question": "Which scenario best exemplifies a situation where due diligence fails to address an organization's actual or potential negative impacts, as described in GRI 12: Coal Sector 2022?",
    "options": {
      "D": "An organization identifies and mitigates all its greenhouse gas emissions but neglects to assess the discriminatory practices in its hiring process.",
      "A": "An organization actively prevents corruption by banning facilitation payments but ignores the disposal of hazardous waste in a manner inconsistent with environmental guidelines.",
      "B": "An organization implements a plan to minimize social impacts while simultaneously enhancing economic opportunities for the affected community without exception.",
      "C": "An organization eliminates effluent discharge into water bodies but inadvertently increases air pollution through untreated emissions from its operations.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "63",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 12_ Coal Sector 2022.pdf",
    "source_text": "plan that details actions to minimize, mitigate, or compensate for adverse social and/or economic impacts , and/or to identify opportunities or actions to enhance positive impacts of a project on the community conflict of interest situation where an individual is confronted with choosing between the requirements of their function in the organization and their other personal or professional interests or responsibilities corruption ‘abuse of entrusted power for private gain’, which can be instigated by individuals or organizations Source: Transparency International, Business Principles for Countering Bribery , 2011 Note: Corruption includes practices such as bribery, facilitation payments, fraud, extortion, collusion, and money laundering. It also includes an offer or receipt of any gift, loan, fee, reward, or other advantage to or from any person as an inducement to do something that is dishonest, illegal, or a breach of trust in the conduct of the enterprise’s business. This can include cash or in-kind benefits, such as free goods, gifts, and holidays, or special personal services provided for the purpose of an improper advantage, or that can result in moral pressure to receive such an advantage. direct (Scope 1) GHG emissions greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from sources that are owned or controlled by the organization Examples: CO2 emissions from fuel consumption Note: A GHG source is any physical unit or process that releases GHG into the atmosphere. discrimination act and result of treating persons unequally by imposing unequal burdens or denying benefits instead of treating each person fairly on the basis of individual merit Note: Discrimination can also include harassment, defined as a course of comments or actions that are unwelcome, or should reasonably be known to be unwelcome, to the person towards whom they are addressed. disposal any operation which is not recovery , even where the operation has as a secondary consequence the recovery of energy Source: European Union (EU), Waste Framework Directive , 2008 (Directive 2008/98/EC) Note: Disposal is the end-of-life management of discarded products, materials, and resources in a sink or through a chemical or thermal transformation that makes these products, materials, and resources unavailable for further use. due diligence process to identify, prevent, mitigate , and account for how the organization addresses its actual and potential negative impacts Source: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises , 2011; modified United Nations (UN), Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework , 2011; modified Note: See section 2.3 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 for more information on ‘due diligence’. effluent treated or untreated wastewater that is discharged GRI 12: Coal Sector 2022 63",
    "new_id": 952
  },
  {
    "id": 78976,
    "question": "Which statement accurately captures the relationship between emissions management strategies and capital expenditure decisions, as implied in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 7: Coal Operations?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Capital expenditure strategies are influenced by both coal demand fluctuations and embedded carbon dioxide estimates, but not necessarily tied to specific emissions reduction targets.",
      "B": "Entities prioritize emissions reduction targets over reserves valuation because carbon pricing directly impacts operational costs rather than asset value.",
      "C": "The discussion of capital expenditure strategy explicitly integrates emissions management plans to ensure alignment with long-term climate regulation compliance.",
      "D": "Emissions management strategies are independent of capital expenditure considerations, as the latter focuses solely on coal price projections without accounting for regulatory risks.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "4",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol7.pdf",
    "source_text": "Volume 7 —Coal Operations Industry Description The Coal Operations industry includes entities that mine coal and those that manufacture coal products. Mining activity covers both underground and surface mining, and thermal and metallurgical coal. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Greenhouse Gas EmissionsGross global Scope 1 emissions, percentage covered under emissions- limiting regulationsQuantitative Metric tons (t) CO₂-e, Percentage (%)EM-CO-110a.1 Discussion of long- and short-term strategy or plan to manage Scope 1 emissions, emissions reduction targets, and an analysis of performance against those targetsDiscussion and Analysisn/a EM-CO-110a.2 Water Management(1) Total water withdrawn, (2) total water consumed; percentage of each in regions with High or Extremely High Baseline Water StressQuantitative Thousand cubic metres (m³), Percentage (%)EM-CO-140a.1 Number of incidents of non-compliance associated with water quality permits, standards and regulationsQuantitative Number EM-CO-140a.2 Reserves Valuation & Capital ExpendituresSensitivity of coal reserve levels to future price projection scenarios that account for a price on carbon emissionsQuantitative Million metric tons (Mt)EM-CO-420a.1 Estimated carbon dioxide emissions embedded in proven coal reservesQuantitative Metric tons (t) CO₂-eEM-CO-420a.2 Discussion of how price and demand for coal or climate regulation influence the capital expenditure strategy for exploration, acquisition and development of assetsDiscussion and Analysisn/a EM-CO-420a.3 Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Production of thermal coalQuantitative Million metric tons (Mt)EM-CO-000.A Production of metallurgical coalQuantitative Million metric tons (Mt)EM-CO-000.BIFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 3",
    "new_id": 953
  },
  {
    "id": 79074,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between 'energy reduction' and 'baseline', as described in GRI 302: Energy 2016?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Energy reduction is calculated based on a comparison with the baseline, which represents projected energy consumption without any conservation efforts.",
      "A": "The baseline refers to historical data, while energy reduction measures overall decreases in production capacity.",
      "C": "Energy reduction includes reductions due to outsourcing organizational activities, aligning with the definition of the baseline.",
      "D": "The baseline is irrelevant to energy reduction since it only accounts for renewable energy sources.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "15-16",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 302_ Energy 2016.pdf",
    "source_text": "Disclosure 302-5 Reductions in energy requirements of products and services The reporting organization shall report the following information:REQUIREMENTS Reductions in energy requirements of sold products and services achieved during the reporting period, in joules or multiples.a. Basis for calculating reductions in energy consumption, such as base year or baseline , including the rationale for choosing it.b. Standards, methodologies, assumptions, and/or calculation tools used. c. RECOMMENDATIONSWhen compiling the information specified in Disclosure 302-5, the reporting organization should:2.9 if subject to different standards and methodologies, describe the approach to selecting them;2.9.1 refer to industry use standards to obtain this information, where available (such as fuel consumption of cars for 100 km at 90 km/h).2.9.2 Guidance for Disclosure 302-5 Use-oriented figures can include, for example, the energy requirements of a car or a computer. Consumption patterns can include, for example, 10 percent less energy use per 100 km travelled or per time unit (hour, average working day).GUIDANCE GRI 302: Energy 2016 15\n\n[Page 16]\nGlossary This glossary provides definitions for terms used in this Standard. The organization is required to apply these definitions when using the GRI Standards. The definitions included in this glossary may contain terms that are further defined in the complete GRI Standards Glossary . All defined terms are underlined. If a term is not defined in this glossary or in the complete GRI Standards Glossary , definitions that are commonly used and understood apply. base year historical datum (such as year) against which a measurement is tracked over time baseline starting point used for comparisons Note: In the context of energy and emissions reporting, the baseline is the projected energy consumption or emissions in the absence of any reduction activity. conservation and efficiency initiative organizational or technological modification that allows a defined process or task to be carried out using less energy Examples: conversion and retrofitting of equipment such as energy-efficient lighting, elimination of unnecessary energy use due to changes in behavior, process redesign energy reduction amount of energy no longer used or needed to carry out the same processes or tasks Note: Energy reduction does not include overall reduction in energy consumption from reducing production capacity or outsourcing organizational activities. human rights rights inherent to all human beings, which include, at a minimum, the rights set out in the United Nations (UN) International Bill of Human Rights and the principles concerning fundamental rights set out in the International Labour Organization (ILO) Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work Source: United Nations (UN), Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework , 2011; modified Note: See Guidance to 2-23-b-i in GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 for more information on ‘human rights’. impact effect the organization has or could have on the economy, environment, and people, including on their human rights , which in turn can indicate its contribution (negative or positive) to sustainable development Note 1: Impacts can be actual or potential, negative or positive, short-term or long-term, intended or unintended, and reversible or irreversible. Note 2: See section 2.1 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 for more information on ‘impact’. material topics topics that represent the organization’s most significant impacts on the economy, environment, and people, including impacts on their human rights Note: See section 2.2 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 and section 1 in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 for more information on ‘material topics’. non-renewable energy source energy source that cannot be replenished, reproduced, grown or generated in a short time GRI 302: Energy 2016 16",
    "new_id": 954
  },
  {
    "id": 79086,
    "question": "Which scenario best illustrates a violation of the reporting requirements outlined for materials usage, according to GRI 301: Materials 2016?",
    "options": {
      "C": "An organization reports the total weight of raw materials used, distinguishing between renewable and non-renewable sources, but omits whether the data were estimated or measured directly.",
      "A": "An organization provides the total volume of semi-manufactured goods used in production, specifying that these were sourced internally, while also detailing the estimation methods applied.",
      "B": "An organization includes both process materials and packaging materials in its total usage report, stating that all data were derived from direct measurements without further manipulation.",
      "D": "An organization excludes associated process materials from its calculations because these do not form part of the final product, despite their critical role in manufacturing.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "7-8",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 301_ Materials 2016.pdf",
    "source_text": "1. Topic management disclosures An organization reporting in accordance with the GRI Standards is required to report how it manages each of its material topics . An organization that has determined materials to be a material topic is required to report how it manages the topic using Disclosure 3-3 in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 (see clause 1.1 in this section). This section is therefore designed to supplement – and not replace – Disclosure 3-3 in GRI 3 . REQUIREMENTSThe reporting organization shall report how it manages materials using Disclosure 3- 3 in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 . 1.1 GRI 301: Materials 2016 7\n\n[Page 8]\n2. Topic disclosures Disclosure 301-1 Materials used by weight or volume The reporting organization shall report the following information: REQUIREMENTS Total weight or volume of materials that are used to produce and package the organization’s primary products and services during the reporting period, by: non-renewable materials used; i. renewable materials used. ii.a. RECOMMENDATIONSWhen compiling the information specified in Disclosure 301-1, the reporting organization should:2.1 include the following material types in the calculation of total materials used: 2.1.1 raw materials, i.e., natural resources used for conversion to products or services, such as ores, minerals, and wood;2.1.1.1 associated process materials, i.e., materials that are needed for the manufacturing process but are not part of the final product, such as lubricants for manufacturing machinery;2.1.1.2 semi-manufactured goods or parts, including all forms of materials and components other than raw materials that are part of the final product;2.1.1.3 materials for packaging purposes, including paper, cardboard and plastics;2.1.1.4 report, for each material type, whether it was purchased from external suppliers or sourced internally (such as by captive production and extraction activities);2.1.2 report whether these data are estimated or sourced from direct measurements; 2.1.3 if estimation is required, report the methods used. 2.1.4 Guidance for Disclosure 301-1 The reported usage data are to reflect the material in its original state, and not to be presented with further data manipulation, such as reporting it as ‘dry weight’.GUIDANCE GRI 301: Materials 2016 8",
    "new_id": 955
  },
  {
    "id": 79153,
    "question": "When prioritizing impacts for reporting, why might an organization focus on highly severe negative human rights impacts even if they are less likely to occur, as outlined in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Because focusing on less severe but more frequent impacts could lead to underreporting of critical risks.",
      "A": "Because the severity of human rights impacts is always considered absolute and unaffected by likelihood.",
      "B": "Because the text explicitly states that human rights impacts should be evaluated independently of other types of impacts.",
      "C": "Because addressing high-severity human rights impacts aligns with global standards regardless of their probability.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "13",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 3_ Material Topics 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "The severity – and therefore the significance – of an impact are not absolute concepts. The severity of an impact should be assessed in relation to the other impacts of the organization. For example, an organization should compare the severity of the impacts of its GHG emissions against the severity of its other impacts. The organization should not assess the significance of its GHG emissions in relation to global GHG emissions, as that comparison could lead to the misleading conclusion that the organization’s emissions are not significant. See references [2], [3], [4] and [5] in the Bibliography . Likelihood The likelihood of a potential negative impact refers to the chance of the impact happening. The likelihood of an impact can be measured or determined qualitatively or quantitatively. It can be described using general terms (e.g., very likely, likely) or mathematically using probability (e.g., 10 in 100, 10%) or frequency over a given time period (e.g., once every three years). Human rights In the case of potential negative human rights impacts, the severity of the impact takes precedence over its likelihood. For example, an organization operating a nuclear power facility may prioritize the potential impact related to loss of life in cases of natural disasters affecting the power facility, even though natural disasters are less likely to occur than other incidents. The severity of a negative human rights impact is not limited to physical harm. Highly severe impacts can occur in relation to any human right. For example, interfering with, damaging, or destroying a sacred space without consultation or agreement with the people for whom the space has spiritual importance can have a highly severe impact on their cultural rights. When prioritizing other types of impacts, such as potential negative environmental impacts, the organization may also choose to prioritize highly severe negative impacts even though they may be less likely to occur. Assessing the significance of positive impacts The significance of an actual positive impact is determined by the scale and scope of the impact. The significance of a potential positive impact is determined by the scale and scope as well as the likelihood of the impact. Scale and scope In the case of positive impacts, the scale of an impact refers to how beneficial the impact is or could be, and the scope refers to how widespread the impact is or could be (e.g., the number of individuals or the extent of environmental resources that are or could be positively affected). Likelihood The likelihood of a potential positive impact refers to the chance of the impact happening. The likelihood of an impact can be measured or determined qualitatively or quantitatively. It can be described using general terms (e.g., very likely, likely) or mathematically using probability (e.g., 10 in 100, 10%) or frequency over a given time period (e.g., once every three years). Step 4. Prioritize the most significant impacts for reporting In this step, to determine its material topics for reporting, the organization prioritizes its impacts based on their significance. Setting a threshold to determine which topics are material The significance of an impact is assessed in relation to the other impacts the organization has identified. The organization should arrange its impacts from most to least significant and define a cut-off point or threshold to determine which of the impacts it will focus its reporting on. The organization should document this threshold. To facilitate prioritization, the organization should group the impacts into topics (see Box 4 in this Standard). For example, when setting a threshold, the organization first groups its impacts into a number of topics and ranks them, based on their significance, from highest to lowest priority. The organization then needs to determine how many of the topics it will report on, starting with those that have the highest priority. Where to set the threshold is up to the organization. For transparency, the organization can provide a visual representation of the prioritization that shows the initial list of topics it has identified and the threshold it has set for reporting.1 2 1International Organization for Standardization (ISO), ISO 31000:2018 Risk management – Guidelines , 2018. 2Ibidem . GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 13",
    "new_id": 956
  },
  {
    "id": 79158,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between the organization's ongoing impact assessment process and its sustainability reporting obligations, as described in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021?",
    "options": {
      "A": "While the ongoing impact assessment informs the determination of material topics, it does not independently fulfill the requirement to prioritize significant impacts for reporting purposes.",
      "B": "The ongoing impact assessment is a standalone activity that replaces the need for determining material topics during reporting periods.",
      "C": "The ongoing impact assessment directly determines what must be reported, without requiring additional prioritization or review in each reporting period.",
      "D": "The ongoing impact assessment is conducted exclusively as part of the sustainability reporting process and has no relevance outside of it.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "7",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 3_ Material Topics 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "1. Guidance to determine material topics An organization reporting in accordance with the GRI Standards is required to determine its material topics . When doing this, the organization is also required to use the applicable GRI Sector Standards (see Requirement 3 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 and Box 5 in this Standard). This section describes the four steps that the organization should follow in determining its material topics (see Figure 2). Following the steps in this section helps the organization determine its material topics and report the disclosures in section 2 of this Standard. The steps provide guidance and are not requirements on their own. Figure 2. Process to determine material topics Material topicsTest the material topics with experts and information usersIdentify and assess impacts on an ongoing basis Determine material topics for reporting Assess the significance of the impacts3 Test the material topics against the topics in the Sector StandardsUse the Sector Standards to understand the sectors’ contextConsider the topics and impacts described in the Sector StandardsPrioritize the most significant impacts for reporting4 Identify actual and potential impacts2 Understand the organization’s context1 The first three steps in the process to determine material topics relate to the organization’s ongoing identification and assessment of impacts . During these steps, the organization identifies and assesses its impacts regularly, as part of its day-to-day activities, and while engaging with relevant stakeholders and experts. These ongoing steps allow the organization to actively identify and manage its impacts as they evolve and as new ones arise. The first three steps are conducted independently of the sustainability reporting process, but they inform the last step. In Step 4, the organization prioritizes its most significant impacts for reporting and, in this way, determines its material topics. In each reporting period , the organization should review its material topics from the previous reporting period to account for changes in the impacts. Changes in impacts can result from changes in the organization’s activities and business relationships . This review helps ensure the material topics represent the organization’s most significant impacts in each new reporting period. The organization should document its process of determining material topics. This includes documenting the approach taken, decisions, assumptions, and subjective judgments made, sources analyzed, and evidence gathered. Accurate records help the organization explain its chosen approach and report the disclosures in section 2 of this Standard. The records facilitate analysis and assurance. See the Verifiability principle in GRI 1 for more information. The approach for each step will vary according to the specific circumstances of the organization, such as its business model; sectors; geographic, cultural, and legal operating context; ownership structure; and the nature of its impacts. Given these specific circumstances, the steps should be systematic, documented, replicable, and used consistently in each reporting period. The organization should document any changes in its approach together with the rationale for those changes and their implications. GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 7",
    "new_id": 957
  },
  {
    "id": 79159,
    "question": "Which statement accurately captures the relationship between the GRI Universal Standards and the Sector Standards in determining material topics, as outlined in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Sector Standards inform organizations about likely material topics, which are then refined using the processes outlined in the Universal Standards.",
      "A": "The Sector Standards replace the need for organizations to consult the Universal Standards when identifying their list of material topics.",
      "C": "The Universal Standards provide a framework that is only applicable if no relevant Sector Standards exist for an organization’s industry.",
      "D": "The Universal Standards exclusively determine material topics, while Sector Standards are optional supplementary resources.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "4",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 3_ Material Topics 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Introduction GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 provides step-by-step guidance for organizations on how to determine material topics. It also explains how the Sector Standards are used in this process. Material topics are topics that represent an organization’s most significant impacts on the economy, environment, and people, including impacts on their human rights . GRI 3 also contains disclosures for organizations to report information about their process of determining material topics, their list of material topics, and how they manage each of their material topics. The Standard is structured as follows: The rest of the Introduction section provides an overview of the system of GRI Standards and further information on using this Standard. System of GRI Standards This Standard is part of the GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards (GRI Standards). The GRI Standards enable an organization to report information about its most significant impacts on the economy, environment, and people, including impacts on their human rights , and how it manages these impacts. The GRI Standards are structured as a system of interrelated standards that are organized into three series: GRI Universal Standards, GRI Sector Standards, and GRI Topic Standards (see Figure 1 in this Standard). Universal Standards: GRI 1, GRI 2 and GRI 3 GRI 1: Foundation 2021 specifies the requirements that the organization must comply with to report in accordance with the GRI Standards. The organization begins using the GRI Standards by consulting GRI 1 . GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 contains disclosures that the organization uses to provide information about its reporting practices and other organizational details, such as its activities, governance, and policies. GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 provides guidance on how to determine material topics . It also contains disclosures that the organization uses to report information about its process of determining material topics, its list of material topics, and how it manages each topic. Sector Standards The Sector Standards provide information for organizations about their likely material topics. The organization uses the Sector Standards that apply to its sectors when determining its material topics and when determining what to report for each material topic. Topic Standards The Topic Standards contain disclosures that the organization uses to report information about its impacts in relation to particular topics. The organization uses the Topic Standards according to the list of material topics it has determined using GRI 3 . Section 1 provides step-by-step guidance on how to determine material topics. • Section 2 contains three disclosures, which provide information about the organization’s process of determining material topics, its list of material topics, and how it manages each topic.• The Glossary contains defined terms with a specific meaning when used in the GRI Standards. The terms are underlined in the text of the GRI Standards and linked to the definitions.• The Bibliography lists authoritative intergovernmental instruments and additional references used in developing this Standard, as well as resources that the organization can consult.• GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 4",
    "new_id": 958
  },
  {
    "id": 79160,
    "question": "Which scenario best illustrates an organization being 'directly linked' to a negative impact without causing or contributing to it, based on the conditions described in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021?",
    "options": {
      "C": "An organization discovers that a smelter in its supply chain sources minerals from a mine using child labor but continues operations without taking steps to address the issue.",
      "A": "An organization knowingly sources cobalt from a supplier whose subcontracted mines use child labor, despite having alternative suppliers available.",
      "B": "An organization sets impractical deadlines for its suppliers, indirectly leading to excessive overtime and unsafe working conditions for workers.",
      "D": "An organization withdraws water from a stressed aquifer without replenishing it, directly causing environmental degradation in the surrounding area.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "11",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 3_ Material Topics 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "In some cases, the organization might be unable to identify actual and potential negative impacts across all its activities and business relationships. This could be, for example, because the organization has diverse or multiple global operations or because its value chain comprises many entities. In such cases, the organization may carry out an initial assessment or scoping exercise to identify general areas across its activities and business relationships (e.g., product lines, suppliers located in specific geographic locations) where negative impacts are most likely to be present and significant. Once the organization has conducted the initial assessment or scoping exercise, it can identify and assess actual and potential negative impacts for these general areas. As part of the initial assessment or scoping exercise, the organization should consider impacts commonly associated with its sectors, its products, geographic locations, or with specific organizations (i.e., impacts associated with a specific entity of the organization, or with an entity it has a business relationship with, such as a poor history of conduct in relation to respecting human rights ). It should also consider impacts it has been involved with or knows it is likely to be involved with. In addition to the GRI Sector Standards, the organization can use the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development ( OECD) Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Business Conduct [2] and the OECD sectoral guidance on due diligence [ 13] for information on impacts commonly associated with sectors, products, geographic locations, and specific organizations. It can also use reports from governments, environmental agencies, international organizations, civil society organizations, workers ’ representatives and trade unions, national human rights institutions, media, or other experts. See references [2], [3], [5] and [13] in the Bibliography . Box 3. Causing, contributing, or being directly linked to negative impacts An organization ‘causes’ a negative impact if its activities on their own result in the impact, for example, if the organization pays a bribe to a foreign public official, or if it withdraws water from a water-stressed aquifer without replenishing the water level. An organization ‘contributes to’ a negative impact if its activities lead, facilitate, or incentivize another entity to cause the impact. The organization can also contribute to a negative impact if its activities in combination with the activities of other entities cause the impact. For example, if the organization sets a short lead time for a supplier to deliver a product, despite knowing from experience that this production time is not feasible, this could result in excessive overtime for the supplier’s workers. In such a case, the organization may contribute to negative impacts on the health and safety of these workers. An organization can cause or contribute to a negative impact through its actions as well as by failure to take action (e.g., failure to prevent or mitigate a potential negative impact). Even if an organization does not cause or contribute to a negative impact, its operations, products, or services may be ‘directly linked to’ a negative impact by its business relationships . For example, if the organization uses cobalt in its products that is mined using child labor, the negative impact (i.e., child labor) is directly linked to the organization’s products through the tiers of business relationships in its supply chain (i.e., through the smelter and minerals trader, to the mining enterprise that uses child labor), even though the organization has not caused or contributed to the negative impact itself. ‘Direct linkage’ is not defined by the link between the organization and the other entity, and is therefore not limited to direct contractual relationships, such as ‘direct sourcing’. The way the organization is involved with negative impacts determines how it should address the impacts and whether it has a responsibility to provide for or cooperate in their remediation (see section 2.3 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 ). See references [2] and [5] in the Bibliography . For additional guidance and examples, see the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Business Conduct [2], pages 70-72, and the United Nations’ (UN) The Corporate Responsibility to Respect Human Rights: An Interpretive Guide [15], pages 15-18. Identi",
    "new_id": 959
  },
  {
    "id": 79161,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why a subsidiary controlled by an organization is excluded from being considered a business partner, based on the relationships described in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The definition of business partner explicitly excludes entities that are under the organization’s control, focusing instead on external engagements.",
      "A": "Subsidiaries are only indirectly linked to the organization’s operations, products, or services.",
      "B": "Controlled subsidiaries are not formally engaged with the organization for meeting its business objectives.",
      "C": "Subsidiaries operate independently of the organization’s value chain and therefore cannot be classified as business partners.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "24",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 3_ Material Topics 2021.pdf",
    "source_text": "Glossary This glossary provides definitions for terms used in this Standard. The organization is required to apply these definitions when using the GRI Standards. The definitions included in this glossary may contain terms that are further defined in the complete GRI Standards Glossary . All defined terms are underlined. If a term is not defined in this glossary or in the complete GRI Standards Glossary , definitions that are commonly used and understood apply. business partner entity with which the organization has some form of direct and formal engagement for the purpose of meeting its business objectives Source: Shift and Mazars LLP, UN Guiding Principles Reporting Framework , 2015; modified Examples: affiliates, business-to-business customers, clients, first-tier suppliers , franchisees, joint venture partners, investee companies in which the organization has a shareholding position Note: Business partners do not include subsidiaries and affiliates that the organization controls. business relationships relationships that the organization has with business partners , with entities in its value chain including those beyond the first tier, and with any other entities directly linked to its operations, products, or services Source: United Nations (UN), Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework , 2011; modified Note: Examples of other entities directly linked to the organization’s operations, products, or services are a non-governmental organization with which the organization delivers support to a local community or state security forces that protect the organization’s facilities. child person under the age of 15 years, or under the age of completion of compulsory schooling, whichever is higher Note 1: Exceptions can occur in certain countries where economies and educational facilities are insufficiently developed, and a minimum age of 14 years applies. These countries of exception are specified by the International Labour Organization (ILO) in response to a special application by the country concerned and in consultation with representative organizations of employers and workers. Note 2: The ILO Minimum Age Convention, 1973, (No. 138), refers to both child labor and young workers. due diligence process to identify, prevent, mitigate , and account for how the organization addresses its actual and potential negative impacts Source: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises , 2011; modified United Nations (UN), Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework , 2011; modified Note: See section 2.3 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 for more information on ‘due diligence’. employee individual who is in an employment relationship with the organization according to national law GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 24",
    "new_id": 960
  },
  {
    "id": 79177,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes why the consolidation approach for GHG emissions data is aligned with financial reporting practices, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 13: Oil & Gas – Refining & Marketing?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Because it uses the same organizational boundary principles as financial reporting, particularly under the 'financial control' approach.",
      "B": "Because it ensures that all emissions from every operational segment are reported, regardless of financial control.",
      "C": "Because it adheres strictly to industry-specific guidelines like those from the IAEG and EpE.",
      "D": "Because it mandates the inclusion of indirect emissions alongside direct emissions for comprehensive accounting.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "6",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol13.pdf",
    "source_text": "1.2 Gross emissions are GHGs emitted into the atmosphere before accounting for offsets, credits or other similar mechanisms that have reduced or compensated for emissions. 2 Scope 1 emissions are defined and shall be calculated according to the methodology contained in The Greenhouse Gas Protocol: A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard (GHG Protocol), Revised Edition, March 2004, published by the World Resources Institute and the World Business Council on Sustainable Development (WRI/WBCSD). 2.1 These emissions include direct emissions of GHGs from stationary or mobile sources; these sources include equipment at well sites, production facilities, refineries, chemical plants, terminals, fixed site drilling rigs, office buildings, marine vessels transporting products, tank truck fleets, mobile drilling rigs, and moveable equipment at drilling and production facilities. 2.2 Acceptable calculation methodologies include those that conform to the GHG Protocol as the base reference, but provide additional guidance, such as industry- or region-specific guidance. Examples include: 2.2.1 GHG Reporting Guidance for the Aerospace Industry published by the International Aerospace Environmental Group (IAEG) 2.2.2 Greenhouse Gas Inventory Guidance: Direct Emissions from Stationary Combustion Sources published by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 2.2.3 India GHG Inventory Program 2.2.4 ISO 14064-1 2.2.5 Petroleum Industry Guidelines for reporting GHG emissions , 2nd edition, 2011, published by IPIECA 2.2.6 Protocol for the quantification of greenhouse gas emissions from waste management activities published by Entreprises pour l’Environnement (EpE) 2.3 GHG emission data shall be consolidated according to the approach with which the entity consolidates its financial reporting data, which is generally aligned with the ‘financial control ’ approach defined by the GHG Protocol as well as: 2.3.1 The financial approach detailed in Chapter 3 of the IPIECA/API/OGP Petroleum Industry Guidelines for Reporting Greenhouse Gas Emissions , 2nd Edition, 2011 (hereafter, the ‘IPIECA GHG Guidelines ’) 2.3.2 The approach provided by the Climate Disclosure Standards Board (CDSB) that is described in REQ-07, ‘Organisational boundary, ’ of the CDSB Framework for reporting environmental and social informationIFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 5",
    "new_id": 961
  },
  {
    "id": 79181,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes why business partners are explicitly distinguished from subsidiaries and affiliates in the provided definitions, as outlined in GRI 206: Anti-competitive Behavior 2016?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Because subsidiaries and affiliates that the organization controls are excluded to avoid redundancy in reporting relationships.",
      "A": "Because subsidiaries and affiliates are not considered part of the organization’s direct value chain.",
      "C": "Because business partners engage in anti-competitive behavior more frequently than subsidiaries or affiliates.",
      "D": "Because business partners represent external entities necessary for meeting business objectives, unlike controlled subsidiaries or affiliates.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "9",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 206_ Anti-competitive Behavior 2016.pdf",
    "source_text": "Glossary This glossary provides definitions for terms used in this Standard. The organization is required to apply these definitions when using the GRI Standards. The definitions included in this glossary may contain terms that are further defined in the complete GRI Standards Glossary . All defined terms are underlined. If a term is not defined in this glossary or in the complete GRI Standards Glossary , definitions that are commonly used and understood apply. anti-competitive behavior action of the organization or employees that can result in collusion with potential competitors, with the purpose of limiting the effects of market competition Examples: allocating customers, suppliers , geographic areas, and product lines; coordinating bids; creating market or output restrictions; fixing prices; imposing geographic quotas anti-trust and monopoly practice action of the organization that can result in collusion to erect barriers for entry to the sector , or another collusive action that prevents competition Examples: abuse of market position, anti-competitive mergers, cartels, price-fixing, unfair business practices business partner entity with which the organization has some form of direct and formal engagement for the purpose of meeting its business objectives Source: Shift and Mazars LLP, UN Guiding Principles Reporting Framework , 2015; modified Examples: affiliates, business-to-business customers, clients, first-tier suppliers , franchisees, joint venture partners, investee companies in which the organization has a shareholding position Note: Business partners do not include subsidiaries and affiliates that the organization controls. business relationships relationships that the organization has with business partners , with entities in its value chain including those beyond the first tier, and with any other entities directly linked to its operations, products, or services Source: United Nations (UN), Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework , 2011; modified Note: Examples of other entities directly linked to the organization’s operations, products, or services are a non-governmental organization with which the organization delivers support to a local community or state security forces that protect the organization’s facilities. employee individual who is in an employment relationship with the organization according to national law or practice human rights rights inherent to all human beings, which include, at a minimum, the rights set out in the United Nations (UN) International Bill of Human Rights and the principles concerning fundamental rights set out in the International Labour Organization (ILO) Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work GRI 206: Anti-competitive Behavior 2016 9",
    "new_id": 962
  },
  {
    "id": 79192,
    "question": "Which scenario best illustrates a situation where a product's recyclability status would need to be qualified, according to the Fuel Cells & Industrial Batteries – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "A product's packaging is fully recyclable, with collection infrastructure accessible to all industrial customers but only 40% of consumer communities.",
      "A": "A product is made entirely of materials that are collected and recycled in over 60% of the regions where it is sold.",
      "B": "A product's components can be reused multiple times for their original purpose but require specialized facilities available in fewer than 60% of its markets.",
      "D": "A product contains materials that are both reusable and recyclable, with recycling programs available to exactly 60% of its total customer base.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "16",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Fuel Cells & Industrial Batteries.pdf",
    "source_text": "Product End-of-life Management Topic Summary As the rate of adoption of fuel cells and industrial batteries increases and more products reach their end of life, designing products to facilitate end-of-life management and maximise materials efficiency may become increasingly important. Fuel cells and batteries may contain hazardous substances, which must be properly discarded because they can pose human health or environmental risks. The emergence of several laws regarding the end-of-life phase of batteries recently has increased the importance of the issue, creating potential added costs of managing risks, as well as opportunities, through regulatory incentives. Effective design for disassembly and reuse or recycling will be an important element for increasing recovery rates to reduce the lifecycle impacts of fuel cells and batteries. Furthermore, given the input-price volatility and resource constraints of some raw materials, fuel cell and industrial battery entities that develop take-back and recycling systems and reuse recovered materials in manufacturing may increase their long-term operational efficiency and improve their risk profile. Metrics RR-FC-410b.1. Percentage of products sold that are recyclable or reusable 1The entity shall disclose the percentage of products, by weight, that are reusable or recyclable, where: 1.1 Reusable is defined as a product or packaging conceived and designed to accomplish, within its lifecycle, a specific number of trips, rotations, or uses for the same purpose for which it was conceived, consistent with definitions in ISO 14021 Environmental labels and declarations —Self-declared environmental claims (Type II environmental labelling) . 1.2 Recyclable is defined as a product or packaging that can be diverted from the waste stream through available processes and programmes and can be collected, processed and returned to use in the form of raw materials or products, consistent with definitions in ISO 14021. 2For products or product materials partially made of recyclable or reusable materials, the entity shall classify the portion of the material that is recyclable or reusable based on a calculation (or estimate, if appropriate) of the weight of each portion. 3A product or its components shall be considered recyclable or reusable if one or more of these elements apply: 3.1 A product or package can be collected, separated, or otherwise recovered from the waste stream through an established recycling programme for reuse or use in manufacturing or for assembling another item. 3.2 When recycling facilities are available to a substantial majority (60%) of consumers, communities where the item is sold, or commercial and industrial customers through established collection infrastructure (public or private), the entity may consider the product (or product component) recyclable without a qualification. 3.3 When recycling facilities are available to less than a substantial majority of customers or communities where the product is sold, the entity shall only consider the product (or product components) recyclable if it makes the appropriate qualification to its customers. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |FUEL CELLS & INDUSTRIAL BATTERIES |16",
    "new_id": 963
  },
  {
    "id": 79196,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between regulatory requirements and entity policies regarding workforce BLL (blood lead level) thresholds, as implied by the Fuel Cells & Industrial Batteries – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "An entity's policies may exceed regulatory requirements, and these policies must adapt to evolving regulations and apply uniformly unless location-specific rules exist.",
      "A": "Entity policies are exclusively designed to align with the least stringent regulatory requirements across all locations.",
      "B": "Entities must adopt policies that differ across locations only when local regulations are stricter than OSHA standards.",
      "C": "Regulatory agencies like OSHA mandate that entities implement policies more stringent than their guidelines to ensure compliance.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "12-13",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Fuel Cells & Industrial Batteries.pdf",
    "source_text": "6The scope of the workforce shall include employees and contract employees in manufacturing or recycling plants but may discuss other members of the workforce, as relevant. 7The entity may discuss entity policies regarding maximum workforce BLL thresholds and testing frequencies, including these aspects: 7.1 How the entity ensures compliance with maximum workforce BLL thresholds and testing frequencies as established by regulatory agencies and governmental or nongovernmental organisations, such as OSHA and the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH). 7.2 Whether any elements of entity policies are more stringent than regulatory requirements. 7.3 Whether policies differ across locations with varying regulatory requirements. 7.4 How policies are responsive to evolving regulatory requirements. 8The entity may discuss performance in adhering to maximum workforce BLL thresholds and testing frequencies as established by entity policies or applicable regulations, including any legal or regulatory fines or settlements and instances of non-compliance. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |FUEL CELLS & INDUSTRIAL BATTERIES |12\n\n[Page 13]\nProduct Efficiency Topic Summary Both customer demand and regulatory requirements are driving innovation in energy-efficient products with lower environmental impacts and lower total cost of ownership. Therefore, research and development in the Fuel Cells & Industrial Batteries industry that drive energy and thermal efficiency and enhance storage capacities may lower barriers to adoption. Advances in battery technology to increase storage capabilities and improve charging efficiencies, while reducing costs for customers, are critical for the integration of renewable energy technologies into the grid. Pressured by stricter environmental regulations, high energy costs and customer preferences, fuel cell and industrial battery manufacturers that improve efficiency in the use phase may increase revenue and market share. Metrics RR-FC-410a.1. Average storage capacity of batteries, by product application and technology type 1The entity shall disclose the average storage capacity of batteries by product application and technology type, weighted by unit sales volume per product application and technology type. 1.1 Storage capacity shall be measured as the specific energy, or gravimetric energy density, of batteries, and is calculated as the ratio of nominal energy in watt-hours to the mass of the product in kilogrammes: watt- hours / kilogrammes (Wh/kg). 2The entity shall measure and disclose performance in accordance with the applicable product application or technology type standard(s), and it shall disclose the standard(s) used for performance measurement. 2.1 Applicable standard(s) include SAE J240 —Automotive storage batteries and SAE J2185 —Heavy-duty storage batteries. 3The entity shall disclose performance by these application types, if applicable: portable, motive, stationary and ‘all other’, each further categorised by these technology types, if applicable: lead-based, nickel-based, lithium-based, sodium-based and all other types. 3.1 The entity may include additional categories of application types or technology types if appropriate, including categories for new products with low sales volumes, but strategic importance in terms of product efficiency or other attributes. RR-FC-410a.2. Average energy efficiency of fuel cells as (1) electrical efficiency and (2) thermal efficiency, by product application and technology type 1The entity shall disclose the average energy efficiency of fuel cells as (1) electrical efficiency and (2) thermal efficiency, weighted by unit sales volume per product application and technology type. 1.1 Electrical efficiency is calculated as net electricity produced divided by total fuel energy input. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |FUEL CELLS & INDUSTRIAL BATTERIES |13",
    "new_id": 964
  },
  {
    "id": 79197,
    "question": "Which of the following would most effectively challenge the assumption that all quantitative metrics in the document are directly comparable across fuel cells and industrial batteries, according to the Fuel Cells & Industrial Batteries – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Both fuel cells and batteries report average operating lifetime, but one uses hours (h) while the other uses number of cycles.",
      "B": "The document specifies different units of measure for product efficiency, such as specific energy (Wh/kg) for batteries and thermal efficiency (%) for fuel cells.",
      "C": "Energy management metrics include gigajoules (GJ) and percentages (%), which apply uniformly to both fuel cells and batteries.",
      "D": "Descriptions of efforts to manage hazardous materials are categorized under discussion and analysis rather than quantitative metrics.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "6-7",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Fuel Cells & Industrial Batteries.pdf",
    "source_text": "SUSTAINABILITY DISCLOSURE TOPICS & METRICS Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORYUNIT OF MEASURECODE Energy Management(1) Total energy consumed, (2) percentage grid electricity and (3) percentage renewableQuantitativeGigajoules (GJ), Percentage (%)RR-FC-130a.1 Workforce Health & Safety(1) Total recordable incident rate (TRIR) and (2) fatality rate for (a) direct employees and (b) contract employeesQuantitative Rate RR-FC-320a.1 Description of efforts to assess, monitor, and reduce exposure of workforce to human health hazardsDiscussion and Analysisn/a RR-FC-320a.2 Product EfficiencyAverage storage capacity of batteries, by product application and technology typeQuantitativeSpecific energy (Wh/kg)RR-FC-410a.1 Average energy efficiency of fuel cells as (1) electrical efficiency and (2) thermal efficiency, by product application and technology typeQuantitativePercentage (%)RR-FC-410a.2 Average battery efficiency as coulombic efficiency, by product application and technology typeQuantitativePercentage (%)RR-FC-410a.3 Average operating lifetime of fuel cells, by product application and technology typeQuantitative Hours (h) RR-FC-410a.4 Average operating lifetime of batteries, by product application and technology typeQuantitativeNumber of cyclesRR-FC-410a.5 Product End- of-life ManagementPercentage of products sold that are recyclable or reusableQuantitativePercentage (%) by weightRR-FC-410b.1 (1) Weight of end-of-life material recovered, (2) percentage recycledQuantitativeMetric tonnes (t), Percentage (%)RR-FC-410b.2 Description of approach to manage use, reclamation, and disposal of hazardous materialsDiscussion and Analysisn/a RR-FC-410b.3 Materials SourcingDescription of the management of risks associated with the use of critical materialsDiscussion and Analysisn/a RR-FC-440a.1 Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORYUNIT OF MEASURECODE Number of units sold Quantitative Number RR-FC-000.A continued... SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |FUEL CELLS & INDUSTRIAL BATTERIES |6\n\n[Page 7]\n...continued ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORYUNIT OF MEASURECODE Total storage capacity of batteries sold QuantitativeMegawatt- hours (MWh)RR-FC-000.B Total energy production capacity of fuel cells sold QuantitativeMegawatt- hours (MWh)RR-FC-000.C SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |FUEL CELLS & INDUSTRIAL BATTERIES |7",
    "new_id": 965
  },
  {
    "id": 79306,
    "question": "Which statement accurately captures the relationship between the Industry-based Guidance and the IFRS S2 Climate-related Disclosures, including its implications for application, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 20: Agricultural Products?",
    "options": {
      "B": "The guidance is designed to provide optional suggestions for applying IFRS S2 but introduces no new mandatory obligations or disclosure criteria.",
      "A": "The Industry-based Guidance establishes legally binding requirements derived from SASB Standards that entities must follow to comply with IFRS S2.",
      "C": "IFRS S2 mandates the use of specific metric codes from SASB Standards as part of its compliance framework, enforced through the Industry-based Guidance.",
      "D": "The Industry-based Guidance supersedes IFRS S2 in cases where there are discrepancies between recommended practices and stated disclosure requirements.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "2-3",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol20.pdf",
    "source_text": "This Industry-based Guidance accompanies IFRS S2 Climate related Disclosures (published June 2023; see separate booklet) and is issued by the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB). Disclaimer: To the extent permitted by applicable law, the ISSB and the IFRS Foundation (Foundation) expressly disclaim all liability howsoever arising from this publication or any translation thereof whether in contract, tort or otherwise to any person in respect of any claims or losses of any nature including direct, indirect, incidental or consequential loss, punitive damages, penalties or costs. Information contained in this publication does not constitute advice and should not be substituted for the services of an appropriately qualified professional. © IFRS Foundation 2023 Reproduction and use rights are strictly limited to personal non-commercial use, such as corporate disclosure. Any other use, such as – but not limited to – reporting software, investment analysis, data services and product development is not permitted without written consent. Please contact the Foundation for further details at sustainability_licensing@ifrs.org. All rights reserved. The Foundation has trade marks registered around the world (Marks) including ‘IAS®’, ‘IASB®’, the IASB® logo, ‘IFRIC®’, ‘IFRS®’, the IFRS® logo, ‘IFRS for SMEs®’, the IFRS for SMEs® logo, ‘International Accounting Standards®’, ‘International Financial Reporting Standards®’, the ‘Hexagon Device ’, ‘NIIF®’, ‘SIC®’ and SASB®. Further details of the Foundation ’s Marks are available from the Foundation on request. The Foundation is a not-for-profit corporation under the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware, USA and operates in England and Wales as an overseas company (Company number: FC023235) with its principal office in the Columbus Building, 7 Westferry Circus, Canary Wharf, London, E14 4HD.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 1\n\n[Page 3]\nIntroduction This volume is part of the Industry-based Guidance on Implementing IFRS S2 Climate-related Disclosures . This guidance suggests possible ways to apply some of the disclosure requirements in IFRS S2 but does not create additional requirements. This volume suggests possible ways to identify, measure and disclose information about climate-related risks and opportunities that are associated with particular business models, economic activities and other common features that characterise participation in this industry. This industry-based guidance has been derived from Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) Standards, which are maintained by the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB). The metric codes used in SASB Standards have been included for ease of reference. For additional context regarding the industry-based guidance contained in this volume, including structure and terminology, application and illustrative examples, refer to Section III of the Accompanying Guidance to IFRS S2.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 2 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 966
  },
  {
    "id": 79380,
    "question": "Which scenario demonstrates a potential contradiction in the consolidation and reporting of GHG emissions data under the specified frameworks, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 47: Chemicals?",
    "options": {
      "C": "An entity calculates its percentage of regulated Scope 1 emissions based on a combination of mandatory carbon tax systems and voluntary emissions-limiting programmes.",
      "A": "An entity consolidates its financial reporting data using the ‘financial control’ approach but excludes Scope 1 emissions covered by voluntary trading systems when calculating the percentage of regulated emissions.",
      "B": "An entity adheres strictly to the GHG Protocol while consolidating emissions data but applies industry-specific guidance that conflicts with the Climate Disclosure Standards Board’s (CDSB) organisational boundary requirements.",
      "D": "An entity reports overlapping emissions data under two mandatory cap-and-trade schemes, inflating the total percentage of regulated Scope 1 emissions relative to gross global emissions.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "6",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol47.pdf",
    "source_text": "2.1 Acceptable calculation methodologies include those that conform to the GHG Protocol as the base reference, but provide additional guidance, such as industry- or region-specific guidance. Examples include: 2.1.1 Greenhouse Gas Inventory Guidance: Direct Emissions from Stationary Combustion Sources published by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 2.1.2 India GHG Inventory Program 2.1.3 ISO 14064-1 2.1.4 Petroleum Industry Guidelines for Reporting GHG Emissions , 2nd edition, 2011, published by IPIECA 2.1.5 Protocol for the quantification of greenhouse gas emissions from waste management activities published by Entreprises pour l’Environnement (EpE) 2.1.6 WBCSD Guidance for Accounting & Reporting Corporate GHG Emissions in the Chemical Sector Value Chain 2.2 GHG emissions data shall be consolidated and disclosed according to the approach with which the entity consolidates its financial reporting data, which generally is aligned with the ‘financial control ’ approach defined by the GHG Protocol , and the approach published by the Climate Disclosure Standards Board (CDSB) that is described in REQ-07, ‘Organisational boundary ’, of the CDSB Framework for reporting environmental and social information . 3 The entity shall disclose the percentage of its gross global Scope 1 GHG emissions covered under an emissions-limiting regulation or programme intended to limit or reduce emissions directly, such as cap-and-trade schemes, carbon tax/fee systems, and other emissions control (for example, command-and-control approach) and permit-based mechanisms. 3.1 Examples of emissions-limiting regulations may include: 3.1.1 California Cap-and-Trade (California Global Warming Solutions Act) 3.1.2 European Union Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS) 3.1.3 Quebec Cap-and-Trade (Quebec Environment Quality Act) 3.2 The percentage shall be calculated as the total amount of gross global Scope 1 GHG emissions (CO 2-e) covered under emissions-limiting regulations divided by the total amount of gross global Scope 1 GHG emissions (CO 2-e). 3.2.1 For emissions subject to more than one emissions-limiting regulation, the entity shall not account for those emissions more than once. 3.3 The scope of emissions-limiting regulations excludes emissions covered under voluntary emissions-limiting regulations (for example, voluntary trading systems), as well as reporting-based regulations.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 5",
    "new_id": 967
  },
  {
    "id": 79381,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between sustainability metrics and their implications for entities in the Chemicals industry, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 47: Chemicals?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The inclusion of both quantitative metrics and discussion-based disclosures suggests a dual focus on measurable outcomes and strategic planning for emissions and resource efficiency.",
      "A": "Entities are required to report only on greenhouse gas emissions and water management as primary indicators of compliance with environmental standards.",
      "B": "Specialty chemicals producers are exempt from reporting on energy management due to their smaller scale compared to basic chemicals manufacturers.",
      "C": "Water management risks are deemed less critical than energy management, as no specific reduction targets are mentioned for water-related disclosures.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "4",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol47.pdf",
    "source_text": "Volume 47 —Chemicals Industry Description Entities in the Chemicals industry transform organic and inorganic feedstocks into more than 70,000 diverse products with a range of industrial, pharmaceutical, agricultural, housing, automotive and consumer applications. The industry commonly is segmented into basic (commodity) chemicals, agricultural chemicals and specialty chemicals. Basic chemicals, the largest segment by volume produced, include bulk polymers, petrochemicals, inorganic chemicals and other industrial chemicals. Agricultural chemicals include fertilisers, crop chemicals and agricultural biotechnology. Specialty chemicals include paints and coatings, agrochemicals, sealants, adhesives, dyes, industrial gases, resins and catalysts. Larger entities may produce basic, agricultural and specialty chemicals, but most entities are specialised. Chemicals entities typically manufacture and sell products globally. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Greenhouse Gas EmissionsGross global Scope 1 emissions, percentage covered under emissions- limiting regulationsQuantitative Metric tons (t) CO₂-e, Percentage (%)RT -CH-110a.1 Discussion of long- and short-term strategy or plan to manage Scope 1 emissions, emissions reduction targets, and an analysis of performance against those targetsDiscussion and Analysisn/a RT -CH-110a.2 Energy Management(1) Total energy consumed, (2) percentage grid electricity, (3) percentage renewable and (4) total self-generated energy 81Quantitative Gigajoules (GJ), Percentage (%)RT -CH-130a.1 Water Management(1) Total water withdrawn, (2) total water consumed; percentage of each in regions with High or Extremely High Baseline Water StressQuantitative Thousand cubic metres (m³), Percentage (%)RT -CH-140a.1 Number of incidents of non-compliance associated with water quality permits, standards and regulationsQuantitative Number RT -CH-140a.2 Description of water management risks and discussion of strategies and practices to mitigate those risksDiscussion and Analysisn/a RT -CH-140a.3 Product Design for Use-phase EfficiencyRevenue from products designed for use-phase resource efficiencyQuantitative Presentation currencyRT -CH-410a.1 81Note to RT-CH-130a.1 – The entity shall discuss its efforts to reduce energy consumption and/or improve energy efficiency throughout the production processes.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 3",
    "new_id": 968
  },
  {
    "id": 79388,
    "question": "When calculating the percentage of responsibly sourced aluminium, which scenario would violate the guidelines outlined for certification accounting in the Containers & Packaging – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Including aluminium certified under both ASI Performance Standard Version 1 and Chain of Custody Standard Draft 2 in the same total.",
      "B": "Counting aluminium certified by an equivalent standard but not yet recognized by the Aluminium Stewardship Initiative.",
      "C": "Excluding recycled aluminium from the total weight of aluminium-based raw materials purchased.",
      "D": "Accounting for aluminium certified under multiple standards only once in the calculation.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "29-30",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Containers & Packaging.pdf",
    "source_text": "RT-CP-430a.2. Total aluminium purchased; percentage from certified sources 1The entity shall disclose the total weight (in metric tonnes) of aluminium-based raw materials purchased during the reporting period. 1.1 The scope of raw materials includes all inputs processed to be sold as a finished good, including recycled raw materials, virgin raw materials and goods that will be consumed directly in the production process. 2The percentage shall be calculated as the total weight (in metric tonnes) of its aluminium based raw materials certified to a responsible sourcing standard divided by the total weight of aluminium based raw materials. 3Responsible sourcing certification includes that promulgated by the Aluminium Stewardship Initiative (ASI) (Performance Standard Version 1 and Chain of Custody Standard Draught 2) or certification to an equivalent standard. 4 Aluminium certified to more than one standard shall be accounted for by the entity only once. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |CONTAINERS & PACKAGING |29\n\n[Page 30]\n| |30 sasb.org/contact",
    "new_id": 969
  },
  {
    "id": 79412,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the implications of the definitions and calculations provided for recycled content in the context of product lifecycle management, as described in the Containers & Packaging – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "The percentage of raw materials derived from recycled content must exclude pre-consumer material that was reclaimed within the same manufacturing process to ensure compliance with ISO 14021 standards.",
      "A": "The inclusion of rework, regrind, or scrap materials is permissible under the definition of pre-consumer material when these materials are reclaimed within the same manufacturing process.",
      "C": "Post-consumer material excludes returns from the distribution chain because such materials have not reached end-users and thus do not meet the criteria for being considered post-consumer.",
      "D": "Recycled content can be calculated as a proportion of total raw materials consumed without distinguishing between pre-consumer and post-consumer sources, as both contribute equally to environmental benefits.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "23-24",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Containers & Packaging.pdf",
    "source_text": "3.2 specific phenols and phenol derivatives such as butylated hydroxytoluene and pentachlorophenol; and 3.3 preservatives, such as formaldehyde. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |CONTAINERS & PACKAGING |23\n\n[Page 24]\nProduct Lifecycle Management Topic Summary Containers and packaging entities face opportunities and challenges associated with the potential environmental impacts of their products throughout their lifecycle. Designing products with reduced use-phase and end-of-life environmental impacts is an important opportunity for manufacturers. Demand for packaging produced with safer chemicals and using recycled and renewable materials continues to grow, along with demand for recyclable, reusable and compostable products. Although the lifecycle impact of products depends largely on their use and disposal, entities that effectively optimise such attributes during the design phase may gain a competitive advantage. Metrics RT-CP-410a.1. Percentage of raw materials from: (1) recycled content, (2) renewable resources, and (3) renewable and recycled content 1The entity shall disclose (1) the percentage of raw materials consumed, by weight, that are derived from recycled content. 1.1 Recycled content is defined, consistent with definitions in ISO 14021, Environmental labels and declarations —Self-declared environmental claims (Type II environmental labelling) , as the proportion, by mass, of recycled or recovered material in a product or packaging, for which only pre-consumer and post- consumer materials shall be considered as recycled content. 1.1.1 Recycled material is defined as material reprocessed from recovered (or reclaimed) material through a manufacturing process and made into a final product or a component to be integrated into a product. 1.1.2 Recovered material is defined as material that would have otherwise been discarded as waste or used for energy recovery, but which has instead been collected and recovered (or reclaimed) as a material input, in lieu of new primary material, for a recycling or manufacturing process. 1.1.3 Pre-consumer material is defined as material diverted from the waste stream during a manufacturing process. This definition excludes materials such as rework, regrind or scrap that are generated in a process and are capable of being reclaimed within the same process in which they were generated. 1.1.4 Post-consumer material is defined as material generated by households or by commercial, industrial and institutional facilities in their role as end-users of a product that can no longer be used for its intended purpose. This includes returns of material from the distribution chain. 1.2 The percentage shall be calculated as the weight of raw materials from recycled content divided by the total weight of all raw materials for products, such that: SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |CONTAINERS & PACKAGING |24",
    "new_id": 970
  },
  {
    "id": 79419,
    "question": "Which of the following is a necessary condition for an entity to claim it has fully complied with the disclosure requirements regarding its strategies, plans, or reduction targets for Scope 1 emissions, according to the Containers & Packaging – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The entity must limit its disclosures to activities that were ongoing or reached completion during the reporting period.",
      "A": "The entity must recalibrate its base year emissions whenever external regulations change.",
      "B": "The entity must report on all activities, whether active, completed, or planned, during the reporting period.",
      "D": "The entity must ensure that its reduction targets apply uniformly across all business units and geographies.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "10-11",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Containers & Packaging.pdf",
    "source_text": "RT-CP-110a.2. Discussion of long- and short-term strategy or plan to manage Scope 1 emissions, emissions reduction targets and an analysis of performance against those targets 1The entity shall discuss its long- and short-term strategy or plan to manage its Scope 1 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. 1.1 Scope 1 emissions are defined and shall be calculated according to the methodology contained in The Greenhouse Gas Protocol: A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard (GHG Protocol), Revised Edition, March 2004, published by the World Resources Institute and the World Business Council on Sustainable Development (WRI/WBCSD). 1.2 The scope of GHG emissions includes the seven GHGs covered under the Kyoto Protocol —carbon dioxide (CO 2), methane (CH 4), nitrous oxide (N 2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), sulphur hexafluoride (SF 6), and nitrogen trifluoride (NF 3). 2The entity shall discuss its emission reduction target(s) and analyse its performance against the target(s), including, if relevant: 2.1 The scope of the emission reduction target (for example, the percentage of total emissions to which the target is applicable); 2.2 Whether the target is absolute or intensity-based and the metric denominator if it is an intensity-based target; 2.3 The percentage reduction against the base year, with the base year representing the first year against which emissions are evaluated towards the achievement of the target; 2.4 The time lines for the reduction activity, including the start year, the target year and the base year; 2.5 The mechanism(s) for achieving the target; and 2.6 Any circumstances in which the target or base year emissions have been, or may be, recalculated retrospectively or the target or base year has been reset. 3The entity shall discuss the activities and investments required to achieve the plans or targets, and any risks or limiting factors that might affect achievement of the plans or targets. 4The entity shall discuss the scope of its strategies, plans or reduction targets, such as whether they pertain differently to different business units, geographies or emissions sources. 5The entity shall discuss whether its strategies, plans or reduction targets are related to, or associated with, emissions limiting or emissions reporting-based programmes or regulations (for example, the EU Emissions Trading Scheme, Quebec Cap-and-Trade System, California Cap-and-Trade Program), including regional, national, international or sectoral programmes. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |CONTAINERS & PACKAGING |10\n\n[Page 11]\n6Disclosure of strategies, plans or reduction targets shall be limited to activities that were ongoing (active) or reached completion during the reporting period. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |CONTAINERS & PACKAGING |11",
    "new_id": 971
  },
  {
    "id": 79420,
    "question": "Which of the following best represents a potential consequence of an entity's decision to increase its reliance on self-generated energy, as discussed implicitly in the Containers & Packaging – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "It may alter the entity’s risk profile by introducing uncertainties related to cost, reliability, and air emissions associated with energy sourcing.",
      "A": "It guarantees a reduction in the entity’s total greenhouse gas emissions due to decreased dependence on grid electricity.",
      "B": "It ensures complete regulatory compliance since self-generated energy is free from external oversight.",
      "C": "It eliminates the need for purchased electricity entirely, thereby simplifying energy management strategies.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "14",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Containers & Packaging.pdf",
    "source_text": "Energy Management Topic Summary Containers and packaging manufacturing is energy-intensive, with energy used to power processing units, cogeneration plants, machinery and non-manufacturing facilities. The type of energy used, amount consumed and energy management strategies depend on the type of products manufactured. Typically, fossil fuels such as natural gas and biomass are the predominant form of energy used, while purchased electricity also may be a significant share. Therefore, energy purchases may be a significant share of production costs. An entity ’s energy mix may include energy generated on site, purchased grid electricity and fossil fuels, and renewable and alternative energy. Trade-offs in the use of such energy sources include cost, reliability of supply, related water use and air emissions, and regulatory compliance and risk. As such, an entity ’s energy intensity and energy sourcing decisions may affect its operating efficiency and risk profile over time. Metrics RT-CP-130a.1. (1) Total energy consumed, (2) percentage grid electricity, (3) percentage renewable and (4) total self-generated energy 1The entity shall disclose (1) the total amount of energy it consumed as an aggregate figure, in gigajoules (GJ). 1.1 The scope of energy consumption includes energy from all sources, including energy purchased from external sources and energy produced by the entity itself (self-generated). For example, direct fuel usage, purchased electricity, heating, cooling and steam energy all are included within the scope of energy consumption. 1.2 The scope of energy consumption includes only energy directly consumed by the entity during the reporting period. 1.3 In calculating energy consumption from fuels and biofuels, the entity shall use higher heating values (HHV), also known as gross calorific values (GCV), which are measured directly or taken from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2The entity shall disclose (2) the percentage of energy it consumed that was supplied from grid electricity. 2.1 The percentage shall be calculated as purchased grid electricity consumption divided by total energy consumption. 3 The entity shall disclose (3) the percentage of energy it consumed that was renewable energy. 3.1 Renewable energy is defined as energy from sources that are replenished at a rate greater than or equal to their rate of depletion, such as geothermal, wind, solar, hydro and biomass. 3.2 The percentage shall be calculated as renewable energy consumption divided by total energy consumption. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |CONTAINERS & PACKAGING |14",
    "new_id": 972
  },
  {
    "id": 79421,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes why material substitution assessments are considered a relevant action in managing hazardous materials, according to the outlined processes and concerns in the Containers & Packaging – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "They enable the evaluation of alternative substances using tools like GreenScreen® or CleanGredients®, addressing potential hazards before formulation and design.",
      "B": "They exclusively focus on replacing banned substances with safer alternatives while adhering strictly to ISO 18602 standards.",
      "C": "They provide retailers and commercial buyers with detailed material safety data sheets to enhance transparency in product declarations.",
      "D": "They ensure compliance with legal proceedings by documenting all instances of chemical risk traits during procurement.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "22-23",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Containers & Packaging.pdf",
    "source_text": "2.4 whether the recall was voluntary or involuntary; 2.5 corrective actions; and 2.6 any other significant outcomes (for example, legal proceedings or fatalities). RT-CP-250a.2. Discussion of process to identify and manage emerging materials and chemicals of concern 1The entity shall discuss how it manages the use of materials, chemicals and substances that may be hazardous to human health or the environment, presenting concerns for consumers, customers (for example, retailers and commercial buyers), regulators or others (for example, non-governmental organisations or scientific researchers). 1.1 Materials, chemicals and substances include individual compounds, classes of chemicals and categories of chemicals. 2At a minimum, the entity shall discuss how it assesses materials and chemicals for hazardous characteristics and risk traits, including the operational processes it employs for these assessments and other actions it takes to manage hazards and risks. 2.1 Relevant operational processes may include: 2.1.1 product formulation and design; 2.1.2 materials and chemicals procurement; and 2.1.3 product safety testing, product labelling and product declarations (for example, material safety data sheets). 2.2 Relevant actions to discuss may include: 2.2.1 exclusion of substances (for example, use of banned substances lists); 2.2.2 use of material substitution assessments, tools and screening methods (for example, GreenScreen® For Safer Chemicals or CleanGredients® Data Verification); 2.2.3 implementation of ISO 18602 Packaging and the environment —Optimization of the packaging system , which includes criteria for determining the amount and minimisation of hazardous constituents and determining the amount of four heavy metals (lead, cadmium, mercury and hexavalent chromium) in packaging; and 2.2.4 performance on The Consumer Goods Forum ’s Global Protocol on Packaging Sustainability 2.0 metrics for Impact on Human Health. 3 Emerging materials and chemicals of concern may include: 3.1 plasticisers, such as phthalates and BPA; SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |CONTAINERS & PACKAGING |22\n\n[Page 23]\n3.2 specific phenols and phenol derivatives such as butylated hydroxytoluene and pentachlorophenol; and 3.3 preservatives, such as formaldehyde. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |CONTAINERS & PACKAGING |23",
    "new_id": 973
  },
  {
    "id": 79443,
    "question": "Which of the following best represents a scenario where biogenic CO₂ emissions would be excluded from gross other indirect (Scope 3) GHG emissions reporting, according to GRI 305: Emissions 2016?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Biogenic CO2 emissions produced during the processing phase of biomass materials.",
      "A": "Biogenic CO2 emissions resulting from the combustion of biomass within the organization's value chain.",
      "C": "Biogenic CO2 emissions occurring during the transportation of biomass across international borders.",
      "D": "Biogenic CO2 emissions caused by the biodegradation of organic waste generated in upstream activities.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "13",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 305_ Emissions 2016.pdf",
    "source_text": "Disclosure 305-3 Other indirect (Scope 3) GHG emissions The reporting organization shall report the following information: Compilation requirementsREQUIREMENTS Gross other indirect (Scope 3) GHG emissions in metric tons of CO2 equivalent . a. If available, the gases included in the calculation; whether CO , CH , NO, HFCs, PFCs, SF, NF , or all.2 4 2 6 3b. Biogenic CO2 emissions in metric tons of CO equivalent.2 c. Other indirect (Scope 3) GHG emissions categories and activities included in the calculation.d. Base year for the calculation, if applicable, including: the rationale for choosing it; i. emissions in the base year; ii. the context for any significant changes in emissions that triggered recalculations of base year emissions.iii.e. Source of the emission factors and the global warming potential (GWP) rates used, or a reference to the GWP source.f. Standards, methodologies, assumptions, and/or calculation tools used. g. When compiling the information specified in Disclosure 305-3, the reporting organization shall:2.5 exclude any GHG trades from the calculation of gross other indirect (Scope 3) GHG emissions;2.5.1 exclude energy indirect (Scope 2) GHG emissions from this disclosure. Energy indirect (Scope 2) GHG emissions are disclosed as specified in Disclosure 305-2;2.5.2 report biogenic emissions of CO from the combustion or biodegradation of biomass that occur in its value chain separately from the gross other indirect (Scope 3) GHG emissions. Exclude biogenic emissions of other types of GHG (such as CH and N O), and biogenic emissions of CO that occur in the life cycle of biomass other than from combustion or biodegradation (such as GHG emissions from processing or transporting biomass).2.5.3 2 4 2 2 RECOMMENDATIONSWhen compiling the information specified in Disclosure 305-3, the reporting organization should:2.6 apply emission factors and GWP rates consistently for the data disclosed; 2.6.1 use the GWP rates from the IPCC assessment reports based on a 100-year timeframe;2.6.2 if subject to different standards and methodologies, describe the approach to selecting them;2.6.3 list other indirect (Scope 3) GHG emissions, with a breakdown by upstream and downstream categories and activities;2.6.4 where it aids transparency 2.6.5 or comparability over time, provide a breakdown of the other indirect (Scope 3) GHG emissions by: business unit or facility; 2.6.5.1 country; 2.6.5.2 type of source; 2.6.5.3 type of activity. 2.6.5.4 GRI 305: Emissions 2016 13",
    "new_id": 974
  },
  {
    "id": 79454,
    "question": "When calculating Scope 2 GHG emissions, under which circumstance would the location-based and market-based values most likely be identical, according to GRI 305: Emissions 2016?",
    "options": {
      "C": "When the organization uses grid-average emission factors due to the unavailability of a residual mix.",
      "A": "When the organization has access to a residual mix that accurately reflects its energy consumption patterns.",
      "B": "When contractual instruments fully specify the emissions-intensity of all purchased electricity.",
      "D": "When the organization's direct (Scope 1) emissions exceed its indirect (Scope 2) emissions.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "12",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 305_ Emissions 2016.pdf",
    "source_text": "type of activity. 2.4.5.4 Guidance for Disclosure 305-2 Energy indirect (Scope 2) GHG emissions include, but are not limited to, the CO2 emissions from the generation of purchased or acquired electricity, heating, cooling, and steam consumed by an organization – disclosed as specified in Disclosure 302-1 of GRI 302: Energy 2016 . For many organizations, the energy indirect (Scope 2) GHG emissions that result from the generation of purchased electricity can be much greater than their direct (Scope 1) GHG emissions. The ‘GHG Protocol Scope 2 Guidance’ requires organizations to provide two distinct Scope 2 values: a location-based and a market-based value. A location- based method reflects the average GHG emissions intensity of grids on which energy consumption occurs, using mostly grid-average emission factor data. A market-based method reflects emissions from electricity that an organization has purposefully chosen (or its lack of choice). It derives emission factors from contractual instruments, which include any type of contract between two parties for the sale and purchase of energy bundled with attributes about the energy generation, or for unbundled attribute claims. The market-based method calculation also includes the use of a residual mix, if the organization does not have specified emissions-intensity from its contractual instruments. This helps prevent double counting between consumers’ market-based method figures. If a residual mix is unavailable, the organization can disclose this and use grid-average emission factors as a proxy (which can mean that the location-based and market- based are the same number until information on the residual mix is available). The reporting organization can apply the Quality Criteria in the ‘GHG Protocol Scope 2 Guidance’ so that contractual instruments convey GHG emission rate claims and to prevent double counting. See reference [18] in the Bibliography . For recalculations of prior year emissions, the organization can follow the approach in the ‘GHG Protocol Corporate Standard’. The chosen emission factors can originate from mandatory reporting requirements, voluntary reporting frameworks, or industry groups. Estimates of GWP rates change over time as scientific research develops. GWP rates from the Second Assessment Report of the IPCC are used as the basis for international negotiations under the ‘Kyoto Protocol’. Thus, such rates can be used for disclosing GHG emissions where it does not conflict with national or regional reporting requirements. The organization can also use the latest GWP rates from the most recent IPCC assessment report. The organization can combine Disclosure 305-2 with Disclosures 305-1 (direct/Scope 1 GHG emissions) and 305-3 (other indirect/Scope 3 GHG emissions) to disclose total GHG emissions. Further details and guidance are available in the ‘GHG Protocol Corporate Standard’. Details on the location-based and market-based methods are available in the ‘GHG Protocol Scope 2 Guidance’. See also references [1], [2], [12], [13], [14] and [18] in the Bibliography .GUIDANCE GRI 305: Emissions 2016 12",
    "new_id": 975
  },
  {
    "id": 79455,
    "question": "Which of the following represents a necessary condition for ensuring accurate and consistent reporting of gross direct (Scope 1) GHG emissions, according to the guidelines provided in GRI 305: Emissions 2016?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Applying emission factors and GWP rates consistently across all disclosed data and using IPCC-based GWP rates over a 100-year timeframe.",
      "A": "Using only the equity share method for consolidation while ignoring operational control or financial control approaches.",
      "B": "Excluding all biogenic CO2 emissions from the calculation of gross direct (Scope 1) GHG emissions regardless of their source.",
      "C": "Providing a breakdown of emissions by type of activity as the sole means to ensure transparency and comparability over time.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "9",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 305_ Emissions 2016.pdf",
    "source_text": "2. Topic disclosures Disclosure 305-1 Direct (Scope 1) GHG emissions The reporting organization shall report the following information: Compilation requirementsREQUIREMENTS Gross direct (Scope 1) GHG emissions in metric tons of CO2 equivalent . a. Gases included in the calculation; whether CO , CH , NO, HFCs, PFCs, SF , NF , or all. 2 4 2 6 3 b. Biogenic CO2 emissions in metric tons of CO equivalent.2 c. Base year for the calculation, if applicable, including: the rationale for choosing it; i. emissions in the base year; ii. the context for any significant changes in emissions that triggered recalculations of base year emissions.iii.d. Source of the emission factors and the global warming potential (GWP) rates used, or a reference to the GWP source.e. Consolidation approach for emissions; whether equity share, financial control, or operational control.f. Standards, methodologies, assumptions, and/or calculation tools used. g. When compiling the information specified in Disclosure 305-1, the reporting organization shall:2.1 exclude any GHG trades from the calculation of gross direct (Scope 1) GHG emissions;2.1.1 report biogenic emissions of CO2 from the combustion or biodegradation of biomass separately from the gross direct (Scope 1) GHG emissions. Exclude biogenic emissions of other types of GHG (such as CH and N O), and biogenic emissions of CO that occur in the life cycle of biomass other than from combustion or biodegradation (such as GHG emissions from processing or transporting biomass).2.1.2 4 2 2 RECOMMENDATIONSWhen compiling the information specified in Disclosure 305-1, the reporting organization should:2.2 apply emission factors and GWP rates consistently for the data disclosed; 2.2.1 use the GWP rates from the IPCC assessment reports based on a 100-year timeframe;2.2.2 select a consistent approach for consolidating direct (Scope 1) and energy indirect (Scope 2) GHG emissions ; choosing from the equity share, financial control, or operational control methods outlined in the ‘GHG Protocol Corporate Standard’;2.2.3 if subject to different standards and methodologies, describe the approach to selecting them;2.2.4 where it aids transparency or comparability over time, provide a breakdown of the direct (Scope 1) GHG emissions by:2.2.5 business unit or facility; 2.2.5.1 country; 2.2.5.2 type of source (stationary combustion, process, fugitive); 2.2.5.3 type of activity. 2.2.5.4 Guidance for Disclosure 305-1 Direct (Scope 1) GHG emissions include, but are not limited to, the CO emissions from the fuel consumption as reported in Disclosure 302-1 of GRI 302: Energy 2016 .GUIDANCE 2 GRI 305: Emissions 2016 9",
    "new_id": 976
  },
  {
    "id": 79456,
    "question": "Which implication can be drawn regarding the GSSB's role in developing and issuing the GRI Standards, based on the text in GRI 305: Emissions 2016?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The GSSB ensures multi-stakeholder expertise informs the development process, but organizations using the Standards assume full responsibility for their reports.",
      "B": "The GSSB holds ultimate legal responsibility for any consequences arising from the use of the GRI Standards.",
      "C": "The GSSB develops Standards primarily through unilateral decision-making by its board members.",
      "D": "The GSSB provides a warranty that reports adhering to the GRI Standards will meet all international regulatory requirements.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "2-3",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 305_ Emissions 2016.pdf",
    "source_text": "GRI 305: Emissions 2016 Topic Standard Effective Date This Standard is effective for reports or other materials published on or after 1 July 2018 Responsibility This Standard is issued by the Global Sustainability Standards Board (GSSB) . Any feedback on the GRI Standards can be submitted to gssbsecretariat@globalreporting.org for the consideration of the GSSB. Due Process This Standard was developed in the public interest and in accordance with the requirements of the GSSB Due Process Protocol. It has been developed using multi-stakeholder expertise, and with regard to authoritative intergovernmental instruments and widely held expectations of organizations relating to social, environmental, and economic responsibilities. Legal Liability This document, designed to promote sustainability reporting, has been developed by the Global Sustainability Standards Board (GSSB) through a unique multi-stakeholder consultative process involving representatives from organizations and report information users from around the world. While the GRI Supervisory Board, Management Board, and GSSB encourage the use of the GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards (GRI Standards) and related Interpretations by all organizations, the preparation and publication of reports based fully or partially on the GRI Standards and related Interpretations are the full responsibility of those producing them. Neither the GRI Supervisory Board, Management Board, GSSB, nor Stichting Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) can assume responsibility for any consequences or damages resulting directly or indirectly from the use of the GRI Standards and related Interpretations in the preparation of reports, or the use of reports based on the GRI Standards and related Interpretations. Copyright and trademark notice This document is copyright-protected by Stichting Global Reporting Initiative (GRI). The reproduction and distribution of this document for information and/or use in preparing a sustainability report is permitted without prior permission from GRI. However, neither this document nor any extract from it may be reproduced, stored, translated, or transferred in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photocopied, recorded, or otherwise) for any other purpose without prior written permission from GRI. Global Reporting Initiative, GRI and logo, GSSB and logo, and GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards (GRI Standards) and logo are trademarks of Stichting Global Reporting Initiative. © 2024 GRI. All rights reserved. ISBN 978-90-8866-108-2\n\n[Page 3]\nContent Introduction 4 1. Topic management disclosures 8 2. Topic disclosures 9 Disclosure 305-1 Direct (Scope 1) GHG emissions 9 Disclosure 305-2 Energy indirect (Scope 2) GHG emissions 11 Disclosure 305-3 Other indirect (Scope 3) GHG emissions 13 Disclosure 305-4 GHG emissions intensity 16 Disclosure 305-5 Reduction of GHG emissions 17 Disclosure 305-6 Emissions of ozone-depleting substances (ODS) 19 Disclosure 305-7 Nitrogen oxides (NOx), sulfur oxides (SOx), and other significant air emissions21 Glossary 22 Bibliography 25 GRI 305: Emissions 2016 3",
    "new_id": 977
  },
  {
    "id": 79630,
    "question": "Which scenario aligns most accurately with the guidance on addressing significant negative environmental impacts in supplier relationships, as outlined in GRI 308: Supplier Environmental Assessment 2016?",
    "options": {
      "B": "An organization implements capacity-building initiatives for suppliers found to have potential negative environmental impacts and revises contracts to include clear performance targets.",
      "A": "An organization terminates a supplier relationship without assessing the broader environmental or operational consequences of that decision.",
      "C": "An organization prioritizes suppliers for environmental assessment based solely on the cost implications of their products or services.",
      "D": "An organization relies exclusively on third-party audits to address environmental impacts, avoiding any direct engagement with suppliers.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "7-8",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 308_ Supplier Environmental Assessment 2016.pdf",
    "source_text": "1. Topic management disclosures An organization reporting in accordance with the GRI Standards is required to report how it manages each of its material topics . An organization that has determined supplier environmental assessment to be a material topic is required to report how it manages the topic using Disclosure 3-3 in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 (see clause 1.1 in this section). This section is therefore designed to supplement – and not replace – Disclosure 3-3 in GRI 3 . REQUIREMENTSThe reporting organization shall report how it manages supplier environmental assessment using Disclosure 3-3 in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 .1.1 The reporting organization can also disclose: Environmental criteria or assessments of suppliers for environmental impacts can include the topics covered in other GRI Topic Standards (e.g., GRI 302: Energy 2016 , GRI 303: Water and Eflluents 2018 , GRI 305: Emissions 2016 ). Negative impacts can include those that are either caused or contributed to by an organization, or that are directly linked to its operations, products, or services by its relationship with a supplier. Assessments can be informed by audits, contractual reviews, two-way engagement, and complaint and grievance mechanisms . Actions taken to address environmental impacts can include changing an organization’s procurement practices, adjusting performance expectations, capacity building, training, changes to processes, as well as terminating supplier relationships. Assessments and audits of suppliers and their products and services using environmental criteria can be undertaken by an organization, by a second party, or by a third party.GUIDANCE the systems used to screen new suppliers using environmental criteria, and a list of the environmental criteria used to screen new suppliers;• processes used, such as due diligence , to identify and assess significant actual and potential negative environmental impacts in the supply chain ;• how the organization identifies and prioritizes suppliers for assessment of environmental impacts;• actions taken to address the significant actual and potential negative environmental impacts identified in the supply chain, and whether the actions are intended to prevent, mitigate, or remediate the impacts;• how expectations are established and defined in contracts with suppliers to promote the prevention, mitigation, and remediation of significant actual and potential negative environmental impacts, including targets and objectives;• whether suppliers are incentivized and rewarded for the prevention, mitigation, and remediation of significant actual and potential negative environmental impacts;• practices for assessing and auditing suppliers and their products and services using environmental criteria;• a list of the type, system, scope, frequency, current implementation of assessment and audit, and which parts of the supply chain have been certified and audited;• the systems in place to assess the potential negative impacts of terminating a relationship with a supplier as a result of assessing the supplier for environmental impacts, and the organization’s strategy to mitigate those impacts.• GRI 308: Supplier Environmental Assessment 2016 7\n\n[Page 8]\n2. Topic disclosures Disclosure 308-1 New suppliers that were screened using environmental criteria The reporting organization shall report the following information:REQUIREMENTS Percentage of new suppliers that were screened using environmental criteria. a. Guidance for Disclosure 308-1 Environmental criteria can include the topics covered in other GRI Topic Standards (e.g., GRI 302: Energy 2016 , GRI 303: Water and Effluents 2018 , GRI 305: Emissions 2016 ) Background This disclosure informs stakeholders about the percentage of suppliers selected or contracted subject to due diligence processes for environmental impacts. An organization is expected to initiate due diligence as early as possible in the development of a new relationship with a supplier. Impacts may be prevented or mitigated at the stage of structuring contracts or other agreements, as well as via ongoing collaboration with suppliers.GUIDANCE GRI 308: Supplier Environmental Assessment 2016 8",
    "new_id": 978
  },
  {
    "id": 79770,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why the metric codes from SASB Standards are included in this guidance, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 44: Solar Technology & Project Developers?",
    "options": {
      "C": "To provide a reference framework that aligns with existing standards but does not impose additional mandatory reporting obligations.",
      "A": "To establish legally binding requirements for solar energy companies to report their sustainability metrics.",
      "B": "To replace the disclosure requirements in IFRS S2 with more specific guidelines tailored to the solar technology industry.",
      "D": "To ensure that all entities in the solar industry exclusively use SASB Standards for energy and water management disclosures.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "3-4",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol44.pdf",
    "source_text": "Introduction This volume is part of the Industry-based Guidance on Implementing IFRS S2 Climate-related Disclosures . This guidance suggests possible ways to apply some of the disclosure requirements in IFRS S2 but does not create additional requirements. This volume suggests possible ways to identify, measure and disclose information about climate-related risks and opportunities that are associated with particular business models, economic activities and other common features that characterise participation in this industry. This industry-based guidance has been derived from Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) Standards, which are maintained by the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB). The metric codes used in SASB Standards have been included for ease of reference. For additional context regarding the industry-based guidance contained in this volume, including structure and terminology, application and illustrative examples, refer to Section III of the Accompanying Guidance to IFRS S2.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 2 © IFRS Foundation\n\n[Page 4]\nVolume 44 —Solar Technology & Project Developers Industry Description Solar Technology & Project Developers industry entities manufacture solar energy equipment, including solar photovoltaic (PV) modules, polysilicon feedstock, solar thermal electricity-generation systems, solar inverters and other related components. Entities also may develop, build and manage solar energy projects and offer financing or maintenance services to customers. The industry uses two primary technologies: PV and concentrated solar power (CSP). Within solar PV, two main technologies exist: crystalline silicon-based solar and thin-film solar, which includes panels made using copper indium gallium selenide and cadmium telluride. The primary markets for solar panels are residential, non-residential (commercial and industrial) and utility-scale projects. Entities in the industry operate globally. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Energy Management in Manufacturing(1) Total energy consumed, (2) percentage grid electricity and (3) percentage renewableQuantitative Gigajoules (GJ), Percentage (%)RR-ST -130a.1 Water Management in Manufacturing(1) Total water withdrawn, (2) total water consumed; percentage of each in regions with High or Extremely High Baseline Water StressQuantitative Thousand cubic metres (m³), Percentage (%)RR-ST -140a.1 Description of water management risks and discussion of strategies and practices to mitigate those risksDiscussion and Analysisn/a RR-ST -140a.2 Management of Energy Infrastructure Integration & Related RegulationsDescription of risks associated with integration of solar energy into existing energy infrastructure and discussion of efforts to manage those risksDiscussion and Analysisn/a RR-ST -410a.1 Description of risks and opportunities associated with energy policy and its effect on the integration of solar energy into existing energy infrastructureDiscussion and Analysisn/a RR-ST -410a.2 Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Total capacity of photovoltaic (PV) solar modules producedQuantitative Megawatts (MW)RR-ST -000.A continued...IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 3",
    "new_id": 979
  },
  {
    "id": 79775,
    "question": "Under which condition would an entity's disclosure of hazardous waste recycling rates be considered incomplete or non-compliant with the outlined framework, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 48: Containers & Packaging?",
    "options": {
      "D": "If the entity includes materials incinerated for energy recovery as part of its recycled hazardous waste calculations.",
      "A": "If the entity discloses the total weight of hazardous waste generated but omits the percentage that was reused or reclaimed.",
      "B": "If the entity uses the UNEP Basel Convention definitions without disclosing the specific legal or regulatory framework applied.",
      "C": "If the entity separately discloses the percentage of hazardous waste incinerated without including it in the recycling rate.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "14",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol48.pdf",
    "source_text": "disposal. Waste management strategies include reduced generation, effective treatment and disposal, and recycling and recovery, if possible. Such activities, while requiring initial investment or operating costs, may reduce an entity ’s long-term cost structure and mitigate the risk of remediation liabilities or regulatory penalties. Metrics RT -CP-150a.1 Amount of waste generated, percentage hazardous and percentage recycled 1 The entity shall calculate and disclose the total amount of hazardous waste generated, in metric tons. 1.1 Hazardous wastes are defined in accordance with the applicable jurisdictional legal or regulatory framework(s) where the waste was generated. 2 The entity shall calculate and disclose the percentage of hazardous waste recycled as the total weight of hazardous waste generated that was recycled, divided by the total weight of hazardous waste generated. 2.1 Hazardous waste that is reused, reclaimed or remanufactured shall be considered within the scope of recycled. 2.2 Recycled, reused, reclaimed and remanufactured hazardous waste is defined in accordance with the applicable jurisdictional legal or regulatory framework(s) where the waste was generated. 2.3 Materials incinerated, including for energy recovery, shall not be considered within the scope of recycled. 2.3.1 Energy recovery is defined as the use of combustible waste to generate energy through direct incineration, with or without other waste, but with recovery of the heat. 2.3.2 The entity may separately disclose the percentage of hazardous waste generated that was incinerated. 3 The entity may use the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal for the purposes of defining hazardous waste or recycled hazardous waste for operations located in jurisdictions that lack applicable legal or regulatory definitions. 4 The entity shall disclose the legal or regulatory framework(s) used to define hazardous waste and recycled hazardous waste, and the amounts defined in accordance with each applicable framework.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 13",
    "new_id": 980
  },
  {
    "id": 79776,
    "question": "Which condition must be satisfied for an entity to claim renewable energy from a renewable power purchase agreement (PPA) or green power product, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 48: Containers & Packaging?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs) or Guarantees of Origin (GOs) must be explicitly included, retained, and retired or cancelled on behalf of the entity.",
      "B": "The entity must generate at least 50% of the renewable electricity on-site.",
      "C": "The renewable energy must come exclusively from sources within the entity's direct control or influence.",
      "D": "The entity must sell any Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs) or Guarantees of Origin (GOs) generated on-site to validate its renewable energy claims.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "9",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol48.pdf",
    "source_text": "2 The entity shall disclose (2) the percentage of energy it consumed that was supplied from grid electricity. 2.1 The percentage shall be calculated as purchased grid electricity consumption divided by total energy consumption. 3 The entity shall disclose (3) the percentage of energy it consumed that was renewable energy. 3.1 Renewable energy is defined as energy from sources that are replenished at a rate greater than or equal to their rate of depletion, such as geothermal, wind, solar, hydro and biomass. 3.2 The percentage shall be calculated as renewable energy consumption divided by total energy consumption. 3.3 The scope of renewable energy includes renewable fuel the entity consumed, renewable energy the entity directly produced and renewable energy the entity purchased, if purchased through a renewable power purchase agreement (PPA) that explicitly includes renewable energy certificates (RECs) or Guarantees of Origin (GOs), a Green ‐e Energy Certified utility or supplier programme, or other green power products that explicitly include RECs or GOs, or for which Green ‐e Energy Certified RECs are paired with grid electricity. 3.3.1 For any renewable electricity generated on site, any RECs and GOs shall be retained (not sold) and retired or cancelled on behalf of the entity for the entity to claim them as renewable energy. 3.3.2 For renewable PPAs and green power products, the agreement shall explicitly include and convey that RECs and GOs be retained or replaced and retired or cancelled on behalf of the entity for the entity to claim them as renewable energy. 3.3.3 The renewable portion of the electricity grid mix outside of the control or influence of the entity is excluded from the scope of renewable energy. 3.4 For the purposes of this disclosure, the scope of renewable energy from biomass sources is limited to materials certified to a third-party standard (for example, Forest Stewardship Council, Sustainable Forest Initiative, Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification or American Tree Farm System), materials considered eligible sources of supply according to the Green-e Framework for Renewable Energy Certification, Version 1.0 (2017) or Green-e regional standards, or materials eligible for an applicable jurisdictional renewable portfolio standard. 4 The entity shall disclose (4) the amount of energy self-generated as an aggregate figure, in gigajoules (GJ). 4.1 The entity may disclose the amount of self-generated energy sold to an electric utility or end-use customer.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 8 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 981
  },
  {
    "id": 79822,
    "question": "Which of the following scenarios would most likely result in an entity being required to provide a detailed explanation under RT-EE-510a.2 but not under RT-EE-510a.1, as outlined in the Electrical & Electronic Equipment – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "An entity settles a legal case involving allegations of price-fixing without admitting guilt, resulting in monetary losses.",
      "A": "An entity is fined for a violation of environmental regulations after a guilty plea, leading to significant financial penalties.",
      "C": "An entity incurs monetary losses from a lawsuit alleging bribery, which was resolved through a deferred prosecution agreement.",
      "D": "An entity faces monetary losses due to a settlement over patent misuse claims, with no admission of wrongdoing.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "7-8",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Electrical & Electronic Equipment.pdf",
    "source_text": "...continued TOPIC METRIC CATEGORYUNIT OF MEASURECODE Business EthicsDescription of policies and practices for prevention of: (1) corruption and bribery and (2) anti-competitive behaviourDiscussion and Analysisn/a RT -EE-510a.1 Total amount of monetary losses as a result of legal proceedings associated with bribery or corruption 5QuantitativePresentation currencyRT -EE-510a.2 Total amount of monetary losses as a result of legal proceedings associated with anti-competitive behaviour regulations 6QuantitativePresentation currencyRT -EE-510a.3 Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORYUNIT OF MEASURECODE Number of units produced by product category7Quantitative Number RT -EE-000.A Number of employees Quantitative Number RT -EE-000.B 5Note to RT-EE-510a.2 – The entity shall briefly describe the nature, context and any corrective actions taken because of monetary losses. 6Note to RT-EE-510a.3 – The entity shall briefly describe the nature (for example, judgement or order issued after trial, settlement, guilty plea, deferred prosecution agreement or non-prosecution agreement) and context (for example, price fixing, patent misuse, or antitrust) of all monetary losses because of legal proceedings. 7Note to RT-EE-000.A – Production should be disclosed as number of units produced by product category, where relevant product categories include energy generation, energy delivery, and lighting and indoor climate control electronics. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT |7\n\n[Page 8]\nEnergy Management Topic Summary Electrical and electronic equipment entities may use significant amounts of energy. Purchased electricity is the largest share of energy expenditure in the industry, followed by purchased fuels. The type of energy used, amount consumed and energy management strategies depend on the type of products manufactured. Including the use of electricity generated on site, grid-sourced electricity and alternative energy, an entity ’s energy mix may be important in reducing the cost and increasing the reliability of energy supply and, ultimately, affecting the entity ’s cost structure and exposure to regulatory shifts. Metrics RT-EE-130a.1. (1) Total energy consumed, (2) percentage grid electricity and (3) percentage renewable 1 The entity shall disclose (1) the total amount of energy it consumed as an aggregate figure, in gigajoules (GJ). 1.1 The scope of energy consumption includes energy from all sources, including energy purchased from external sources and energy produced by the entity itself (self-generated). For example, direct fuel usage, purchased electricity, and heating, cooling and steam energy all are included within the scope of energy consumption. 1.2 The scope of energy consumption includes only energy directly consumed by the entity during the reporting period. 1.3 In calculating energy consumption from fuels and biofuels, the entity shall use higher heating values (HHV), also known as gross calorific values (GCV), which are measured directly or taken from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2The entity shall disclose (2) the percentage of energy it consumed that was supplied from grid electricity. 2.1 The percentage shall be calculated as purchased grid electricity consumption divided by total energy consumption. 3The entity shall disclose (3) the percentage of energy it consumed that was renewable energy. 3.1 Renewable energy is defined as energy from sources that are replenished at a rate greater than or equal to their rate of depletion, such as geothermal, wind, solar, hydro and biomass. 3.2 The percentage shall be calculated as renewable energy consumption divided by total energy consumption. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT |8",
    "new_id": 982
  },
  {
    "id": 79823,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why an entity in the electrical and electronic equipment industry might implement the OECD anti-corruption guidelines, according to the implications of the Electrical & Electronic Equipment – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "To mitigate risks associated with business ethics violations by aligning with internationally recognized frameworks.",
      "A": "To directly eliminate all forms of bribery and corruption within its operations as a standalone solution.",
      "B": "To ensure that monetary losses from legal proceedings are completely eradicated moving forward.",
      "D": "To solely enhance employee awareness programmes without addressing broader systemic issues.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "20",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Electrical & Electronic Equipment.pdf",
    "source_text": "Business Ethics Topic Summary Electrical and electronic equipment manufacturers based in jurisdictions with stronger business ethics laws may be vulnerable to regulatory scrutiny of their business ethics because of operations in regions with weaker government enforcement of business ethics laws. Some entities in this industry have been found in violation of corruption laws as well as anti-competitive behaviour. Unethical practices may jeopardise future revenue growth and may result in significant legal costs and a higher reputational risk. As such, strong governance practices can mitigate the risk of violations of business ethics laws and resulting regulatory penalties or brand-value impacts. Metrics RT-EE-510a.1. Description of policies and practices for prevention of: (1) corruption and bribery and (2) anti-competitive behaviour 1The entity shall discuss its management system and due diligence procedures for assessing and managing corruption and bribery risks within the scope of its own operations and those associated with business partners in its value chain. 1.1 Relevant business partners include customers, suppliers, contractors, subcontractors and joint arrangement partners. 2Relevant aspects of a management system include employee awareness programmes, internal mechanisms for reporting and following up on suspected violations and anti-corruption policies. 3The entity may discuss its implementation of the following organisational guidelines: 3.1 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) anti-corruption guidelines; 3.2 International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) Rules of Conduct and Recommendations to Combat Extortion and Bribery ; 3.3 Transparency International Business Principles for Countering Bribery ; 3.4 United Nations Global Compact 10th Principle; and 3.5 World Economic Forum (WEF) Partnering Against Corruption Initiative (PACI). RT-EE-510a.2. Total amount of monetary losses as a result of legal proceedings associated with bribery or corruption 1The entity shall disclose the total amount of monetary losses incurred during the reporting period resulting from legal proceedings associated with incidents relating to bribery and corruption. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT |20",
    "new_id": 983
  },
  {
    "id": 79824,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes why an entity might prioritize strategies such as supplier diversification or investments in recycling technologies for critical materials, as discussed in the Electrical & Electronic Equipment – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "To address risks arising from geopolitical uncertainty, volatile input prices, and competition over limited material availability.",
      "A": "To comply with international energy efficiency standards like IE2, IE3, and IE4.",
      "B": "To ensure their products are slightly lighter than previous generations and thus qualify as improving resource efficiency.",
      "C": "To align exclusively with the milestones set forth in Section 5 of the European Commission’s Roadmap to a Resource Efficient Europe.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "17-18",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Electrical & Electronic Equipment.pdf",
    "source_text": "3A product shall be considered to have been designed to increase energy efficiency if documentation shows that the entity has tested, modelled or otherwise established an increase in energy efficiency during the product ’s use- phase. 3.1 Examples of products that increase energy efficiency may include: smart grid technologies and infrastructure (for example, demand response systems, distribution automation, smart inverters or advanced metering equipment); smart home and intelligent building control products; flexible alternating current transmission systems and low-loss transformers. 3.1.1 Smart grid is defined as a modernisation of the electricity delivery systems to monitor, protect and automatically optimise the operation of its interconnected elements —from the central and distributed generation through the transmission network and the distribution system, to industrial users and building automation systems, and to energy storage installations and to end-use consumers. 3.2 The scope of disclosure includes products that impart an incremental improvement to energy efficiency, insofar as the entity can demonstrate that the improvement is meaningful, such as through alignment with the milestones set forth in Section 5, ‘Key Sectors ’ of the European Commission ’s Road Map to a Resource Efficient Europe or with EU Directive 2012/27/EU, or through conformance with energy efficiency standards such as the International Electrotechnical Commission ’s (IEC) IE2 High Efficiency, IE3 Premium Efficiency and IE4 Super Premium Efficiency. 3.3 The scope of disclosure excludes products that impart improved resource efficiency in an ancillary, indirect or minimal way (for example, a conventional product that is slightly lighter than the previous generation of the product). SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT |17\n\n[Page 18]\nMaterials Sourcing Topic Summary Electrical and electronic equipment entities are exposed to supply chain risks when critical materials are used in products. Entities in the industry manufacture products using critical materials with few or no available substitutes, many of which are sourced in only a few countries that may be subject to geopolitical uncertainty. Entities in this industry also face competition because of increasing global demand for these materials from other sectors, which may result in price increases and supply risks. Entities that limit the use of critical materials by using alternatives, as well as secure their supply, may mitigate the potential for financial effects stemming from supply disruptions and volatile input prices. Metrics RT-EE-440a.1. Description of the management of risks associated with the use of critical materials 1The entity shall describe how it manages the risks associated with the use of critical materials in its products, including physical limits on availability and access, changes in price, and regulatory and reputational risks, in which: 1.1 a critical material is defined as a material both essential in use and subject to the risk of supply restriction; and 1.2 examples of critical materials may include: 1.2.1 antimony, cobalt, fluorspar, gallium, germanium, graphite, indium, magnesium, niobium, tantalum and tungsten; 1.2.2 platinum group metals (platinum, palladium, iridium, rhodium, ruthenium and osmium); and 1.2.3 rare earth elements, which include yttrium, scandium, lanthanum and the lanthanides (cerium, praseodymium, neodymium, promethium, samarium, europium, gadolinium, terbium, dysprosium, holmium, erbium, thulium, ytterbium and lutetium). 2The entity shall identify the critical materials that present a significant risk to its operations, the type of risks they represent and the strategies the entity uses to mitigate the risks. 2.1 Relevant strategies may include diversification of suppliers, stockpiling of materials, development or procurement of alternative and substitute materials, and investments in recycling technology for critical materials. 3All disclosure shall be sufficient such that it is specific to the risks the entity faces, but that disclosure itself would not compromise the entity ’s ability to maintain confidential information. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT |18",
    "new_id": 984
  },
  {
    "id": 79840,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the implicit relationship between the organization’s due diligence process and its responsibility regarding suppliers, as described in GRI 407: Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining 2016?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The organization is expected to conduct a due diligence process identifying risks both within its operations and across its supply chain, while taking measures to support affected rights.",
      "B": "The organization is only required to ensure that its own operations respect workers’ rights, with no obligation to address supplier practices.",
      "C": "The organization must avoid benefiting from violations but is not expected to actively identify or mitigate risks within its supply chain.",
      "D": "The organization’s sole responsibility is to align its policies with international agreements, without needing to assess specific operational or supplier risks.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "7-8",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 407_ Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining 2016.pdf",
    "source_text": "1. Topic management disclosures An organization reporting in accordance with the GRI Standards is required to report how it manages each of its material topics . An organization that has determined freedom of association and collective bargaining to be a material topic is required to report how it manages the topic using Disclosure 3-3 in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 (see clause 1.1 in this section). This section is therefore designed to supplement – and not replace – Disclosure 3-3 in GRI 3 . REQUIREMENTSThe reporting organization shall report how it manages freedom of association and collective bargaining using Disclosure 3-3 in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 .1.1 RECOMMENDATIONS The reporting organization should describe any policy or policies considered likely to affect workers ’ decisions to form or join a trade union, to bargain collectively or to engage in trade union activities.1.2 GRI 407: Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining 2016 7\n\n[Page 8]\n2. Topic disclosures Disclosure 407-1 Operations and suppliers in which the right to freedom of association and collective bargaining may be at risk The reporting organization shall report the following information:REQUIREMENTS Operations and suppliers in which workers ’ rights to exercise freedom of association or collective bargaining may be violated or at significant risk either in terms of: type of operation (such as manufacturing plant) and supplier; i. countries or geographic areas with operations and suppliers considered at risk. ii.a. Measures taken by the organization in the reporting period intended to support rights to exercise freedom of association and collective bargaining.b. Guidance for Disclosure 407-1 The process for identifying operations and suppliers, as specified in Disclosure 407-1, can reflect the reporting organization’s approach to risk assessment on this issue. It can also draw from recognized international data sources, such as the various outcomes of the ILO Supervisory bodies and the recommendations of the ILO Committee of Freedom of Association (see reference [4] in the Bibliography ). When reporting the measures taken, the organization can refer to the ILO ‘Tripartite Declaration of Principles Concerning Multinational Enterprises and Social Policy’ and Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises for further guidance. Background This disclosure concerns an organization’s due diligence with respect to any negative impacts its activities have had on the human rights of workers to form or join trade unions and to bargain collectively. This can include policies and processes with respect to the organization's business relationships, including its suppliers. It can also include the due diligence process to identify operations and suppliers where these rights are at risk. It also aims to reveal actions that have been taken to support these rights across an organization’s range of operations. This disclosure does not require the organization to express a specific opinion on the quality of national legal systems. Collective agreements can be made at the level of the organization, at the level of a particular site, at the industry level, and at the national level in countries where this is the practice. Collective agreements can cover specific groups of workers, for example, those performing a specific activity or working at a specific location. An organization is expected to respect the rights of workers to exercise freedom of association and collective bargaining. It is also expected to not benefit from or contribute to such violations through its business relationships (e.g., suppliers).GUIDANCE GRI 407: Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining 2016 8",
    "new_id": 985
  },
  {
    "id": 79841,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes the relationship between an entity's obligation to report backlog cancellations associated with hydrocarbon-related projects and its reporting on renewable energy projects, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 33: Engineering & Construction Services?",
    "options": {
      "B": "An entity is required to disclose both the backlog cancellations for hydrocarbon-related projects and the total backlog associated with renewable energy projects, but the latter excludes cancellations.",
      "A": "Backlog cancellations for hydrocarbon-related projects must be disclosed, while renewable energy project backlog is reported only when it involves geothermal or biomass energy.",
      "C": "The disclosure of backlog cancellations applies equally to hydrocarbon-related and renewable energy projects, provided the projects involve engineering or similar services.",
      "D": "Entities are not obligated to disclose backlog cancellations for renewable energy projects unless those projects are directly linked to fossil fuel-based electricity generation.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "13",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol33.pdf",
    "source_text": "1.2.1 Examples of hydrocarbon-related projects include any project directly associated with oil, gas or coal production, transportation, refining, and fossil fuel-based electricity generation. 2 If a significant portion of the entity ’s backlog in hydrocarbon-related projects is associated with natural gas power generation projects, the entity may provide supplementary disclosures describing this proportion of backlog and the sustainability impacts of such projects relative to alternatives or baseline scenarios. 3 The entity may provide a description of the sustainability implications of hydrocarbon-related projects, which may include project descriptions, categorisations by resource type, expected sustainability impacts, and risks related to project completion or conversion to revenue. 4 The entity shall disclose the amount of its backlog associated with (2) renewable energy projects. 4.1 Renewable energy is defined as energy from sources that are replenished at a rate greater than or equal to their rate of depletion, such as geothermal, wind, solar, hydro and biomass. 5 The entity shall exclude from its calculations and disclosures of backlog any amount of an order backlog cancellation that re-enters order backlog during the same reporting period because of a project owner ’s successful re-planning of the project. 6 The scope of disclosure is limited to projects in which the entity provided engineering, architecture, design, construction, installation, planning, consulting, repair or maintenance services, or other similar services. IF-EN-410b.2. Amount of backlog cancellations associated with hydrocarbon- related projects 1 The entity shall disclose the amount of its total backlog associated with hydrocarbon-related projects of any type cancelled during the reporting period for any reason. 1.1 Backlog is defined as the value of projects not completed as of the close of the reporting period (revenue contractually expected in the future but that has not been recognised), or is defined by the entity, consistent with its existing disclosure of backlog. Backlog also may be referenced as revenue backlog or unsatisfied performance obligations. 1.2 Backlog cancellations are defined as the amount of backlog cancelled, reduced, terminated or deferred such that it no longer meets the definition of backlog, or that which is removed from the backlog for any reason other than conversion to revenue or currency exchange rate fluctuations.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 12 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 986
  },
  {
    "id": 79929,
    "question": "When calculating percentages for wood fibre materials sourced from forestlands certified to third-party forest management standards, how should an entity treat wood-fibre certified to multiple applicable standards, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 3: Building Products & Furnishings?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Include the wood-fibre in the calculations for each applicable standard.",
      "A": "Account for the wood-fibre only once across all applicable standards.",
      "B": "Exclude such wood-fibre entirely from the calculations to avoid double-counting.",
      "D": "Allocate the weight of the wood-fibre proportionally among the applicable standards.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "11-12",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol3.pdf",
    "source_text": "3 The entity shall disclose the percentage of its total wood fibre materials sourced from forestlands certified to each applicable third-party forest management standard, separately by standard. 3.1 The percentage shall be calculated as the weight (in air-dried metric tons) of the entity ’s wood fibre materials purchased during the reporting period sourced from forestlands certified to each applicable third-party forest management standard divided by the total weight (in air-dried metric tons) of wood fibre materials purchased during the reporting period. 3.1.1 Wood-fibre certified to more than one third-party forest management standard shall be accounted for by the entity in its calculations for each applicable standard. 4 The entity shall disclose the percentage of total wood fibre materials purchased that have been certified to wood fibre standards. 4.1 Wood fibre standards exclude third-party forest management standards. 4.2 Wood fibre standards include: 4.2.1 SFI Certified Fibre Sourcing Standard 4.2.2 FSC Controlled Wood Standard 4.2.3 PEFC Controlled Wood Standard 4.2.4 Recycled wood fibre standards that include post- and pre-consumer reclaimed material (for example, PEFC Recycled Label and FSC Recycled Label) 4.2.5 Any other due diligence standards related to wood fibre sourcing requirements for wood fibre from non-certified forestlands 4.3 The percentage shall be calculated as the weight (in air-dried metric tons) of the entity ’s wood fibre materials purchased during the reporting period certified to wood fibre standards divided by the total weight (in air-dried metric tons) of wood fibre materials purchased during the reporting period. 4.3.1 Wood-fibre certified to more than one wood fibre standard shall be accounted for by the entity only once. 5 The entity shall disclose the percentage of its wood fibre materials purchased that have been certified to wood fibre standards, separately by standard. 5.1 The percentage shall be calculated as the weight (in air-dried metric tons) of the entity ’s wood fibre materials purchased during the reporting period certified to each applicable wood fibre standard divided by the total weight (in air-dried metric tons) of wood fibre materials purchased during the reporting period. 5.1.1 Wood-fibre certified to more than one third-party wood fibre standard shall be accounted for by the entity in its calculations for each applicable standard.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 10 © IFRS Foundation\n\n[Page 12]\nNote to CG-BF-430a.1 1 The entity shall describe its practices for sourcing wood fibre materials from forestlands not certified to a third-party forest management standard and for sourcing wood fibre materials not certified to other wood fibre certification standards. 2 The entity shall describe its policies to verify the forestry management and harvesting practices of suppliers, which include codes of conduct, audits or contracts. 3 The scope of disclosure shall include how the entity ’s sourcing practices and policies consider the following criteria: 3.1 Wood legality and compliance with applicable jurisdictional laws or regulations 3.2 Wood sourced from areas of protected conservation status or high biodiversity value 3.3 Logging in or near areas of endangered species habitat 3.4 Logging in or near areas of indigenous peoples ’ land 3.5 The forestry management and harvesting practices of suppliers, including environmental impact assessments or forestry management plans 3.6 The use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs), pesticides or other chemicals in forests 3.7 Criteria outlined in the definition of SFI ‘controversial sources ’, the definition of FSC ‘controlled wood ’ or the equivalent 4 The entity also may disclose its wood fibre sources (for example, from corporate, private or government owned forestlands and whether fibre is grown domestically or internationally) and the potential risks associated with procuring fibre from these sources.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 11",
    "new_id": 987
  },
  {
    "id": 79936,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why an incident of discrimination might be categorized as 'no longer subject to action' despite not having been fully resolved through remediation, according to GRI 406: Non-discrimination 2016?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The underlying circumstances leading to the incident have changed, rendering further action unnecessary.",
      "A": "The organization has decided that incidents involving external stakeholders are outside its scope of responsibility.",
      "B": "All incidents of discrimination are automatically closed after a specific reporting period ends.",
      "C": "The complainant has chosen to withdraw the case, and therefore no legal obligation remains for the organization.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "8",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 406_ Non-discrimination 2016.pdf",
    "source_text": "2. Topic disclosures Disclosure 406-1 Incidents of discrimination and corrective actions taken The reporting organization shall report the following information: Compilation requirementsREQUIREMENTS Total number of incidents of discrimination during the reporting period. a. Status of the incidents and actions taken with reference to the following: Incident reviewed by the organization; i. Remediation plans being implemented; ii. Remediation plans that have been implemented, with results reviewed through routine internal management review processes;iii. Incident no longer subject to action. iv.b. When compiling the information specified in Disclosure 406-1, the reporting organization shall include incidents of discrimination on grounds of race, color, sex, religion, political opinion, national extraction, or social origin as defined by the ILO, or other relevant forms of discrimination involving internal and/or external stakeholders across operations in the reporting period.2.1 Guidance for Disclosure 406-1 In the context of this disclosure, an ‘incident’ refers to a legal action or complaint registered with the reporting organization or competent authorities through a formal process, or an instance of non-compliance identified by the organization through established procedures. Established procedures to identify instances of non-compliance can include management system audits, formal monitoring programs, or grievance mechanisms . An incident is no longer subject to action if it is resolved, the case is completed, or no further action is required by the organization. For example, an incident for which no further action is required can include cases that were withdrawn or where the underlying circumstances that led to the incident no longer exist. Background According to ILO instruments, discrimination can occur on the grounds of race, color, sex, religion, political opinion, national extraction, and social origin. Discrimination can also occur based on factors such as age, disability, migrant status, HIV and AIDS, gender, sexual orientation, genetic predisposition, and lifestyles, among others. The presence and effective implementation of policies to avoid discrimination are a basic expectation of responsible business conduct.GUIDANCE 1 1Source: International Labour Organization (ILO), Report I(B) - Equality at work: The continuing challenge - Global Report under the follow-up to the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work , 2011. GRI 406: Non-discrimination 2016 8",
    "new_id": 988
  },
  {
    "id": 79954,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why an entity’s process for classifying, identifying, and reporting lost time incidents might align with guidance from the International Chamber of Shipping and the IMO ISM Code, as described in the Marine Transportation – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "To standardize reporting procedures that could otherwise lead to increased employee turnover and worker-related expenses.",
      "B": "To ensure compliance with anti-bribery laws and reduce corruption risks during port operations.",
      "C": "To provide a framework for mitigating health and safety risks linked to hazardous weather and heavy machinery exposure.",
      "D": "To minimize discrepancies in incident classification that may result in underreported legal liabilities or insurance claims.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "18-19",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Marine Transportation.pdf",
    "source_text": "Workforce Health & Safety Topic Summary Marine transportation workers face dangers such as hazardous weather and exposure to large machinery and heavy cargo. The greatest health and safety risks occur during loading and unloading cargo at ports. Ships must be loaded and unloaded quickly and on schedule, increasing injury risk, fatigue and stress. The health and well-being of workers in the industry also is linked inextricably to entity safety performance since a healthy crew is necessary for safe voyages. Entities with inadequate safety management systems that fail to ensure crew health and safety may witness increased employee turnover and worker-related expenses, including medical expenses such as insurance premiums and worker pay-outs. Metrics TR-MT-320a.1. Lost time incident rate (LTIR) 1 The entity shall disclose its lost time incident rate (LTIR) for work-related injuries and illnesses. 1.1 A lost time incident is an incident that results in absence from work beyond the date or shift when it occurred. 1.2 The rate shall be calculated as: (lost time incidents) / (1,000,000 hours worked). 2The entity may disclose its process for classifying, identifying and reporting lost time incidents. 2.1 The International Chamber of Shipping and the International Maritime Organization (IMO) International Safety Management Code (ISM Code) provide additional guidance in implementing lost time incident reporting. 3The scope of the disclosure includes all employees regardless of employee location. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |MARINE TRANSPORTATION |18\n\n[Page 19]\nBusiness Ethics Topic Summary Port facilitation payments are considered standard business practice in some countries to obtain permits, cargo clearance and port berths. However, anti-bribery laws place pressure on marine transportation entities to alter this practice. Enforcement of these laws may result in significant one-time costs and higher compliance costs and increased cost of capital, or affect an entity ’s social licence to operate. Entity governance must monitor for and prevent corruption, participation —whether wilful or unintentional —in illegal or unethical payments, or the exertion of unfair influence. Operating in corruption-prone countries may exacerbate these risks. Metrics TR-MT-510a.1. Number of calls at ports in countries that have the 20 lowest rankings in Transparency International ’s Corruption Perception Index 1The entity shall disclose the total number of calls at ports in countries that have the 20 lowest rankings in Transparency International ’s Corruption Perception Index (CPI). 1.1 The 20 lowest numerical ranks shall be used to generate the scope of countries. Because more than one country can share a single rank, the scope may include more than 20 countries. 1.2 The entity shall use the most current version of the CPI. TR-MT-510a.2. Total amount of monetary losses as a result of legal proceedings associated with bribery or corruption 1The entity shall disclose the total amount of monetary losses incurred during the reporting period resulting from legal proceedings associated with bribery, corruption or other unethical business practices. 2The legal proceedings shall include any adjudicative proceeding involving the entity, whether before a court, a regulator, an arbitrator or otherwise. 3The losses shall include all monetary liabilities to the opposing party or to others (whether as the result of settlement, verdict after trial or otherwise), including fines and other monetary liabilities incurred during the reporting period as a result of civil actions (for example, civil judgements or settlements), regulatory proceedings (for example, penalties, disgorgement or restitution) and criminal actions (for example, criminal judgements, penalties or restitution) brought by any entity (for example, governmental, business or individual). 4The scope of monetary losses shall exclude legal and other fees and expenses incurred by the entity in its defence. 5The scope of the disclosure shall include legal proceedings associated with the enforcement of applicable jurisdictional laws or regulations. Note to TR-MT-510a.2 SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |MARINE TRANSPORTATION |19",
    "new_id": 989
  },
  {
    "id": 79955,
    "question": "Which scenario is most likely to create ambiguity in the reporting of lost time incidents (LTIR) under the ISM Code, based on how entities might interpret or apply its guidance in the Marine Transportation – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Entities interpret the ISM Code’s guidance differently, leading to variations in whether an incident is classified based on the severity of injury versus actual work absence.",
      "A": "Entities consistently classify all injuries requiring medical attention as lost time incidents regardless of work absence.",
      "C": "Entities exclude incidents resulting in absence due to fatigue or stress if no physical injury occurred.",
      "D": "Entities fail to include incidents occurring beyond port operations, such as those during voyages.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "18-19",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Marine Transportation.pdf",
    "source_text": "Workforce Health & Safety Topic Summary Marine transportation workers face dangers such as hazardous weather and exposure to large machinery and heavy cargo. The greatest health and safety risks occur during loading and unloading cargo at ports. Ships must be loaded and unloaded quickly and on schedule, increasing injury risk, fatigue and stress. The health and well-being of workers in the industry also is linked inextricably to entity safety performance since a healthy crew is necessary for safe voyages. Entities with inadequate safety management systems that fail to ensure crew health and safety may witness increased employee turnover and worker-related expenses, including medical expenses such as insurance premiums and worker pay-outs. Metrics TR-MT-320a.1. Lost time incident rate (LTIR) 1 The entity shall disclose its lost time incident rate (LTIR) for work-related injuries and illnesses. 1.1 A lost time incident is an incident that results in absence from work beyond the date or shift when it occurred. 1.2 The rate shall be calculated as: (lost time incidents) / (1,000,000 hours worked). 2The entity may disclose its process for classifying, identifying and reporting lost time incidents. 2.1 The International Chamber of Shipping and the International Maritime Organization (IMO) International Safety Management Code (ISM Code) provide additional guidance in implementing lost time incident reporting. 3The scope of the disclosure includes all employees regardless of employee location. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |MARINE TRANSPORTATION |18\n\n[Page 19]\nBusiness Ethics Topic Summary Port facilitation payments are considered standard business practice in some countries to obtain permits, cargo clearance and port berths. However, anti-bribery laws place pressure on marine transportation entities to alter this practice. Enforcement of these laws may result in significant one-time costs and higher compliance costs and increased cost of capital, or affect an entity ’s social licence to operate. Entity governance must monitor for and prevent corruption, participation —whether wilful or unintentional —in illegal or unethical payments, or the exertion of unfair influence. Operating in corruption-prone countries may exacerbate these risks. Metrics TR-MT-510a.1. Number of calls at ports in countries that have the 20 lowest rankings in Transparency International ’s Corruption Perception Index 1The entity shall disclose the total number of calls at ports in countries that have the 20 lowest rankings in Transparency International ’s Corruption Perception Index (CPI). 1.1 The 20 lowest numerical ranks shall be used to generate the scope of countries. Because more than one country can share a single rank, the scope may include more than 20 countries. 1.2 The entity shall use the most current version of the CPI. TR-MT-510a.2. Total amount of monetary losses as a result of legal proceedings associated with bribery or corruption 1The entity shall disclose the total amount of monetary losses incurred during the reporting period resulting from legal proceedings associated with bribery, corruption or other unethical business practices. 2The legal proceedings shall include any adjudicative proceeding involving the entity, whether before a court, a regulator, an arbitrator or otherwise. 3The losses shall include all monetary liabilities to the opposing party or to others (whether as the result of settlement, verdict after trial or otherwise), including fines and other monetary liabilities incurred during the reporting period as a result of civil actions (for example, civil judgements or settlements), regulatory proceedings (for example, penalties, disgorgement or restitution) and criminal actions (for example, criminal judgements, penalties or restitution) brought by any entity (for example, governmental, business or individual). 4The scope of monetary losses shall exclude legal and other fees and expenses incurred by the entity in its defence. 5The scope of the disclosure shall include legal proceedings associated with the enforcement of applicable jurisdictional laws or regulations. Note to TR-MT-510a.2 SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |MARINE TRANSPORTATION |19",
    "new_id": 990
  },
  {
    "id": 79971,
    "question": "Which of the following represents a necessary but insufficient condition for an entity to effectively mitigate reputational damage caused by animal welfare or human rights incidents in its supply chain?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Implementing supplier screening and diversification strategies as part of its risk management approach.",
      "A": "Maintaining certifications for all product categories across environmental and social standards.",
      "B": "Engaging in supplier training programs focused exclusively on fuel economy regulations and transportation costs.",
      "D": "Identifying specific product lines that present risks without addressing broader supply chain vulnerabilities.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "12",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol22.pdf",
    "source_text": "1.3.8 U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Organic; and 1.3.9 UTZ Certified. 2 The entity may additionally break down the disclosure by product category and certification type. 2.1 A product category is defined as a group of related products that offer a similar general functionality (for example, meat, produce, packaged goods). 2.2 Certification types may be grouped based on the topic or scope of the standard, and can include animal welfare, working conditions, organic, sustainable fishing or harvesting. FB-FR-430a.3. Discussion of strategy to manage environmental and social risks within the supply chain, including animal welfare 1 The entity shall discuss its strategic approach to managing its environmental and social risks present within, or which may arise out of, its food and food products supply chain. 1.1 Environmental and social risks may include: 1.1.1 Impacts on crop and livestock production because of climate change (for example, changing average temperatures and water stress) that may affect cost and availability of produce, meat, poultry, dairy and processed food products; 1.1.2 Animal feed price increases resulting from environmental and social factors or tightening environmental regulations that may have price impacts on meat, poultry and dairy; 1.1.3 Fuel economy regulations that affect transportation costs; 1.1.4 Labour rights and immigration reforms that affect food prices and availability; 1.1.5 International trade barriers or varying levels of food safety oversight in a global market; 1.1.6 Commercial catch limits that could affect the supply of seafood products; and 1.1.7 Animal welfare, human rights or related supply chain incidents that may result in reputational damage. 1.2 Relevant strategies to discuss may include supplier screening, diversification of suppliers, supplier training programmes on best environmental management practices, supplier engagement on labour and human rights issues, and maintenance of a supply chain code of conduct, supply chain audits and certifications. 2 The entity shall identify which products or product lines present risks to its operations, the risks represented and the strategies the entity uses to mitigate such risks.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 11",
    "new_id": 991
  },
  {
    "id": 80108,
    "question": "Which scenario best illustrates a situation where an entity in the Hardware industry fails to meet its obligations under the described approach to managing data security risks, as outlined in the Hardware – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "An entity integrates enhanced data security features into its products but neglects to assess potential vulnerabilities during the manufacturing supply chain phase.",
      "A": "An entity identifies a vulnerability in its product design but delays corrective actions due to budget constraints, assuming the risk is low.",
      "B": "An entity implements robust policies and procedures to address identified vulnerabilities but does not disclose these measures to its customers.",
      "C": "An entity conducts regular audits of its products for vulnerabilities but lacks a clear process for determining financial consequences related to identified risks.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "8",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Hardware.pdf",
    "source_text": "Product Security Topic Summary The hardware products and related software offered by entities in the Hardware industry may have vulnerabilities that expose consumers to data security threats. Therefore, hardware manufacturers must help ensure user data security. Such vulnerabilities may occur at any stage of a product lifecycle, including product design, the manufacturing supply chain, product distribution and the product ’s use-phase. Entities in the industry unable to identify vulnerabilities may risk exposing consumer data to security threats and potentially eroding the trust of their customer base. Cybersecurity threats create both risks and opportunities for the Hardware industry, as effective product security may be a source of competitive advantage for entities, potentially increasing their sales and market share. Additionally, user concerns about data security and related government actions may also serve as revenue-generating opportunities for securing government contracts and providing security products. Metrics TC-HW-230a.1. Description of approach to identifying and addressing data security risks in products 1The entity shall describe its approach to identifying information system vulnerabilities that may pose a data security risk in the entity ’s products. 1.1 Vulnerability is defined as a weakness in an information system, implementation, system security procedure or internal control that could be exploited. 1.2 Data security risk is defined as the risk of any circumstance or event with the potential to affect organisational operations (including mission, functions, image or reputation), assets, products, individuals, or other organisations or governments through an information system via unauthorised access, destruction, disclosure, modification of information or denial of service. 2The entity shall describe its approach to managing identified data security risks and vulnerabilities associated with the entity ’s products. 2.1 The discussion may include: 2.1.1 policies and procedures that determine the entity ’s approach to responding to identified data security risks and vulnerabilities; 2.1.2 corrective actions taken by the entity in response to identified vulnerabilities; and 2.1.3 financial consequences from identified data security risks and vulnerabilities, including remediation costs and reputational risk. 3If relevant, the entity may describe its products and services that specifically enable enhanced data security for users, or features it integrates into existing products to specifically enhance data security. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |HARDWARE |8",
    "new_id": 992
  },
  {
    "id": 80114,
    "question": "Which scenario best illustrates a situation where an entity in the Hardware industry might face reputational risks while managing critical materials, as outlined in the Hardware – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "An entity identifies a material as critical but refrains from specifying it due to potential competitive harm, while still describing associated risks and mitigation strategies.",
      "B": "An entity avoids disclosing any information about its critical materials to prevent competitive harm.",
      "C": "An entity stockpiles large quantities of cobalt without diversifying suppliers, leading to increased scrutiny over environmental concerns.",
      "D": "An entity invests heavily in recycling technology for all its critical materials but fails to address supply chain transparency.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "22-23",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Hardware.pdf",
    "source_text": "Materials Sourcing Topic Summary Entities in the Hardware industry rely on numerous critical materials as important inputs for finished products. Many of these inputs have few or no available substitutes and often are sourced from only a few countries, many of which may be subject to geopolitical uncertainty. Other sustainability impacts related to climate change, land use, resource scarcity and conflict in regions where the industry ’s supply chain operates are also increasingly shaping the industry ’s ability to source materials. Additionally, increased competition for these materials because of growing global demand from other sectors may result in price increases and supply risks. The ability of entities to manage potential material shortages, supply disruptions, price volatility and reputational risks is made more difficult by the practice of commonly sourcing materials from supply chains that may lack transparency. Failure to effectively manage sourcing may constrain access to necessary materials, reduce margins, impair revenue growth or increase costs of capital. Metrics TC-HW-440a.1. Description of the management of risks associated with the use of critical materials 1The entity shall describe how it manages the risks associated with the use of critical materials in its products, including physical limits on availability and access, changes in price and regulatory and reputational risks, in which: 1.1 a critical material is defined as a material both essential in use and subject to the risk of supply restriction; and 1.2 examples of critical materials may include: 1.2.1 antimony, cobalt, fluorspar, gallium, germanium, graphite, indium, magnesium, niobium, tantalum and tungsten; 1.2.2 platinum group metals (platinum, palladium, iridium, rhodium, ruthenium and osmium); and 1.2.3 rare earth elements, which include yttrium, scandium, lanthanum and the lanthanides (cerium, praseodymium, neodymium, promethium, samarium, europium, gadolinium, terbium, dysprosium, holmium, erbium, thulium, ytterbium and lutetium). 2The entity shall identify the critical materials that present a significant risk to its operations, the type of risks they represent and the strategies the entity uses to mitigate the risks. 2.1 Relevant strategies may include diversification of suppliers, stockpiling of materials, development or procurement of alternative and substitute materials, and investments in recycling technology for critical materials. 3All disclosure shall be sufficient such that it is specific to the risks the entity faces, but that disclosure itself would not compromise the entity ’s ability to maintain confidential information. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |HARDWARE |22\n\n[Page 23]\n3.1 For example, if an entity determines not to identify a specific critical material that presents a significant risk to its operations because of the competitive harm that could result from the disclosure, the entity shall disclose the existence of such risks, the type of risks and the strategies used to mitigate the risks, but the entity is not required to disclose the relevant critical material. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |HARDWARE |23",
    "new_id": 993
  },
  {
    "id": 80115,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between product security vulnerabilities and an entity's approach to addressing data security risks, as described in the Hardware – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "The entity must describe both the identification of vulnerabilities and the management of associated risks, which may include financial consequences such as remediation costs and reputational risk.",
      "A": "An entity’s description of its approach to addressing data security risks is limited to vulnerabilities identified during the product design phase, excluding other lifecycle stages.",
      "C": "Entities are required to focus exclusively on vulnerabilities arising from the manufacturing supply chain, as this is considered the most critical stage for data security.",
      "D": "The entity's approach to addressing data security risks is deemed sufficient if it only outlines policies and procedures without detailing specific corrective actions or financial impacts.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "7-8",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Hardware.pdf",
    "source_text": "Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORYUNIT OF MEASURECODE Number of units produced by product category4Quantitative Number TC-HW-000.A Area of manufacturing facilities QuantitativeSquare metres (m²)TC-HW-000.B Percentage of production from owned facilities QuantitativePercentage (%)TC-HW-000.C 4Note to TC-HW-000.A – The entity shall indicate the number of units produced during the reporting period, whether the entity manufactured them in its own facilities, or contract manufacturers or suppliers produced them. The disclosure shall use the following product categories: communications equipment, components, computer hardware, computer peripherals, computer storage, consumer electronics, other hardware, printing & imaging and transaction management systems. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |HARDWARE |7\n\n[Page 8]\nProduct Security Topic Summary The hardware products and related software offered by entities in the Hardware industry may have vulnerabilities that expose consumers to data security threats. Therefore, hardware manufacturers must help ensure user data security. Such vulnerabilities may occur at any stage of a product lifecycle, including product design, the manufacturing supply chain, product distribution and the product ’s use-phase. Entities in the industry unable to identify vulnerabilities may risk exposing consumer data to security threats and potentially eroding the trust of their customer base. Cybersecurity threats create both risks and opportunities for the Hardware industry, as effective product security may be a source of competitive advantage for entities, potentially increasing their sales and market share. Additionally, user concerns about data security and related government actions may also serve as revenue-generating opportunities for securing government contracts and providing security products. Metrics TC-HW-230a.1. Description of approach to identifying and addressing data security risks in products 1The entity shall describe its approach to identifying information system vulnerabilities that may pose a data security risk in the entity ’s products. 1.1 Vulnerability is defined as a weakness in an information system, implementation, system security procedure or internal control that could be exploited. 1.2 Data security risk is defined as the risk of any circumstance or event with the potential to affect organisational operations (including mission, functions, image or reputation), assets, products, individuals, or other organisations or governments through an information system via unauthorised access, destruction, disclosure, modification of information or denial of service. 2The entity shall describe its approach to managing identified data security risks and vulnerabilities associated with the entity ’s products. 2.1 The discussion may include: 2.1.1 policies and procedures that determine the entity ’s approach to responding to identified data security risks and vulnerabilities; 2.1.2 corrective actions taken by the entity in response to identified vulnerabilities; and 2.1.3 financial consequences from identified data security risks and vulnerabilities, including remediation costs and reputational risk. 3If relevant, the entity may describe its products and services that specifically enable enhanced data security for users, or features it integrates into existing products to specifically enhance data security. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |HARDWARE |8",
    "new_id": 994
  },
  {
    "id": 80148,
    "question": "Which statement accurately captures the necessary conditions for an incident to be classified as work-related and reportable under the disclosure requirements, according to the Air Freight & Logistics – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "An incident is considered work-related if it arises during travel when the employee is engaged in activities benefiting the employer and constitutes a new case of injury or illness.",
      "A": "An incident is work-related if it occurs in a physical location where the employee is present as part of their employment, regardless of whether the injury arises from work activities.",
      "B": "An incident qualifies as work-related only if it involves a new case of injury or illness that happens while the employee is traveling for leisure but still within working hours.",
      "D": "All injuries or illnesses occurring in any environment involving company-owned equipment are automatically classified as work-related, even if they stem from pre-existing conditions.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "17-18",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Air Freight & Logistics.pdf",
    "source_text": "4.1 Work-related incidents are injuries and illnesses resulting from events or exposures in the work environment. 4.2 The work environment is the establishment and other locations where one or more employees are working or are present as a condition of their employment. 4.3 The work environment includes not only physical locations, but also the equipment or materials used by the employee during the course of work. 4.4 Incidents that occur while an employee is travelling are work-related if, at the time of the injury or illness, the employee was engaged in work activities in the interest of the employer. 4.5 A work-related incident must be a new case, not a previously recorded injury or illness being updated. 5 The entity shall disclose the rates for each of these employee categories: 5.1 direct employees, defined as individuals on the entity ’s payroll, whether they are full-time, short service, part-time, executive, labour, salary, seasonal, migrant, or hourly employees. 5.2 contract employees, defined as individuals who are not on the entity ’s payroll, but whom the entity supervises or manages, including independent contractors and those employed by third parties (for example, temp agencies and labour brokers). 6The scope of the disclosure includes all employees regardless of employee location or type of employment. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |AIR FREIGHT & LOGISTICS |17\n\n[Page 18]\nSupply Chain Management Topic Summary Many entities in the Air Freight & Logistics industry contract with large, complex networks of asset-based third-party providers to provide freight transportation services to their customers. Contracting is common among entities providing freight forwarding, logistics, brokerage and intermodal services. These contractors operate across all modes of transport such as motor carriers, railroads, air freight and ocean carriers. Entities must manage contractor relationships to ensure contractor actions that may result in environmental or social impacts do not result in material adverse effects on their own operations, such as decreased brand value. At the same time, entities that offer low- carbon logistics solutions may capture market share from customers seeking to reduce the carbon footprint of their shipments. Metrics TR-AF-430a.2. Total greenhouse gas (GHG) footprint across transport modes 1The entity shall disclose the complete tank-to-wheels greenhouse gas (GHG) footprint in metric tonnes of CO 2-e per metric tonne-kilometre. 2Tank-to-wheels emissions relate to vehicle processes and exclude upstream emissions associated with primary energy production (well-to-tank emissions). 2.1 The entity shall calculate its disclosure according to EN 16258:2012 – Methodology for calculation and declaration of energy consumption and GHG emissions of transport services (freight and passengers). 2.1.1 Calculations shall be consistent with the methodology used to calculate the ‘tank-to-wheels GHG emissions (Gt) ’ result that is described in EN 16258:2012. 2.1.2 Determination of transportation system scope, boundaries and any necessary allocations shall be consistent with the methodology described in EN 16258:2012. 3The scope of disclosure includes emissions from all freight transportation and logistics activities, including those from the entity ’s own assets (Scope 1) and those from contract carriers and outsourced freight forwarding services. 4The scope of disclosure includes emissions from all modes of transportation, such as road freight, air freight, barge transport, marine transport and rail transport. 5Consistent with EN 16258:2012, disclosure may be based on calculations from a mix of categories of emissions values (specific measured values, transport operator vehicle-type- or route-type-specific values, transport operator fleet values and default values). 6If relevant and necessary for interpretation of disclosure, the entity shall describe its allocation methods, emissions values, boundaries, mix of transport services used and other information. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |AIR FREIGHT & LOGISTICS |18",
    "new_id": 995
  },
  {
    "id": 80149,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why an entity in the Air Freight & Logistics industry might choose to invest in mechanisms that filter emissions, despite the associated upfront costs, as described in the Air Freight & Logistics – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "To mitigate long-term regulatory exposure by addressing pollutants like NOx, SOx, and PM10, even though these actions may increase short-term operating costs.",
      "A": "To comply with customer demand for reduced greenhouse gas emissions, as N2O is explicitly highlighted as a pollutant of concern.",
      "B": "To exclusively target the reduction of PM10 emissions, which are defined as liquid materials with an aerodynamic diameter greater than 10 micrometres.",
      "C": "To modernize fleets solely due to rising fuel costs, as alternative fuels are noted to eliminate all direct air emissions.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "13",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Air Freight & Logistics.pdf",
    "source_text": "Air Quality Topic Summary Entities in the Air Freight & Logistics industry generate air pollutants that may threaten human health. The industry ’s primary air emissions include sulphur oxides (SOx), nitrogen oxides (NOx) and particulate matter (PM), which negatively affect local air quality. As regulators debate the most efficient mechanisms to reduce local air pollution from the industry, entities may be forced to increase operating costs or make investments to modernise their fleets because of regulatory pressure, customer demand and rising fuel costs. Use of more expensive alternative fuels and mechanisms that filter emissions prior to release into the atmosphere also may affect an entity ’s cost structure, requiring upfront costs but decreasing regulatory exposure over the long term. Metrics TR-AF-120a.1. Air emissions of the following pollutants: (1) NO x (excluding N 2O), (2) SO x, and (3) particulate matter (PM 10) 1The entity shall disclose its emissions of air pollutants, in metric tonnes per pollutant, released into the atmosphere. 1.1 The scope of the disclosure includes air pollutants associated with the entity ’s direct air emissions resulting from all the entity ’s activities and sources of emissions, which may include stationary or mobile sources, production facilities, office buildings and transportation fleets. 2 The entity shall disclose its emissions of (1) oxides of nitrogen (NO x), reported as NO x. 2.1 The scope of NO x includes NO and NO 2, but excludes N 2O. 3 The entity shall disclose its emissions of (2) oxides of sulphur (SO x), reported as SO x. 3.1 The scope of SO x includes SO 2 and SO 3. 4The entity shall disclose its emissions of (3) particulate matter 10 micrometres or less in diameter (PM 10), reported as PM 10. 4.1 PM10 is defined as any airborne finely divided solid or liquid material with an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to a nominal 10 micrometres. 5The entity may discuss the calculation method for its emissions disclosure, such as whether data is from continuous emissions monitoring systems (CEMS), engineering calculations or mass balance calculations. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |AIR FREIGHT & LOGISTICS |13",
    "new_id": 996
  },
  {
    "id": 80150,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes why an entity in the Air Freight & Logistics industry might face increased regulatory exposure despite adopting mechanisms to filter emissions prior to release into the atmosphere, according to the Air Freight & Logistics – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Because investments in filtering mechanisms do not address greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, which remain subject to regulatory scrutiny.",
      "B": "Because filtering mechanisms are ineffective at reducing sulphur oxides (SOx) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) emissions.",
      "C": "Because the use of higher heating values (HHV) for energy consumption calculations inherently increases reported emission levels.",
      "D": "Because regulatory pressure may still require further reductions in particulate matter (PM10) beyond what filtering systems achieve.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "12-13",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Air Freight & Logistics.pdf",
    "source_text": "5In disclosing fuel consumed by (2) air transport-related operations, the entity shall additionally disclose the percentage of fuel consumed that was (b) sustainable fuel. 5.1 Sustainable fuel is defined as a subset of alternative fuel that meets all of the following criteria described by ICAO: 5.1.1 Achieves net greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction on a life cycle basis 5.1.2 Avoids competition with food and water through utilisation of marginal or unviable land 5.1.3 Contributes to local social and economic development, such as through expanded employment and revitalised infrastructure. 5.2 The percentage shall be calculated as the amount of sustainable fuel consumed by air transport-related operations (in GJ) divided by the total amount of fuel consumed by air transport-related operations (in GJ). 6 The scope of disclosure is limited to fuel the entity directly consumed. 7In calculating energy consumption from fuels, the entity shall use higher heating values (HHV), also known as gross calorific values (GCV), which are measured directly or taken from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 8The entity shall apply conversion factors consistently for all data reported under this disclosure, such as the use of HHVs for fuel use (including biofuels). SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |AIR FREIGHT & LOGISTICS |12\n\n[Page 13]\nAir Quality Topic Summary Entities in the Air Freight & Logistics industry generate air pollutants that may threaten human health. The industry ’s primary air emissions include sulphur oxides (SOx), nitrogen oxides (NOx) and particulate matter (PM), which negatively affect local air quality. As regulators debate the most efficient mechanisms to reduce local air pollution from the industry, entities may be forced to increase operating costs or make investments to modernise their fleets because of regulatory pressure, customer demand and rising fuel costs. Use of more expensive alternative fuels and mechanisms that filter emissions prior to release into the atmosphere also may affect an entity ’s cost structure, requiring upfront costs but decreasing regulatory exposure over the long term. Metrics TR-AF-120a.1. Air emissions of the following pollutants: (1) NO x (excluding N 2O), (2) SO x, and (3) particulate matter (PM 10) 1The entity shall disclose its emissions of air pollutants, in metric tonnes per pollutant, released into the atmosphere. 1.1 The scope of the disclosure includes air pollutants associated with the entity ’s direct air emissions resulting from all the entity ’s activities and sources of emissions, which may include stationary or mobile sources, production facilities, office buildings and transportation fleets. 2 The entity shall disclose its emissions of (1) oxides of nitrogen (NO x), reported as NO x. 2.1 The scope of NO x includes NO and NO 2, but excludes N 2O. 3 The entity shall disclose its emissions of (2) oxides of sulphur (SO x), reported as SO x. 3.1 The scope of SO x includes SO 2 and SO 3. 4The entity shall disclose its emissions of (3) particulate matter 10 micrometres or less in diameter (PM 10), reported as PM 10. 4.1 PM10 is defined as any airborne finely divided solid or liquid material with an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to a nominal 10 micrometres. 5The entity may discuss the calculation method for its emissions disclosure, such as whether data is from continuous emissions monitoring systems (CEMS), engineering calculations or mass balance calculations. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |AIR FREIGHT & LOGISTICS |13",
    "new_id": 997
  },
  {
    "id": 80151,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects a necessary condition for a fuel to be classified as sustainable according to the disclosure requirements in the Air Freight & Logistics – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "The fuel must avoid competition with food and water resources by utilizing marginal or unviable land while also contributing to local social and economic development.",
      "A": "The fuel must achieve net greenhouse gas emissions reduction on a life cycle basis and be derived exclusively from non-food sources.",
      "C": "The fuel is required to meet all three criteria: net GHG reduction, avoidance of competition with food and water, and contribution to local development, but only if it is consumed in operations outside the entity’s direct control.",
      "D": "The fuel must reduce sulphur oxide emissions by at least 50% compared to conventional fuels while also avoiding reliance on marginal land.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "12-13",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Air Freight & Logistics.pdf",
    "source_text": "5In disclosing fuel consumed by (2) air transport-related operations, the entity shall additionally disclose the percentage of fuel consumed that was (b) sustainable fuel. 5.1 Sustainable fuel is defined as a subset of alternative fuel that meets all of the following criteria described by ICAO: 5.1.1 Achieves net greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction on a life cycle basis 5.1.2 Avoids competition with food and water through utilisation of marginal or unviable land 5.1.3 Contributes to local social and economic development, such as through expanded employment and revitalised infrastructure. 5.2 The percentage shall be calculated as the amount of sustainable fuel consumed by air transport-related operations (in GJ) divided by the total amount of fuel consumed by air transport-related operations (in GJ). 6 The scope of disclosure is limited to fuel the entity directly consumed. 7In calculating energy consumption from fuels, the entity shall use higher heating values (HHV), also known as gross calorific values (GCV), which are measured directly or taken from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 8The entity shall apply conversion factors consistently for all data reported under this disclosure, such as the use of HHVs for fuel use (including biofuels). SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |AIR FREIGHT & LOGISTICS |12\n\n[Page 13]\nAir Quality Topic Summary Entities in the Air Freight & Logistics industry generate air pollutants that may threaten human health. The industry ’s primary air emissions include sulphur oxides (SOx), nitrogen oxides (NOx) and particulate matter (PM), which negatively affect local air quality. As regulators debate the most efficient mechanisms to reduce local air pollution from the industry, entities may be forced to increase operating costs or make investments to modernise their fleets because of regulatory pressure, customer demand and rising fuel costs. Use of more expensive alternative fuels and mechanisms that filter emissions prior to release into the atmosphere also may affect an entity ’s cost structure, requiring upfront costs but decreasing regulatory exposure over the long term. Metrics TR-AF-120a.1. Air emissions of the following pollutants: (1) NO x (excluding N 2O), (2) SO x, and (3) particulate matter (PM 10) 1The entity shall disclose its emissions of air pollutants, in metric tonnes per pollutant, released into the atmosphere. 1.1 The scope of the disclosure includes air pollutants associated with the entity ’s direct air emissions resulting from all the entity ’s activities and sources of emissions, which may include stationary or mobile sources, production facilities, office buildings and transportation fleets. 2 The entity shall disclose its emissions of (1) oxides of nitrogen (NO x), reported as NO x. 2.1 The scope of NO x includes NO and NO 2, but excludes N 2O. 3 The entity shall disclose its emissions of (2) oxides of sulphur (SO x), reported as SO x. 3.1 The scope of SO x includes SO 2 and SO 3. 4The entity shall disclose its emissions of (3) particulate matter 10 micrometres or less in diameter (PM 10), reported as PM 10. 4.1 PM10 is defined as any airborne finely divided solid or liquid material with an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to a nominal 10 micrometres. 5The entity may discuss the calculation method for its emissions disclosure, such as whether data is from continuous emissions monitoring systems (CEMS), engineering calculations or mass balance calculations. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |AIR FREIGHT & LOGISTICS |13",
    "new_id": 998
  },
  {
    "id": 80168,
    "question": "Which statement accurately captures the relationship between sustainability-related impacts and systemic risk in the insurance industry, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 17: Insurance?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Entities engaging in non-traditional activities, such as credit default swaps, are considered more vulnerable to financial market developments and may amplify systemic risk.",
      "A": "Insurance entities contribute to sustainability-related impacts solely through their underwriting of non-traditional products like credit default swaps.",
      "B": "The potential for moral hazard created by insurance products is explicitly identified as a driver of systemic risk by regulators.",
      "D": "Sustainability-related impacts are mitigated entirely by the regulatory oversight applied to Systemically Important Financial Institutions.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "4",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol17.pdf",
    "source_text": "Volume 17 —Insurance Industry Description The Insurance industry provides both traditional and non-traditional insurance-related products. Traditional policy lines include property, life, casualty and reinsurance. Non- traditional products include annuities, alternative risk transfers and financial guarantees. Entities in the insurance industry also engage in proprietary investments. Insurance entities generally operate within a single segment in the industry, for example, property and casualty, although some large insurance entities have diversified operations. Similarly, entities may vary based on the level of their geographical segmentation. Whereas large entities may underwrite insurance premiums in many countries, smaller entities generally operate in a single country or jurisdiction. Insurance premiums, underwriting revenue and investment income drive industry growth, while insurance claim payments present the most significant cost and source of uncertainty for profits. Insurance entities provide products and services that enable the transfer, pooling and sharing of risk necessary for a well-functioning economy. Insurance entities, through their products, can also create a form of moral hazard, reducing incentives to improve underlying behaviour and performance, and thus contributing to sustainability-related impacts. Like other financial institutions, insurance entities face risks associated with credit and financial markets. Within the industry, regulators have identified entities that engage in non-traditional or non-insurance activities, including credit default swaps (CDS) protection and debt securities insurance, as being more vulnerable to financial market developments, and therefore more likely to amplify or contribute to systemic risk. As a result, some insurance entities may be designated as Systemically Important Financial Institutions, thus exposing them to increased regulation and oversight. Note: Topics and metrics regarding sustainability issues associated with the provision of health insurance are outlined in the Managed Care (HC-MC) industry. . Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Incorporation of Environmental, Social and Governance Factors in Investment ManagementDescription of approach to incorporation of environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors in investment management processes and strategiesDiscussion and Analysisn/a FN-IN-410a.2 Policies Designed to Incentivise Responsible BehaviourNet premiums written related to energy efficiency and low carbon technologyQuantitative Presentation currencyFN-IN-410b.1 Discussion of products or product features that incentivise health, safety or environmentally responsible actions or behavioursDiscussion and Analysisn/a FN-IN-410b.2 continued...IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 3",
    "new_id": 999
  },
  {
    "id": 80184,
    "question": "Which scenario demonstrates the most accurate application of the GRI Standards’ requirements and guidance regarding reporting on market presence-related impacts, as outlined in GRI 202: Market Presence 2016?",
    "options": {
      "D": "An organization provides a hyperlink in its standalone sustainability report to an external webpage where a required disclosure about its market presence-related impacts is published, while clearly referencing this in the GRI content index.",
      "A": "An organization omits a required disclosure about its market presence because it determines that the information is immaterial to its stakeholders, without providing any reason for the omission in the GRI content index.",
      "B": "An organization avoids reporting on a specific market presence-related impact by arguing that the associated policy does not exist and therefore cannot be disclosed under any circumstances.",
      "C": "An organization reports all disclosures from the Topic Standard relevant to its material topics but excludes explanations or reasons for any missing items, such as non-existent committees or policies.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "5-6",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 202_ Market Presence 2016.pdf",
    "source_text": "Figure 1. GRI Standards: Universal, Sector and Topic Standards Apply all three Universal Standards to your reportingUse the Sector Standards that apply to your sectorsSelect Topic Standards to report specific information on your material topicsSector Standards Universal Standards Topic StandardsGRI Standards Requirements and principles for using the GRI Standards Disclosures about the reporting organization Disclosures and guidance about the organization's material topics Using this Standard This Standard can be used by any organization – regardless of size, type, sector, geographic location, or reporting experience – to report information about its market presence-related impacts . An organization reporting in accordance with the GRI Standards is required to report the following disclosures if it has determined market presence to be a material topic : See Requirements 4 and 5 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 . Reasons for omission are permitted for these disclosures. If the organization cannot comply with a disclosure or with a requirement in a disclosure (e.g., because the required information is confidential or subject to legal prohibitions), the organization is required to specify the disclosure or the requirement it cannot comply with, and provide a reason for omission together with an explanation in the GRI content index. See Requirement 6 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 for more information on reasons for omission. If the organization cannot report the required information about an item specified in a disclosure because the item (e.g., committee, policy, practice, process) does not exist, it can comply with the requirement by reporting this to be the case. The organization can explain the reasons for not having this item, or describe any plans to develop it. The disclosure does not require the organization to implement the item (e.g., developing a policy), but to report that the item does not exist. If the organization intends to publish a standalone sustainability report, it does not need to repeat information that it has already reported publicly elsewhere, such as on web pages or in its annual report. In such a case, the organization can report a required disclosure by providing a reference in the GRI content index as to where this information can be found (e.g., by providing a link to the web page or citing the page in the annual report where the information has been published). Disclosure 3-3 in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 (see clause 1.1 in this Standard); • Any disclosures from this Topic Standard that are relevant to the organization’s market presence-related impacts (Disclosure 202-1 through Disclosure 202-2).• GRI 202: Market Presence 2016 5\n\n[Page 6]\nRequirements, guidance and defined terms The following apply throughout this Standard: Requirements are presented in bold font and indicated by the word 'shall'. An organization must comply with requirements to report in accordance with the GRI Standards. Requirements may be accompanied by guidance. Guidance includes background information, explanations, and examples to help the organization better understand the requirements. The organization is not required to comply with guidance. The Standards may also include recommendations. These are cases where a particular course of action is encouraged but not required. The word ‘should’ indicates a recommendation, and the word ‘can’ indicates a possibility or option. Defined terms are underlined in the text of the GRI Standards and linked to their definitions in the Glossary . The organization is required to apply the definitions in the Glossary. GRI 202: Market Presence 2016 6",
    "new_id": 1000
  },
  {
    "id": 80200,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why disclosing Tier 2 PSE metrics separately might be considered less critical than Tier 1 metrics under ANSI/API RP 754, as referenced in the Chemicals – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Disclosure of Tier 2 PSE metrics is optional because they do not meet the threshold for mandatory reporting under ANSI/API RP 754.",
      "B": "Tier 2 PSEs are less severe and therefore have minimal impact on operational safety or regulatory compliance.",
      "C": "Tier 2 PSEs occur exclusively during transportation, which falls outside the scope of entity-owned or -operated facilities.",
      "D": "The severity-weighted nature of Tier 2 PSEs makes them inherently less relevant to process safety management strategies.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "34",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Chemicals.pdf",
    "source_text": "Operational Safety, Emergency Preparedness & Response Topic Summary Health, safety and emergency management is a critical issue for entities in the Chemicals industry. Technical failure, human error or external factors such as weather may result in accidental releases of chemical substances into the environment at processing facilities or during storage and transportation. Furthermore, the combustible nature of some chemical substances, combined with the high operating temperatures and pressures involved in manufacturing, increases the risk of explosions, hazardous spills or other emergency situations. Such events may harm workers or people in nearby communities through the release of harmful air emissions and chemical substances, and they may impact the environment adversely. Entities may face operational disruptions, damage to facilities, reputational harm, and increased regulatory compliance and remediation costs in the event of a process incident. As such, strong process safety management may reduce operational downtime, mitigate costs and regulatory risk, and ensure workforce productivity. Metrics RT-CH-540a.1. Process Safety Incidents Count (PSIC), Process Safety Total Incident Rate (PSTIR), and Process Safety Incident Severity Rate (PSISR) 1The entity shall disclose its process safety performance using these indicators, consistent with the American National Standards Institute and the American Petroleum Institute ’s Process Safety Performance Indicators for the Refining and Petrochemical Industries Recommended Practice 754 (ANSI/API RP 754): 1.1 Process Safety Incidents Count (PSIC), which is defined as the total (annual) count of all incidents that meet the definition of a Tier 1 Process Safety Event (PSE) in accordance with ANSI/API RP 754. 1.2 Process Safety Total Incident Rate (PSTIR), which is defined as the cumulative (annual) count of Tier 1 incidents normalised by man-hours, is calculated as the PSIC multiplied by 200,000 and divided by the total annual hours worked by employees, contractors and subcontractors. 1.3 Process Safety Incident Severity Rate (PSISR), which is defined as the cumulative (annual) severity- weighted rate of process safety incidents, is calculated as the Total Severity Score for all Tier 1 PSEs multiplied by 200,000 and divided by the total annual hours worked by employees, contractors and subcontractors. 2 The scope of the disclosure includes PSEs occurring at entity-owned or entity-operated facilities. 3The entity may separately disclose equivalent PSIC and PSTIR metrics for Tier 2 PSEs, as defined by ANSI/API RP 754. Note to RT-CH-540a.1 1The entity shall describe incidents with a severity rating of Tier 1 or Tier 2, including root causes, outcomes and corrective actions implemented in response (for example, technology improvements or operator training). SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |CHEMICALS |34",
    "new_id": 1001
  },
  {
    "id": 80241,
    "question": "Which of the following scenarios would require an entity to disclose a transport incident under the given criteria, assuming no other conditions are met, according to the Chemicals – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "An incident involving non-dangerous goods where 1,200 kg were released but no injuries or significant property damage occurred.",
      "A": "A transport incident resulting in a release of 45 kg of dangerous goods and causing property damage valued at 48,000 Euros.",
      "C": "A hazardous materials spill requiring emergency services intervention that lasted less than three hours with no evacuations or road closures.",
      "D": "A vehicle collision during transport leading to one worker's absence for exactly three days without any material release or external authority involvement.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "35-36",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Chemicals.pdf",
    "source_text": "RT-CH-540a.2. Number of transport incidents 1The entity shall disclose the total number of transport incidents, where transport incidents are defined consistent with applicable jurisdictional laws or regulations. 2A reportable transport incident is defined, irrespective of chemical products contribution, as an incident resulting in: 2.1 a death or injury leading to intensive medical treatment, a stay in hospital of at least one day or an absence from work of more than three days; 2.2 any release of more than 50 kg/L of dangerous goods or more than 1,000 kg/L of non-dangerous goods; 2.3 any damage of more than 50,000 Euros or the local presentation currency equivalent (including environmental clean-up) resulting from a transport incident; or 2.4 an incident leading to direct involvement of authorities or emergency services, evacuation of people or closure of public traffic routes for at least three hours. 3 The entity shall report distribution incidents for all modes of product transport (for example, road, rail or ship). 4The scope of the disclosure includes all distributions for which the entity has direct oversight as well as those contracted by the entity to a third party (Tier 1 contracts). Note to RT-CH-540a.2 1The entity shall describe significant transport incidents, including root causes, outcomes and corrective actions implemented in response (for example, technology improvements or driver training). 1.1 Significant transport incidents are considered to be those that require immediate notice of a hazardous materials incident to a governmental authority. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |CHEMICALS |35\n\n[Page 36]\n| |36 sasb.org/contact",
    "new_id": 1002
  },
  {
    "id": 80243,
    "question": "Which scenario would most likely result in an entity failing to comply with the disclosure requirements for GHS Category 1 and 2 Health and Environmental Hazardous Substances, as described in the Chemicals – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The entity calculates the percentage of products containing hazardous substances based on unit volume rather than revenue.",
      "A": "The entity excludes revenue from products that contain substances meeting GHS Category 3 criteria but includes all Category 1 and 2 substances.",
      "B": "The entity conducts hazard assessments for only a subset of its products containing Category 1 and 2 substances, without disclosing this limitation.",
      "D": "The entity uses definitions from a system other than the GHS System for Classification and Labelling of Chemicals when categorizing aquatic hazards.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "28",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Chemicals.pdf",
    "source_text": "Safety & Environmental Stewardship of Chemicals Topic Summary Product safety and stewardship is a critical issue for entities in the Chemicals industry. The potential for human health or environmental impacts of chemicals during the use-phase can influence product demand and regulatory risk, which in turn can affect revenues and result in higher operating, regulatory compliance and mitigation expenses. The industry can mitigate regulatory risk and grow market share by developing innovative approaches to manage the potential impacts of products during the use-phase, including developing alternative products with reduced toxicity. This could contribute to shareholder value through improved competitive positioning, greater market share, reduced regulatory risks and higher brand value. Metrics RT-CH-410b.1. (1) Percentage of products that contain Globally Harmonised System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS) Category 1 and 2 Health and Environmental Hazardous Substances, (2) percentage of such products that have undergone a hazard assessment 1The entity shall disclose (1) the percentage of its products, by revenue, that contain Globally Harmonised System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS) Category 1 and 2 Health and Environmental Hazardous substances, such that: 1.1 the categories of GHS Health Hazards include ‘Acute toxicity ’, ‘Skin corrosion/irritation ’, ‘Serious eye damage/eye irritation ’, ‘Respiratory or skin sensitization ’, ‘Germ cell mutagenicity ’, ‘Carcinogenicity ’, ‘Reproductive toxicity ’, ‘Specific target organ toxicity —Single exposure ’, Specific target organ toxicity — Repeated exposure ’ and ‘Aspiration hazard ’; 1.2 the categories of GHS Environmental Hazards include ‘Hazardous to the aquatic environment ’ and ‘Hazardous to the ozone layer ’. The basic elements of aquatic hazards include ‘Acute aquatic toxicity ’, ‘Chronic aquatic toxicity ’, ‘Bioaccumulation potential ’ and ‘Rapid degradability ’; and 1.3 the entity shall reference the definitions provided by the GHS System for Classification and Labelling of Chemicals. 2The entity shall calculate and disclose the percentage as the revenue from products that contain substances meeting the criteria of GHS Category 1 and 2 Health and Environmental Hazardous Substances divided by the total revenue from all products. 2.1 The entity shall follow the criteria pertaining to mixtures as established in the GHS guidance. 3The entity shall disclose (2) the percentage of its products containing Globally Harmonised System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals Category 1 and 2 Hazardous Substances that have undergone a hazard assessment. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |CHEMICALS |28",
    "new_id": 1003
  },
  {
    "id": 80251,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why entities producing GMO-based products might face reputational risks despite the potential for market opportunities, as described in the Chemicals – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Public perception and regulatory scrutiny over perceived health, environmental, and social impacts may lead to decreased trust in GMO-based products.",
      "A": "Consumers universally prefer non-GMO products due to their established health benefits.",
      "B": "Regulatory bans and quotas on GMO products ensure that manufacturers cannot achieve significant market penetration.",
      "C": "GMO technology is inherently less effective than traditional agricultural methods, leading to widespread criticism.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "31",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Chemicals.pdf",
    "source_text": "Genetically Modified Organisms Topic Summary Some chemical entities produce crop seeds developed using genetically modified organism (GMO) technology. GMO technology has improved some crop yields, including corn and soy, by altering the crop ’s resistance to pesticides and herbicides and improving drought tolerance, among other factors. At the same time, consumers and regulators in some areas have expressed concern over the use of GMO technology because of perceived health, environmental and social impacts of GMO cultivation and consumption. Thus, entities that employ such technology face both market opportunities and risks related to its use. The adoption of GMO crop technology is significant in some regions, although in other regions regulators have implemented bans, quotas or labelling requirements on GMO-based products. Such product bans or labelling requirements may decrease revenues or increase costs for manufacturers, and regulatory scrutiny and public perception may affect reputational risk. As such, entities that effectively respond to market drivers related to GMO products can mitigate risks and capitalise on opportunities. Metrics RT-CH-410c.1. Percentage of products by revenue that contain genetically modified organisms (GMOs) 1The entity shall disclose the percentage of its products, by revenue, that contain genetically modified organisms (GMOs). 1.1 GMOs are defined as organisms, except for human beings, in which genetic material has been altered in a way that does not occur naturally by mating or natural recombination. 2The scope of the disclosure includes GMOs defined by applicable jurisdictional laws or regulations. 3The percentage shall be calculated as the revenue from products that contain GMOs divided by total revenue from all products. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |CHEMICALS |31",
    "new_id": 1004
  },
  {
    "id": 80252,
    "question": "Which scenario would require the entity to disclose efforts related to reducing long-term health risks for workers under its supervision but not formally on its payroll, as outlined in the Chemicals – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "An independent contractor supervised by the entity while operating machinery in a production plant.",
      "B": "A full-time executive employee working at the company's headquarters.",
      "C": "A seasonal worker employed directly by the entity and supervised in a production facility.",
      "D": "A part-time administrative assistant hired through a staffing agency but managed by that agency.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "25-26",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Chemicals.pdf",
    "source_text": "4.3 The work environment includes not only physical locations, but also the equipment or materials used by the employee during the course of work. 4.4 Incidents that occur while an employee is on travel status are work-related if, at the time of the injury or illness, the employee was engaged in work activities in the interest of the employer. 4.5 A work-related incident must be a new case, not a previously recorded injury or illness being updated. 5 The entity shall disclose the rates for each of these employee categories: 5.1 direct employees, defined as individuals on the entity ’s payroll, whether they are full-time, short service, part-time, executive, labour, salary, seasonal, migrant or hourly employees. 5.2 contract employees, defined as individuals who are not on the entity ’s payroll, but whom the entity supervises or manages, including independent contractors and those employed by third parties (for example, temp agencies and labour brokers). 6 The scope of the disclosure includes all employees regardless of employee location or type of employment. RT-CH-320a.2. Description of efforts to assess, monitor, and reduce exposure of employees and contract workers to long-term (chronic) health risks 1The entity shall discuss how it assesses, monitors and reduces workforce exposure to long-term (chronic) human health risks which may include: 1.1 corrosives; 1.2 hepatotoxins; 1.3 nephrotoxins; 1.4 neurotoxins; 1.5 sensitisers; and 1.6 known or suspected carcinogens, teratogens, mutagens and reprotoxins. 2The workforce includes any personnel conducting entity business on behalf of the entity, including all direct employees and contract employees. 2.1 Direct employees are defined as individuals on the entity ’s payroll, whether they are full-time, short service, part-time, executive, labour, salary, seasonal, migrant or hourly employees. 2.2 Contract employees are defined as individuals who are not on the entity ’s payroll, but whom the entity supervises or manages, including independent contractors and those employed by third parties (for example, temp agencies and labour brokers). SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |CHEMICALS |25\n\n[Page 26]\n3The disclosure shall focus on the entity ’s workforce in production facilities but may include all employees and contractors if relevant. 4 Relevant efforts to describe might include: 4.1 automation of processes; 4.2 completion of occupational exposure limit reviews; 4.3 implementation of technology to limit harmful worker exposure; 4.4 risk assessments and participation in long-term health studies; 4.5 worker use of personal protective equipment; and 4.6 phasing out, substituting or using safer alternative materials. 5The entity may describe its implementation of relevant safety management systems which may include the measurement of safety and health performance through metrics and obtaining third-party verification of compliance with relevant jurisdictional safety standards. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |CHEMICALS |26",
    "new_id": 1005
  },
  {
    "id": 80253,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes a necessary condition for an injury or illness to be classified as a recordable incident under the entity’s disclosure requirements in the Chemicals – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "The injury or illness must be diagnosed by a licensed healthcare professional, regardless of its impact on the employee's work status.",
      "A": "The injury or illness must result in at least one day away from work or require medical treatment beyond first aid.",
      "C": "The injury or illness must occur within the establishment but does not need to involve exposure to harmful substances or heavy machinery.",
      "D": "The injury or illness must lead to restricted work, job transfer, or loss of consciousness, even if it is not diagnosed by a physician.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "23-24",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Chemicals.pdf",
    "source_text": "2.2 the use of environmental impact assessments (EIA) and social impact assessments (SIA) that evaluate, manage and mitigate risks; 2.3 engagement with local communities through Community Advisory Panels or equivalent channels; and 2.4 consideration of communications and community recovery needs; participation in the development, implementation and maintenance of community emergency preparedness plans; and an appropriate process for responding to raw material, product, process, waste material and transportation incidents. 3The entity may report the share of its operations that have undergone environmental or social impact assessments. 4The entity may describe its efforts to address environmental justice concerns in communities in areas where the entity operates as well as potential operating impacts from regulatory or community action to address environmental justice. 4.1‘Environmental justice ’ is defined as the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, colour, national origin or income with respect to the development, implementation and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations and policies. 5The discussion may address how practices apply to business partners such as contractors, subcontractors, suppliers and joint arrangement partners to the extent permissible under the terms of any contractual agreements, and without revealing confidential, proprietary or sensitive information. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |CHEMICALS |23\n\n[Page 24]\nWorkforce Health & Safety Topic Summary Employees in chemical manufacturing facilities face health and safety risks from exposure to heavy machinery, harmful substances, electrical hazards and high pressure and temperatures, among others. Creating an effective safety culture is critical to mitigate safety impacts proactively, which might otherwise result in financial consequences including higher healthcare costs, litigation and work disruption. By maintaining a safe work environment and promoting a culture of safety, entities can minimise safety-related expenses and potentially improve productivity. Metrics RT-CH-320a.1. (1) Total recordable incident rate (TRIR) and (2) fatality rate for (a) direct employees and (b) contract employees 1 The entity shall disclose (1) its total recordable incident rate (TRIR) for work-related injuries and illnesses. 1.1 An injury or illness is considered a recordable incident if it results in death, days away from work, restricted work or transfer to another job, medical treatment beyond first aid, or loss of consciousness. Additionally, a significant injury or illness diagnosed by a physician or other licensed healthcare professional is considered a recordable incident, even if it does not result in death, days away from work, restricted work or job transfer, medical treatment beyond first aid, or loss of consciousness. 1.1.1 First aid is defined as emergency care or treatment for an ill or injured person before regular medical aid can be provided. 1.1.2 The entity may use applicable jurisdictional criteria for definitions of a recordable incident and a non-recordable incident such as first aid. The entity shall disclose the legal, regulatory or industry framework used as the source for these criteria and definitions. 2The entity shall disclose (2) its fatality rate for work-related fatalities. 3All disclosed rates shall be calculated as: (statistic count × 200,000) / total number of hours worked by all employees in the year reported. 3.1 The ‘200,000’ in the rate calculation represents the total number of hours 100 full-time workers working 40 hours per week for 50 weeks per year can provide annually. 4 The scope of the disclosure includes work-related incidents only. 4.1 Work-related incidents are injuries and illnesses resulting from events or exposures in the work environment. 4.2 The work environment is the establishment and other locations where one or more employees are working or are present as a condition of their employment. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |CHEMICALS |24",
    "new_id": 1006
  },
  {
    "id": 80254,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between the reporting requirements for process safety incidents and transport incidents, as described in the Chemicals – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Both process safety incidents and transport incidents require disclosure of root causes, outcomes, and corrective actions, but only process safety incidents must include a severity rating.",
      "A": "Transport incidents are reported based on their revenue impact, while process safety incidents are categorized by severity ratings such as PSIC, PSTIR, and PSISR.",
      "B": "Process safety incidents and transport incidents both necessitate detailed descriptions, including severity ratings, root causes, outcomes, and corrective actions.",
      "D": "Only transport incidents with a severity rating of 1 or 2 need to be disclosed, whereas all process safety incidents are subject to mandatory reporting.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "7",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Chemicals.pdf",
    "source_text": "...continued TOPIC METRIC CATEGORYUNIT OF MEASURECODE Workforce Health & Safety(1) Total recordable incident rate (TRIR) and (2) fatality rate for (a) direct employees and (b) contract employeesQuantitative Rate RT -CH-320a.1 Description of efforts to assess, monitor, and reduce exposure of employees and contract workers to long-term (chronic) health risksDiscussion and Analysisn/a RT -CH-320a.2 Product Design for Use-phase EfficiencyRevenue from products designed for use- phase resource efficiencyQuantitativePresentation currencyRT -CH-410a.1 Safety & Environmental Stewardship of Chemicals(1) Percentage of products that contain Globally Harmonised System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS) Category 1 and 2 Health and Environmental Hazardous Substances, (2) percentage of such products that have undergone a hazard assessmentQuantitativePercentage (%) by revenue, Percentage (%)RT -CH-410b.1 Discussion of strategy to (1) manage chemicals of concern and (2) develop alternatives with reduced human or environmental impactDiscussion and Analysisn/a RT -CH-410b.2 Genetically Modified OrganismsPercentage of products by revenue that contain genetically modified organisms (GMOs)QuantitativePercentage (%) by revenueRT -CH-410c.1 Management of the Legal & Regulatory EnvironmentDiscussion of corporate positions related to government regulations or policy proposals that address environmental and social factors affecting the industryDiscussion and Analysisn/a RT -CH-530a.1 Operational Safety, Emergency Preparedness & ResponseProcess Safety Incidents Count (PSIC), Process Safety Total Incident Rate (PSTIR), and Process Safety Incident Severity Rate (PSISR) 2Quantitative Number, Rate RT -CH-540a.1 Number of transport incidents 3Quantitative Number RT -CH-540a.2 Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORYUNIT OF MEASURECODE Production by reportable segment4QuantitativeCubic metres (m³) or metric tonnes (t)RT -CH-000.A 2Note to RT-CH-540a.1 – The entity shall describe incidents with a severity rating of 1 or 2, including root causes, outcomes and corrective actions implemented in response. 3Note to RT-CH-540a.2 – The entity shall describe significant transport incidents, including their root causes, outcomes and corrective actions implemented in response. 4Note to RT-CH-000.A – Production should be disclosed for each of the entity ’s reportable segments and production is reported as weight for solid products and volume for liquid and gas products. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |CHEMICALS |7",
    "new_id": 1007
  },
  {
    "id": 80275,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the implications of how confirmed incidents of corruption and business relationships are treated under the described framework in GRI 205: Anti-corruption 2016?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Business partners encompass entities directly linked to an organization’s operations but exclude subsidiaries that the organization controls.",
      "A": "An organization must report all incidents of corruption, including those still under investigation, to comply with disclosure requirements.",
      "B": "Contracts terminated due to corruption violations are reported separately from incidents involving employee dismissals or disciplinary actions.",
      "C": "Public legal cases regarding corruption only include prosecutions and exclude any ongoing investigations during the reporting period.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "10-11",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 205_ Anti-corruption 2016.pdf",
    "source_text": "Disclosure 205-3 Confirmed incidents of corruption and actions taken The reporting organization shall report the following information:REQUIREMENTS Total number and nature of confirmed incidents of corruption . a. Total number of confirmed incidents in which employees were dismissed or disciplined for corruption .b. Total number of confirmed incidents when contracts with business partners were terminated or not renewed due to violations related to corruption.c. Public legal cases regarding corruption brought against the organization or its employees during the reporting period and the outcomes of such cases.d. Guidance for Disclosure 205-3 For stakeholders, there is an interest in both the occurrence of incidents and an organization’s response to the incidents. Public legal cases regarding corruption can include current public investigations, prosecutions, or closed cases. Guidance for Disclosure 205-3-c In the context of this GRI Standard, the term ‘business partners’ includes, among others, suppliers, agents, lobbyists and other intermediaries, joint venture and consortia partners, governments, customers, and clients. GUIDANCE GRI 205: Anti-corruption 2016 10\n\n[Page 11]\nGlossary This glossary provides definitions for terms used in this Standard. The organization is required to apply these definitions when using the GRI Standards. The definitions included in this glossary may contain terms that are further defined in the complete GRI Standards Glossary . All defined terms are underlined. If a term is not defined in this glossary or in the complete GRI Standards Glossary , definitions that are commonly used and understood apply. business partner entity with which the organization has some form of direct and formal engagement for the purpose of meeting its business objectives Source: Shift and Mazars LLP, UN Guiding Principles Reporting Framework , 2015; modified Examples: affiliates, business-to-business customers, clients, first-tier suppliers , franchisees, joint venture partners, investee companies in which the organization has a shareholding position Note: Business partners do not include subsidiaries and affiliates that the organization controls. business relationships relationships that the organization has with business partners , with entities in its value chain including those beyond the first tier, and with any other entities directly linked to its operations, products, or services Source: United Nations (UN), Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework , 2011; modified Note: Examples of other entities directly linked to the organization’s operations, products, or services are a non-governmental organization with which the organization delivers support to a local community or state security forces that protect the organization’s facilities. child person under the age of 15 years, or under the age of completion of compulsory schooling, whichever is higher Note 1: Exceptions can occur in certain countries where economies and educational facilities are insufficiently developed, and a minimum age of 14 years applies. These countries of exception are specified by the International Labour Organization (ILO) in response to a special application by the country concerned and in consultation with representative organizations of employers and workers. Note 2: The ILO Minimum Age Convention, 1973, (No. 138), refers to both child labor and young workers. collective action to combat corruption voluntary engagement with initiatives and stakeholders to improve the broader operating environment and culture, in order to combat corruption Examples: proactive collaboration with civil society organizations, governments and the wider public sector, peers, trade unions confirmed incident of corruption incident of corruption that has been found to be substantiated Note: Confirmed incidents of corruption do not include incidents of corruption that are still under investigation in the reporting period . conflict of interest GRI 205: Anti-corruption 2016 11",
    "new_id": 1008
  },
  {
    "id": 80305,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between waste composition reporting and recovery operations, as described in GRI 306: Waste 2020?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Both hazardous and non-hazardous waste require a breakdown by composition, and each category's recovery operations must be further divided into onsite and offsite activities.",
      "B": "Waste composition must be reported separately for hazardous and non-hazardous waste, but recovery operations apply uniformly to both categories without distinction.",
      "C": "The breakdown of waste by composition is only required for hazardous waste, while recovery operations are exclusively detailed for non-hazardous waste.",
      "D": "Recovery operations such as recycling and preparation for reuse are optional for hazardous waste but mandatory for non-hazardous waste when reporting waste composition.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "13",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 306_ Waste 2020.pdf",
    "source_text": "Disclosure 306-4 Waste diverted from disposal The reporting organization shall report the following information: Compilation requirementsREQUIREMENTS Total weight of waste diverted from disposal in metric tons, and a breakdown of this total by composition of the waste.a. Total weight of hazardous waste diverted from disposal in metric tons, and a breakdown of this total by the following recovery operations: Preparation for reuse ; i. Recycling ; ii. Other recovery operations. iii.b. Total weight of non-hazardous waste diverted from disposal in metric tons, and a breakdown of this total by the following recovery operations: Preparation for reuse; i. Recycling; ii. Other recovery operations. iii.c. For each recovery operation listed in Disclosures 306-4-b and 306-4-c, a breakdown of the total weight in metric tons of hazardous waste and of non-hazardous waste diverted from disposal: onsite; i. offsite. ii.d. Contextual information necessary to understand the data and how the data has been compiled.e. When compiling the information specified in Disclosure 306-4, the reporting organization shall:2.2 exclude effluent , unless required by national legislation to be reported under total waste;2.2.1 use 1000 kilograms as the measure for a metric ton. 2.2.2 RECOMMENDATIONSThe reporting organization should report the total weight of waste prevented, and the baseline and methodology for this calculation.2.3 Background An organization’s choice of operations to manage waste shows how it addresses significant waste-related impacts . The options to manage waste can be informed by the waste management hierarchy, which orders operations to manage waste from the most preferable to the least preferable. The waste management hierarchy prioritizes waste prevention, followed by recovery operations that divert waste from being sent to disposal, such as preparation for reuse, recycling, and other recovery operations. Guidance for Disclosure 306-4 Templates for how to present information under this disclosure can be found in the Appendix Tables . Guidance for Disclosure 306-4-a When reporting composition of the waste, the organization can describe: GUIDANCE the type of waste, such as hazardous waste or non-hazardous waste;• the waste streams, relevant to its sector or activities (e.g., tailings for an organization in the mining sector, electronic waste for an organization in the consumer electronics sector, or food waste for an organization in the agriculture or in the hospitality sector);• the materials that are present in the waste (e.g., biomass, metals, non-metallic minerals, plastics, textiles).• GRI 306: Waste 2020 13",
    "new_id": 1009
  },
  {
    "id": 80315,
    "question": "Which of the following accurately reflects a necessary condition for an entity in the hotels and lodging industry to claim its on-site renewable electricity generation as part of its renewable energy consumption, according to the Hotels & Lodging – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "The entity must retain, retire, or cancel the RECs or GOs linked to the generated electricity, ensuring they are not sold to other parties.",
      "A": "The entity must sell Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs) or Guarantees of Origin (GOs) associated with the generated electricity to ensure market participation.",
      "C": "The entity is required to convert all generated electricity into gigajoules (GJ) using higher heating values (HHV) before including it in renewable energy calculations.",
      "D": "The entity can include any renewable electricity from the grid mix without additional certification, provided it aligns with regional renewable portfolio standards.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "8-9",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Hotels & Lodging.pdf",
    "source_text": "Energy Management Topic Summary Hotel buildings require a significant amount of energy to operate, which is a substantial portion of hotel operating expenses. The industry purchases the majority of its electricity commercially. This purchased electricity indirectly results in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, which is a significant contributor to climate change. Entities in the industry are implementing energy management best practices to reduce operating expenses and environmental impacts and to improve their brand value with guests, who increasingly are concerned about environmental sustainability. Metrics SV-HL-130a.1. (1) Total energy consumed, (2) percentage grid electricity and (3) percentage renewable 1 The entity shall disclose (1) the total amount of energy it consumed as an aggregate figure, in gigajoules (GJ). 1.1 The scope of energy consumption includes energy from all sources, including energy purchased from external sources and energy produced by the entity itself (self-generated). For example, direct fuel usage, purchased electricity, and heating, cooling and steam energy are all included within the scope of energy consumption. 1.2 The scope of energy consumption includes only energy directly consumed by the entity during the reporting period. 1.3 In calculating energy consumption from fuels and biofuels, the entity shall use higher heating values (HHV), also known as gross calorific values (GCV), which are measured directly or taken from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2The entity shall disclose (2) the percentage of energy it consumed that was supplied from grid electricity. 2.1 The percentage shall be calculated as purchased grid electricity consumption divided by total energy consumption. 3The entity shall disclose (3) the percentage of energy it consumed that was renewable energy. 3.1 Renewable energy is defined as energy from sources that are replenished at a rate greater than or equal to their rate of depletion, such as geothermal, wind, solar, hydro and biomass. 3.2 The percentage shall be calculated as renewable energy consumption divided by total energy consumption. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |HOTELS & LODGING |8\n\n[Page 9]\n3.3 The scope of renewable energy includes renewable fuel the entity consumed, renewable energy the entity directly produced and renewable energy the entity purchased, if purchased through a renewable power purchase agreement (PPA) that explicitly includes renewable energy certificates (RECs) or Guarantees of Origin (GOs), a Green ‐e Energy Certified utility or supplier programme, or other green power products that explicitly include RECs or GOs, or for which Green ‐e Energy Certified RECs are paired with grid electricity. 3.3.1 For any renewable electricity generated on-site, any RECs and GOs shall be retained (not sold) and retired or cancelled on behalf of the entity for the entity to claim them as renewable energy. 3.3.2 For renewable PPAs and green power products, the agreement shall explicitly include and convey that RECs and GOs be retained or replaced and retired or cancelled on behalf of the entity for the entity to claim them as renewable energy. 3.3.3 The renewable portion of the electricity grid mix outside the control or influence of the entity is excluded from the scope of renewable energy. 3.4 For the purposes of this disclosure, the scope of renewable energy from biomass sources is limited to materials certified to a third-party standard (for example, Forest Stewardship Council, Sustainable Forest Initiative, Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification or American Tree Farm System), materials considered eligible sources of supply according to the Green-e Framework for Renewable Energy Certification, Version 1.0 (2017) or Green-e regional standards, or materials eligible for an applicable jurisdictional renewable portfolio standard. 4The entity shall apply conversion factors consistently for all data reported under this disclosure, such as the use of HHVs for fuel use (including biofuels) and conversion of kilowatt hours (kWh) to GJ (for energy data, including electricity from solar or wind energy). SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |HOTELS & LODGING |9",
    "new_id": 1010
  },
  {
    "id": 80316,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes the relationship between employee turnover rates and legal proceedings associated with labour law violations, as implied in the Hotels & Lodging – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Involuntary turnover is explicitly linked to monetary losses from labour law violations, while voluntary turnover is not mentioned in this context.",
      "A": "High voluntary turnover directly leads to increased monetary losses from labour law violations due to reduced workforce stability.",
      "B": "Legal proceedings resulting from labour law violations are unrelated to turnover rates but may indirectly influence operational expenses by damaging workplace morale.",
      "D": "Both voluntary and involuntary turnover can contribute to monetary losses from labour law violations by exacerbating underlying issues such as job dissatisfaction.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "15",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Hotels & Lodging.pdf",
    "source_text": "Labour Practices Topic Summary The Hotels & Lodging industry is reliant upon labour to operate large facilities. A service-oriented workforce that provides guests with a pleasant stay is an important value driver for hotel entities. This, combined with labour force dynamics, may create low job satisfaction that can result in high turnover and potential lawsuits and contribute to increased expenses for hotel operators. Hotels that foster anti-discriminatory practices and ensure fair wages may improve worker satisfaction and reduce turnover. Metrics SV-HL-310a.1. (1) Voluntary and (2) involuntary turnover rate for lodging facility employees 1 The entity shall disclose the employee turnover rate as a percentage for lodging facility employees. 1.1 Turnover shall be disclosed separately for (1) voluntary and (2) involuntary departures. 2The entity shall calculate (1) the voluntary turnover rate as the number of employee-initiated separations (for example, resignation or retirement) during the reporting period, divided by the average number of workers employed during the reporting period. 3The entity shall calculate (2) the involuntary turnover rate as the number of entity-initiated separations (for example, dismissal, downsizing, redundancy or non-renewal of contract) during the reporting period, divided by the average number of workers employed during the reporting period. SV-HL-310a.2. Total amount of monetary losses as a result of legal proceedings associated with labour law violations 1The entity shall disclose the total amount of monetary losses incurred during the reporting period resulting from legal proceedings associated with labour law violations, such as those relating to wages, work hours, overtime, and meal and rest breaks. 2The legal proceedings shall include any adjudicative proceeding involving the entity, whether before a court, a regulator, an arbitrator or otherwise. 3The losses shall include all monetary liabilities to the opposing party or to others (whether as the result of settlement, verdict after trial or otherwise), including fines and other monetary liabilities incurred during the reporting period as a result of civil actions (for example, civil judgements or settlements), regulatory proceedings (for example, penalties, disgorgement or restitution) and criminal actions (for example, criminal judgements, penalties or restitution) brought by any entity (for example, governmental, business or individual). 4The scope of monetary losses shall exclude legal and other fees and expenses incurred by the entity in its defence. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |HOTELS & LODGING |15",
    "new_id": 1011
  },
  {
    "id": 80347,
    "question": "Which scenario would most likely undermine the primary purpose of third-party forest management certifications, as described in the Forestry Management – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "An entity prioritizes certification standards that focus exclusively on legal compliance and land rights, ignoring broader environmental and social criteria.",
      "A": "An entity uses multiple certifications for the same forestland area to demonstrate compliance with diverse environmental and social criteria.",
      "B": "An entity reports its total certified forestland area by including leased lands managed under sustainable practices.",
      "C": "An entity achieves certification under a standard endorsed by the Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC) but does not disclose the percentage certified.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "7",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Forestry Management.pdf",
    "source_text": "Ecosystem Services & Impacts Topic Summary Along with their timber output, forests provide valuable ecosystem services including carbon sequestration, wildlife habitat, water purification and storage, soil formation, and recreational opportunities. Meanwhile, in many regions, regulations related to water quality and endangered species protection, as well as harvesting rights that are contingent upon environmental preservation, may create operational risks for entities. As such, protecting or enhancing ecosystem services within managed forestlands could mitigate reputational, demand and operational risks related to the potential adverse environmental impacts of forestry. Entities increasingly use third-party certification to show sustainable forestry management practices that serve to enhance forest asset value and productivity, as well as to meet rising consumer demand for sustainably produced forest products. Metrics RR-FM-160a.1. Area of forestland certified to a third-party forest management standard, percentage certified to each standard 1The entity shall disclose its total forestland area, in hectares, certified to a third-party forest management standard, where: 1.1 The scope includes forestlands owned, leased or managed by the entity. 1.2 Third-party forest management standards certify entities harvest forests in a sustainable manner based on environmental and social criteria including legal compliance, land rights, community and worker relations, environmental impact and biodiversity, forest management plans and practices, land use, wildlife habitat conservation, and water conservation, among others. 1.3 Third-party forest management certifications may include those promoted by the following organisations (or the equivalent): 1.3.1 American Tree Farm System (ATFS) 1.3.2 Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) 1.3.3 Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC) 1.3.4 Forest certification systems endorsed by the PEFC 1.3.5 Sustainable Forest Initiative (SFI) 2If a forestland area is certified to more than one certification standard, the entity shall not account for the land more than once when calculating the total forestland area certified to a third-party forest management standard. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |FORESTRY MANAGEMENT |7",
    "new_id": 1012
  },
  {
    "id": 80348,
    "question": "Which inference most accurately reflects the implicit relationship between adaptation strategies and cost disclosure in the context of forestry management, as described in the Forestry Management – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Cost disclosure serves to quantify the financial implications of implementing adaptation strategies, which indirectly supports compliance with external reporting standards.",
      "B": "Adaptation strategies are disclosed as a means to directly reduce operational costs associated with climate change.",
      "C": "The costs of adaptation strategies are highlighted to demonstrate their alignment with unrelated third-party reporting frameworks.",
      "D": "The primary purpose of disclosing costs is to advocate for the discontinuation of less effective adaptation strategies.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "17-18",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Forestry Management.pdf",
    "source_text": "5.4 The entity ’s adaptation strategies, which may include: improving ecosystem management and biodiversity; monitoring changes; developing tolerant tree varieties; and optimising the timing of planting and harvesting 5.5 The costs associated with these actions 5.6 Disclosure corresponds to CDP Climate Change Questionnaire CC2.1. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |FORESTRY MANAGEMENT |17\n\n[Page 18]\n| |18 sasb.org/contact",
    "new_id": 1013
  },
  {
    "id": 80358,
    "question": "Which statement accurately captures the relationship between an entity's energy consumption reporting requirements and its participation in emissions-related programs, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 23: Meat, Poultry & Dairy?",
    "options": {
      "B": "An entity’s strategies for reducing emissions are directly tied to its energy consumption metrics, yet reporting is limited to active or completed activities regardless of program involvement.",
      "A": "Entities must disclose total energy consumption in gigajoules, including both purchased and self-generated energy, but only if they participate in regional emissions trading schemes.",
      "C": "Energy consumption disclosures exclude self-generated energy unless the entity resets its base year emissions as part of a national regulation like the EU Emissions Trading Scheme.",
      "D": "The scope of energy consumption reporting expands to include indirect emissions when entities associate their targets with international climate agreements.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "8",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol23.pdf",
    "source_text": "2.6 Any circumstances in which the target or base year emissions have been, or may be, recalculated retrospectively or the target or base year has been reset. 3 The entity shall discuss the activities and investments required to achieve the plans or targets, and any risks or limiting factors that might affect achievement of the plans or targets. 4 The entity shall discuss the scope of its strategies, plans or reduction targets, such as whether they pertain differently to different business units, geographies or emissions sources. 5 The entity shall discuss whether its strategies, plans or reduction targets are related to, or associated with, emissions limiting or emissions reporting-based programmes or regulations (for example, the EU Emissions Trading Scheme, Quebec Cap-and-Trade System, California Cap-and-Trade Program), including regional, national, international or sectoral programmes. 6 Disclosure of strategies, plans or reduction targets shall be limited to activities that were ongoing (active) or reached completion during the reporting period. Energy Management Topic Summary The Meat, Poultry & Dairy industry relies heavily on purchased electricity and fuel as critical inputs for value creation. Entities ’ use of electricity and fossil fuels in their operations results in indirect and direct greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, which contribute to environmental impacts, including climate change and pollution. Purchased electricity is a significant operating cost for meat, poultry and dairy entities. Efficient energy usage is essential to maintain a competitive advantage in this industry, as purchased fuels and electricity account for a significant portion of total production costs. Decisions regarding alternative fuels use, renewable energy and on-site electricity generation versus purchasing from the grid can influence both the costs and the reliability of the energy supply. Metrics FB-MP-130a.1. (1) Total energy consumed, (2) percentage grid electricity and (3) percentage renewable 1 The entity shall disclose (1) the total amount of energy it consumed as an aggregate figure, in gigajoules (GJ). 1.1 The scope of energy consumption includes energy from all sources, including energy purchased from external sources and energy produced by the entity itself (self-generated). For example, direct fuel usage, purchased electricity, and heating, cooling and steam energy all are included within the scope of energy consumption. 1.2 The scope of energy consumption includes only energy directly consumed by the entity during the reporting period.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 7",
    "new_id": 1014
  },
  {
    "id": 80374,
    "question": "Which interpretation of the term 'validation' in IFRS S2 aligns with its intended scope while addressing potential ambiguities across industries, as described in the IFRS S2 Basis for Conclusions on Climate-related Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Validation exclusively refers to third-party confirmation that a target is science-based, regardless of industry-specific practices.",
      "A": "Validation encompasses any form of third-party assessment, including model validation in banking, as long as it relates to climate targets.",
      "B": "Validation pertains to internal testing of climate-related targets against jurisdictional Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs).",
      "D": "Validation is synonymous with compliance with sectoral decarbonisation approaches like those used by the Science-based Targets Initiative (SBTi).",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "47",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Basis.pdf",
    "source_text": "The requirement to explain how the latest international agreement on climate change has informed any climate-related targets applies to all relevant climate-related targets, not only greenhouse gas emissions targets. Although the latest international agreement on climate change —the Paris Agreement — primarily focuses on greenhouse gas emissions reduction, it also includes other objectives related to climate change that support greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets. For example, it includes goals related to adaptation to the adverse impacts of climate change and goals to increase finance flows consistent with a pathway towards lower greenhouse gas emissions. An entity might set climate-related targets that are informed by different aspects of the international agreement on climate change, which should be described in the entity ’s disclosures. For example, an entity in the agriculture sector might have specific climate-related targets (for example, intermittent aeration) that are informed by its jurisdiction ’s NDC measures for its agriculture sector. Validated targets Paragraph 34(a) of IFRS S2 requires an entity to explain whether a third party has validated the climate-related target it has set, or is required to meet by law or regulation, and the methodology for setting the target. The ISSB noted that ‘validation ’ is a common term used in disclosing climate-related targets, especially in referring to whether the climate-related target is ‘science-based ’. In other words, whether the climate-related target is in line with what the latest climate science says is necessary to meet the goals of the Paris Agreement. For example, the Science-based Targets Initiative (SBTi) provides a ‘target validation service ’ for an entity to validate its greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets, as described in the SBTi ’s Target Validation Protocol for Near- term Targets (Version 3.0, 2021). However, the ISSB recognised that ‘validation ’ is a technical term in some industries and has a number of different meanings. For example, in the banking industry, validation relates to models and to specific procedures or applications, often carried out by third parties. For the avoidance of doubt, the ISSB confirmed that the use of the term ‘validation ’ in IFRS S2 is only in reference to whether and how a climate- related target has been tested and confirmed —by a third party —in relation to the latest climate science. Additionally, IFRS S2 does not require an entity to obtain third-party validation for its climate-related targets. Instead, IFRS S2 requires the entity to disclose whether its climate-related targets have been validated by a third party. Sectoral decarbonisation approach Paragraph 36(d) of IFRS S2 requires an entity to disclose whether a climate- related target was derived using a sectoral decarbonisation approach. A sectoral decarbonisation approach, which is used by initiatives such as the SBTi, recognises that entities in different sectors will have specific challenges associated with the transition to a lower-carbon economy (for example, where greenhouse gas emissions are concentrated in the value chain will vary by sector). Therefore, a sectoral decarbonisation approach to setting greenhouse gas emissions targets takes a sector-by-sector approach to translate greenhouse gas emissions targets made at the international level (for example,BC148 BC149 BC150IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES —JUNE 2023 46 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 1015
  },
  {
    "id": 80434,
    "question": "Which statement best captures the rationale behind the ISSB's decision to remove the term 'significant' when referring to climate-related risks and opportunities in IFRS S2, as explained in the IFRS S2 Basis for Conclusions on Climate-related Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The term was removed to clarify that entities are only required to focus on risks and opportunities likely to affect their prospects, not an exhaustive list of all potential issues.",
      "A": "The term was removed because it created ambiguity regarding whether entities were required to consider all possible climate-related risks and opportunities.",
      "B": "The term was removed to eliminate confusion between its intended meaning and the stricter legal interpretation of materiality under financial reporting standards.",
      "C": "The term was removed due to concerns that it imposed an undue burden on entities to conduct overly broad assessments of climate-related factors.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "16",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Basis.pdf",
    "source_text": "The ISSB noted that, in the context of the requirements in paragraphs 10 –22 of IFRS S2, the disclosure topics identified and defined in the Industry-based Guidance can serve as a helpful starting point for an entity in considering the risks and opportunities about which it might need to prepare disclosures. These disclosure topics, which are derived from the SASB Standards, set out the climate-related risks and opportunities that are most likely to be associated with particular business models, activities or other common features that characterise participation in an industry. Although an entity is required to refer to and consider the applicability of the Industry-based Guidance, it might determine that the guidance is not applicable. Additionally, the disclosure topics and associated metrics set out in the Industry-based Guidance are not intended to be exhaustive. Accordingly, an entity is required to disclose information about topics that are not included in the Industry-based Guidance if the entity determines that such information is material. In describing the risks and opportunities about which an entity should prepare and disclose information, the Exposure Draft referred to ‘significant ’ climate-related risks and opportunities. Many respondents to the Exposure Draft expressed concerns about the use of the term ‘significant ’ because it could be interpreted in various ways. Additionally, some respondents were confused about the distinction and connection between the concepts of ‘significant ’ (which applies to risks and opportunities) and ‘material ’ (which applies to information about those risks and opportunities). The ISSB intended to use the term ‘significant ’ to indicate that, in preparing its disclosures, an entity is not required to consider an exhaustive list of all possible climate- related risks and opportunities, but only those that could reasonably be expected to affect the entity ’s prospects. Although this intention is unchanged, for the sake of clarity, the ISSB agreed to remove the term ‘significant ’ in relation to the climate-related risks and opportunities to which IFRS S2 applies. The ISSB also agreed to develop guidance as part of IFRS S1 to clarify the distinction between the process of identifying the sustainability- related risks and opportunities that could reasonably be expected to affect an entity’s prospects and identifying material information to provide about those risks and opportunities. Paragraph 10 of IFRS S2 requires an entity to disclose information about the climate-related risks and opportunities that could reasonably be expected to affect the entity ’s prospects. In feedback to the ISSB, preparers described challenges in identifying risks and opportunities, such as the breadth of assessments that would be necessary to cover all the climate-related risks and opportunities that might affect the entity. In response, the ISSB introduced the concept of an entity using ‘all reasonable and supportable information that is available to the entity at the reporting date without undue cost or effort, including information about past events, current conditions and forecasts of future conditions ’ when identifying climate-related risks and opportunities. The ISSB noted that introducing this concept clarifies that an entity:BC37 BC38 BC39IFRS S2 BASIS FOR CONCLUSIONS © IFRS Foundation 15",
    "new_id": 1016
  },
  {
    "id": 80509,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why the ISSB's decision to expand the relief for misaligned reporting periods to include Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions could introduce potential inconsistencies in greenhouse gas disclosures, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Basis for Conclusions on Climate-related Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Entities may use differing measurement approaches for categorizing investees' emissions, creating variability in reported values.",
      "B": "Entities might prioritize data from investees' reporting periods, leading to overestimation of Scope 3 emissions.",
      "C": "The reliance on timely but unverified data could compromise the accuracy of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions measurements.",
      "D": "The expansion allows entities to disregard significant events occurring between reporting dates, reducing transparency.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "38",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Basis.pdf",
    "source_text": "(a) the entity uses the most recent data available from those entities in its value chain without undue cost or effort to measure and disclose its greenhouse gas emissions; (b) the length of the reporting periods is the same; and (c) the entity discloses the effects of significant events and changes in circumstances (relevant to its greenhouse gas emissions) that occur between the reporting dates of the entities in its value chain and the date of the entity ’s general purpose financial reporting. The ISSB initially agreed that the relief permitting an entity to use greenhouse gas emissions information from a reporting period that is not aligned with its own reporting period would be available for the measurement of Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions. However, the ISSB ultimately decided that this relief would also be available for the measurement of Scope 1 and Scope 2 greenhouse gas emissions. The ISSB noted that this relief might also be relevant in other circumstances beyond greenhouse gas emissions disclosures and the ISSB will monitor whether there is a need to expand this relief. The ISSB observed that information about the greenhouse gas emissions referable to an entity ’s investees might be categorised as Scope 1, Scope 2 or Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions depending on the measurement approach that the entity uses in applying the GHG Protocol Corporate Standard. The ISSB acknowledged the concerns raised by respondents about the measurement of Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions (see paragraph BC112) and confirmed that these measurements are expected to be imperfect and to rely on estimation. However, the ISSB observed that requiring entities to prioritise the use of measurement approaches, inputs and assumptions that possess particular characteristics would enable entities to faithfully represent their Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions. Therefore, the ISSB introduced a Scope 3 measurement framework that categorises and prioritises the inputs used to measure Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions (paragraphs B38 –B54 of IFRS S2). This framework is part of the application guidance that accompanies IFRS S2 and is intended to assist entities in measuring Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions. The guidance is also intended to improve the consistency and comparability of Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions disclosures, and to reduce measurement uncertainty in the estimation of Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions. Building on the GHG Protocol Value Chain Standard, the measurement framework requires an entity to prioritise particular types of data used to measure Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions, namely: (a) data based on direct measurement; (b) data from specific activities within the entity ’s value chain; (c) timely data that faithfully represents the jurisdiction of, and the technology used for, the value chain activity and its greenhouse gas emissions; and (d) data that has been verified.BC115 BC116 BC117IFRS S2 BASIS FOR CONCLUSIONS © IFRS Foundation 37",
    "new_id": 1017
  },
  {
    "id": 80517,
    "question": "Which of the following most accurately reflects the relationship between an entity’s exposure to climate-related risks and opportunities and the information required by IFRS S2, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Basis for Conclusions on Climate-related Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "B": "IFRS S2 mandates disclosure of climate-related risks and opportunities that could reasonably be expected to affect the entity’s prospects over the short, medium, or long term.",
      "A": "The standard requires entities to disclose only those climate-related risks and opportunities that have already materially impacted their financial performance.",
      "C": "Entities must report on how their governance processes address all conceivable climate-related risks, regardless of their likelihood or potential impact.",
      "D": "Disclosure is limited to direct exposures to climate-related risks and opportunities, excluding any indirect effects through third parties.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "4-5",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Basis.pdf",
    "source_text": "CONTENTS from paragraph BASIS FOR CONCLUSIONS ON IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES INTRODUCTION BC1 OVERVIEW BC2 Relationship to other IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards BC4 Materiality BC7 BACKGROUND BC9 Proportionality BC14 Interoperability BC16 OBJECTIVE AND SCOPE BC17 Climate-related risks and opportunities BC17 Impacts and dependencies BC26 CORE CONTENT BC30 Governance BC31 Strategy BC33 Risk management BC70 Metrics and targets BC73 EFFECTIVE DATE BC157 TRANSITION BC165 Comparative information BC165 Method for measuring greenhouse gas emissions BC166 Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions BC170 Other transition considerations BC174IFRS S2 BASIS FOR CONCLUSIONS © IFRS Foundation 3\n\n[Page 5]\nBasis for Conclusions on IFRS S2 Climate-related Disclosures This Basis for Conclusions accompanies, but is not part of, IFRS S2 Climate-related Disclosures. It summarises the considerations of the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB) in developing IFRS S2. Individual ISSB members gave greater weight to some factors than to others. The ISSB also published an Effects Analysis, which describes the likely costs and benefits of IFRS S2. Introduction The ISSB developed IFRS S2 Climate-related Disclosures (IFRS S2) in response to calls from users of general purpose financial reports (users) for more consistent, complete, comparable and verifiable information about an entity ’s climate-related risks and opportunities. To meet this demand, IFRS S2 requires an entity to disclose information about climate-related risks and opportunities that could reasonably be expected to affect the entity ’s cash flows, its access to finance or cost of capital over the short, medium or long term. For the purposes of IFRS S2, these risks and opportunities are collectively referred to as ‘climate-related risks and opportunities that could reasonably be expected to affect the entity ’s prospects ’. Overview Climate change is likely to present risks for nearly all entities and economic sectors. It might also create opportunities for entities, including those focused on mitigating climate change and adapting to its effects (see paragraphs BC17–BC25 ). An entity might be directly exposed to these risks and opportunities, or indirectly exposed through third parties such as suppliers and customers. However, the entity ’s degree and type of exposure to the effects of climate-related risks and opportunities are likely to vary depending on the entity ’s sector, industry, location and its specific circumstances. This varied exposure will, in turn, affect the assessment of the entity ’s overall risk profile carried out by users of general purpose financial reports. IFRS S2 sets out the requirements for disclosing information about an entity ’s climate-related risks and opportunities. In particular, IFRS S2 requires an entity to disclose information that enables users of general purpose financial reports to understand: (a) the governance processes, controls and procedures the entity uses to monitor, manage and oversee climate-related risks and opportunities; (b) the entity ’s strategy for managing climate-related risks and opportunities, including: (i) the climate-related risks and opportunities that could reasonably be expected to affect the entity ’s prospects; (ii) the current and anticipated effects of those climate-related risks and opportunities on the entity ’s business model and value chain;BC1 BC2 BC3IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES —JUNE 2023 4 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 1018
  },
  {
    "id": 80518,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why the ISSB clarified that an entity is not required to use a specific approach, such as the equity share or control approach, when measuring greenhouse gas emissions, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Basis for Conclusions on Climate-related Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "C": "To confirm that while entities must disclose their chosen approach, they retain flexibility in how they measure emissions for comparability purposes.",
      "A": "To ensure that entities can freely choose any measurement approach without disclosing their methodology.",
      "B": "To align the financial reporting of investments with the calculation methods permitted under the GHG Protocol Corporate Standard.",
      "D": "To override the GHG Protocol Corporate Standard and impose stricter requirements on emission calculations.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "34",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Basis.pdf",
    "source_text": "The ISSB observed that the Industry-based Guidance that accompanies IFRS S2 might help an entity determine whether greenhouse gas emissions should be disaggregated by constituent gas. For example, for entities in the oil and gas exploration and production industry, the Industry-based Guidance specifies information about methane emissions (Volume 11 —Oil & Gas —Exploration & Production), noting that with ‘… natural gas production from shale resources expanding, the management of the emission of methane, a highly potent greenhouse gas … has emerged as a major operational, reputational, and regulatory risk for companies ’ in this industry. In this instance, the disaggregation of methane emissions is highlighted as being likely to provide material information. The Exposure Draft proposed that an entity be required to disaggregate its Scope 1 and Scope 2 greenhouse gas emissions into those referable to the consolidated accounting group and those referable to other investees excluded from the consolidated accounting group. This disclosure was proposed in the Exposure Draft to facilitate comparability because the GHG Protocol Corporate Standard allows entities to take different measurement approaches to determine which emissions are included in the calculation of Scope 1, Scope 2 and Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions. For example, an entity can include the emissions of unconsolidated investees using an equity share approach or control approach. These different approaches mean that the way information is provided in an entity ’s financial statements about its investments in other entities might not align with how its greenhouse gas emissions are calculated. It also means that two entities with identical investments in other entities could report different greenhouse gas emissions in relation to those investments by virtue of choices made in applying the GHG Corporate Protocol Standard. Most respondents to the Exposure Draft agreed with this proposal. However, some respondents questioned whether this proposed requirement would override the choices an entity is permitted to make in accordance with the GHG Protocol Corporate Standard. The ISSB clarified the wording of the requirement to confirm that an entity is required to disclose its greenhouse gas emissions measured in accordance with the GHG Protocol Corporate Standard, but the entity is not required to use a particular approach to measure its greenhouse gas emissions (that is, IFRS S2 does not require an entity to use the equity share approach, or either control approach). Rather, IFRS S2 only requires an entity to disaggregate the amount it has measured using its chosen approach. The ISSB confirmed that an entity is required to disaggregate its Scope 1 and Scope 2 greenhouse gas emissions into those referable to the consolidated accounting group and those referable to other investees excluded from the consolidated accounting group. The ISSB also confirmed that an entity is required to disclose the approach it has used to measure its greenhouse gas emissions. The ISSB considered how this requirement would be applied by an entity applying IFRS Accounting Standards to a joint arrangement. Applying IFRS 11 Joint Arrangements , an entity classifies a joint arrangement as either a joint venture or a joint operation. An entity generally accounts for an investment inBC100 BC101 BC102 BC103IFRS S2 BASIS FOR CONCLUSIONS © IFRS Foundation 33",
    "new_id": 1019
  },
  {
    "id": 80519,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the rationale behind the ISSB's decision not to specify particular climate-related scenarios for entities to use in their analyses, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Basis for Conclusions on Climate-related Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Specifying scenarios could lead to outdated information being disclosed, failing to reflect entities' specific circumstances or management’s view of plausibility.",
      "A": "The ISSB believes that specifying scenarios would reduce the need for entities to develop internal skills and capabilities over time.",
      "B": "Entities are expected to rely exclusively on internationally agreed-upon science-based scenarios to ensure consistency across reports.",
      "C": "The ISSB considers annual updates to scenario analysis essential, making predefined scenarios impractical for long-term strategic planning cycles.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "24",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Basis.pdf",
    "source_text": "climate-related scenario analysis. The ISSB emphasised that if an entity ’s climate-related risk exposure warrants a more sophisticated approach to scenario analysis, the entity cannot use a lack of skills or capabilities to justify using a less sophisticated approach if it has the resources available to obtain or develop those skills or capabilities. The ISSB expects this guidance will enable entities to develop their skills and capabilities and strengthen their disclosures over time through a process of learning and iteration. For example, as an entity ’s capabilities develop so will its assessment of what is considered ‘undue’ in terms of cost or effort. The ISSB decided not to specify the particular scenarios that an entity would be required to use in its climate-related scenario analysis because the relevant scenarios would depend on the entity ’s facts and circumstances, including the nature and location of its operations and the physical and transition risks to which it is exposed. Instead, the ISSB confirmed that an entity is required to explain which climate-related scenarios it has used, including whether they are related to transition or physical risks. IFRS S2 also requires disclosure of whether a diverse range of climate-related scenarios was used in the analysis, meaning entities are required to disclose information such as the number of scenarios used and whether the scenarios cover different outcomes or pathways. For example, if an entity considered both orderly and disorderly transition scenarios, the entity could disclose that fact. The ISSB agreed that specifying which scenarios an entity should use would not be practical, might quickly become outdated and could lead to the disclosure of information that does not reflect the entity ’s specific circumstances or management ’s view of what is plausible. Therefore, the ISSB decided not to require the use of scenarios consistent with the latest international agreement on climate change or particular science-based scenarios. However, the ISSB also agreed that the scenarios selected by an entity must be relevant to its circumstances in order to provide useful information to users of general purpose financial reports. The ISSB also agreed to consider developing additional educational materials to support entities in selecting relevant scenarios in applying IFRS S2. The ISSB decided that an entity would be permitted to carry out scenario analysis to coincide with a multi-year strategic planning cycle rather than updating the analysis at every reporting date. However, the ISSB confirmed that the information required by paragraph 22 of IFRS S2 must be disclosed annually. An entity is required to assess its climate resilience on an annual basis to reflect updated insight into the implications of climate uncertainty for the entity ’s business model. In this regard, the information required by paragraph 22(a) of IFRS S2 would be updated in each reporting period, whereas the information required by paragraph 22(b) of IFRS S2 might remain unchanged from one reporting period to the next if climate-related scenario analysis has not been carried out. The ISSB acknowledged that climate-related scenario analysis can be used to inform a variety of other disclosures required by IFRS S2, including the identification and assessment of risks and opportunities, the anticipated financial effects associated with those risks and opportunities, and the plansBC66 BC67 BC68 BC69IFRS S2 BASIS FOR CONCLUSIONS © IFRS Foundation 23",
    "new_id": 1020
  },
  {
    "id": 80520,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the reasoning behind requiring gross greenhouse gas emissions disclosure before considering removal efforts, as explained in the IFRS S2 Basis for Conclusions on Climate-related Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "A": "It allows users to assess whether an entity is genuinely reducing its emissions rather than offsetting them through investments.",
      "B": "It ensures users can evaluate an entity’s reliance on carbon credits to achieve net-zero targets.",
      "C": "It highlights the role of third-party investments as the primary driver of an entity’s greenhouse gas emissions reductions.",
      "D": "It provides a standardized measure for comparing entities’ progress toward renewable energy adoption.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "27",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Basis.pdf",
    "source_text": "To guide entities in applying the cross-industry metric requirements, the Illustrative Guidance that accompanies IFRS S2 provides examples of information that could be used to meet the cross-industry metric categories. These examples are based on the TCFD guidance. Scope 1, Scope 2 and Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions Most respondents to the Exposure Draft agreed with the proposed requirement for an entity to disclose its absolute gross Scope 1, Scope 2 and Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions generated during the reporting period — expressed as CO 2 equivalent (CO 2e). Respondents said that this information would help users of general purpose financial reports assess an entity ’s exposure to particular climate-related risks and opportunities, in particular those associated with the expected transition to a lower-carbon economy. IFRS S2 defines the three scopes of greenhouse gas emissions from the perspective of the reporting entity, adopting the definitions used in the Greenhouse Gas Protocol: A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard (2004) (GHG Protocol Corporate Standard): (a) Scope 1 greenhouse gas emissions —direct greenhouse gas emissions that occur from sources that are owned or controlled by an entity (for example, greenhouse gas emissions from combustion in owned or controlled boilers, furnaces, vehicles or from chemical production in owned or controlled process equipment). (b) Scope 2 greenhouse gas emissions —indirect greenhouse gas emissions from the generation of purchased or acquired electricity, steam, heating or cooling consumed by an entity (for example, greenhouse gas emissions from energy suppliers). (c) Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions —indirect greenhouse gas emissions (not included in Scope 2 greenhouse gas emissions) that occur in the value chain of an entity, including both upstream and downstream emissions. Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions are further divided into 15 categories, eight of which are upstream, and seven of which are downstream from the entity. Scope 3 Category 15 is ‘Investments ’— those greenhouse gases emitted by a third party to which the reporting entity provides financing. The investment category is a particularly important reporting category for financial institutions because it is often the most significant part of their greenhouse gas emissions inventory (see paragraphs BC122 –BC129). Gross greenhouse gas emissions and emissions intensity IFRS S2 requires an entity to disclose its gross greenhouse gas emissions —that is, its greenhouse gas emissions before taking into consideration any removal efforts (for example, from an entity ’s intended use of carbon credits). The gross greenhouse gas emissions disclosure helps users of general purpose financial reports determine whether the entity is reducing its own greenhouse gas emissions or those in its value chain and, if it is, the extent to which it is doing so.BC78 BC79 BC80 BC81IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES —JUNE 2023 26 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 1021
  },
  {
    "id": 80522,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the implications of an entity's decision to apply only certain aspects of IFRS S2 without asserting compliance, as described in the IFRS S2 Basis for Conclusions on Climate-related Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "B": "The entity can provide limited disclosures under IFRS S2 but cannot claim compliance with the Standards, reflecting a selective approach to sustainability reporting.",
      "A": "The entity must still comply with all requirements of the GHG Protocol Corporate Standard for greenhouse gas emissions reporting.",
      "C": "The entity is prohibited from disclosing any climate-related financial information until full compliance with IFRS S2 is achieved.",
      "D": "The entity is exempt from the requirement to disclose comparative information in all subsequent annual reporting periods.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "51",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Basis.pdf",
    "source_text": "The ISSB expects there will be a learning curve for many entities when they apply IFRS S2 for the first time. The ISSB agreed that on balance the potential risk of lower quality disclosures in the first years of application should not discourage entities from disclosing climate-related financial disclosures because of the urgent need for such disclosures. The ISSB noted that in order to assert compliance, an entity must comply with all requirements of the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards. A qualified statement of compliance with the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards is prohibited if an entity only applies some aspects of the Standards. The requirement for an entity to comply with all requirements in the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards reflects the importance of communicating to users of general purpose financial reports whether the entity has been selective in its approach to reporting sustainability-related financial information or whether the entity has applied all of the requirements. However, the ISSB noted that as long as compliance with the Standards is not asserted, an entity could start applying some aspects of IFRS S2 to provide more limited disclosures. Transition Comparative information The ISSB decided to provide relief for an entity from the requirement to disclose comparative information in the first annual reporting period in which it applies IFRS S2. Permitting an entity to report on only that period enables it to provide users of general purpose financial reports with the information they need sooner. This relief therefore allows the requirements to become effective sooner than if comparative information were required. Method for measuring greenhouse gas emissions The Exposure Draft proposed that an entity disclose its absolute gross greenhouse gas emissions generated during the reporting period, measured in accordance with the GHG Protocol Corporate Standard. In response to the Exposure Draft, most respondents agreed with this proposed requirement. Some respondents raised concerns about requiring greenhouse gas emissions to be measured in accordance with the GHG Protocol Corporate Standard partly because some entities already use other methods for measuring greenhouse gas emissions. Respondents to the Exposure Draft stated that in these cases there could be a cost burden for an entity applying the proposals in the Exposure Draft if the entity was already using a method that is different from the GHG Protocol Corporate Standard. Therefore, the ISSB decided to introduce a relief available to an entity if it has been using a method for measuring greenhouse gas emissions that is different from the GHG Protocol Corporate Standard in the annual reporting period immediately preceding the date of the entity ’s initial application of IFRS S2. In those cases, the entity need not use the GHG Protocol Corporate Standard in the first annual reporting period in which it applies IFRS S2. This relief is available to an entity using a method other than the GHG Protocol Corporate Standard, even if the entity is not required to use that method by aBC164 BC165 BC166 BC167IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES —JUNE 2023 50 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 1022
  },
  {
    "id": 80523,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the relationship between an entity's climate-related risks and opportunities as implied by the interdependencies described in the IFRS S2 Basis for Conclusions on Climate-related Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "C": "An entity’s exposure to climate-related risks may create concurrent opportunities, particularly when shifting consumer preferences align with the entity’s strategic capabilities.",
      "A": "Climate-related risks and opportunities are always directly proportional, meaning that mitigating one automatically enhances the other.",
      "B": "Climate-related risks can simultaneously present opportunities, but only if the entity already possesses the necessary infrastructure to address them.",
      "D": "Opportunities arising from climate change are independent of risks and must be addressed through separate strategic initiatives.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "13",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Basis.pdf",
    "source_text": "climate change. For example, an entity might invest in changes to infrastructure to improve its resilience to physical risks. An entity might also take advantage of climate-related opportunities —for example, by developing new products and services that meet shifting consumer needs or preferences and enhance the entity ’s brand reputation. As with climate-related risks, climate-related opportunities will vary depending on the region, market and industry in which an entity operates. Climate-related risks and opportunities are distinct but are not always mutually exclusive. For example, changing consumer preferences towards lower-carbon products might pose a risk to the demand for an entity ’s products and, at the same time, present an opportunity for the entity to develop an alternative, lower-carbon product line or gain market share if it has such a product line. The ISSB emphasised the importance of this relationship between climate-related risks and opportunities in redeliberating some of the requirements in IFRS S2, such as those related to risk management and strategy, particularly in the areas of climate-related transition plans and climate resilience. The impacts of climate change are wide ranging, interrelated and have varied effects on an entity. Therefore, it is impossible to precisely define the full scope of climate-related risks and opportunities that might affect an entity. Consequently, IFRS S2 does not explicitly prescribe what is ‘climate-related ’. The requirements in IFRS S2 are aligned with the TCFD recommendations and are accompanied by the Industry-based Guidance on Implementing IFRS S2 (Industry-based Guidance), which is derived from the industry-based requirements in the SASB Standards, in order to provide parameters to help an entity identify risks and opportunities in applying IFRS S2. The Industry-based Guidance is not intended to be comprehensive or interpreted as such. Although the requirements in IFRS S2 do not explicitly reference some climate-related matters such as reduced access to fresh water, biodiversity loss, deforestation and climate-related social impacts, disclosures about these and other such matters are required if an entity determines that the information is material for users of general purpose financial reports. For example, if a beverage manufacturer determines it is exposed to short-, medium- or long-term effects of climate change on water availability — especially in water-stressed regions —the entity might determine that information about the implications of reduced water availability for its strategy, operations, capital planning and asset values is material. Therefore, this information would be required by IFRS S2. Impacts and dependencies Climate-related risks and opportunities arise from an entity ’s impacts and dependencies on natural resources, and the relationships it maintains with its stakeholders, society, the economy and the natural environment.BC22 BC23 BC24 BC25 BC26IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES —JUNE 2023 12 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 1023
  },
  {
    "id": 80524,
    "question": "Under what circumstances might an entity deviate from using the latest IPCC GWP values without violating the IFRS S2 requirements, and how does this impact the comparability of its disclosures, as described in the IFRS S2 Basis for Conclusions on Climate-related Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "D": "An entity may use older GWP values if they are embedded in emission factors that best represent its activities, but it must disclose why updated values were not used to ensure transparency.",
      "A": "An entity can disregard the latest IPCC GWP values whenever jurisdictional regulations conflict, as regulatory compliance takes precedence over comparability.",
      "B": "Entities are required to always use the most recent IPCC GWP values regardless of jurisdictional or data constraints to maintain strict comparability across disclosures.",
      "C": "If updated GWP values lead to less accurate measurements for specific activities, entities may opt for alternative multipliers without any additional disclosure requirements.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "31",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Basis.pdf",
    "source_text": "warming potential (GWP) values and emission factors. Variations in entities ’ use of GWP values and emission factors could compromise the comparability of entities ’ disclosures. GWP values are multipliers applied to seven constituent greenhouse gases (listed in paragraph BC98) to convert them into a standardised metric (CO 2e), which enables an entity to convert and aggregate various greenhouse gases into absolute greenhouse gas emissions data. The most frequently used GWP values are defined by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). These values are refined in periodically published IPCC assessment reports. As of June 2023, the latest GWP values are defined in the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report.2 The ISSB decided to introduce a requirement in IFRS S2 for an entity to use GWP values based on the latest IPCC assessment report when converting the constituent greenhouse gases into CO 2e. This requirement is intended to enhance the comparability of entities ’ greenhouse gas emissions disclosures, and to ensure greenhouse gas emissions data reflects the latest scientific knowledge. This approach is consistent with the GHG Protocol Corporate Standard, which recommends the use of the most recent GWP values. Although the ISSB requires an entity to use the latest updated GWP values to convert greenhouse gases into CO 2e, the ISSB also recognises that in some cases the GWP values used by an entity might differ depending on the jurisdictions in which the entity operates and the sources of data the entity uses to measure its greenhouse gas emissions. For example, emission factors — used by an entity to convert activity data into greenhouse gas emissions information —often already have the information converted into CO 2e using GWP values that might or might not align with the most recently updated GWP values from the IPCC. If an entity has identified the emission factors that best represent the entity ’s activities, and these are only available in CO 2e and not based on the most recent GWP values, then the entity is required to use those emission factors. Additionally, an entity is required to disclose information that enables users of general purpose financial reports to understand the measurement approach, inputs and assumptions the entity has used to measure its greenhouse gas emissions and why these measurement approaches, inputs and assumptions are relevant to its greenhouse gas emissions (see paragraph BC95). As part of this disclosure requirement, an entity is required to explain which GWP values it uses and, if necessary, why it has not used the updated GWP values from the latest IPCC report. An emission factor is a coefficient that enables an entity to convert quantitative activity data into a measurement of the greenhouse gas emissions resulting from those activities. For example, if an entity is assessing the Scope 1 greenhouse gas emissions from its delivery fleet, the entity might select fuel consumption or the distance travelled by the fleet as the activity data. ThisBC92 BC93 BC94 2Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability , Contribution of Working Group II to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2022.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES —JUNE 2023 30 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 1024
  },
  {
    "id": 80525,
    "question": "Which combination of mechanisms is explicitly applied to both the identification of risks and opportunities and the measurement of Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Basis for Conclusions on Climate-related Disclosures?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Consideration of reasonable and supportable information without undue cost or effort and guidance, educational material, and other efforts to facilitate application.",
      "B": "Transition relief and consideration of skills, capabilities, and resources.",
      "C": "Concept of 'unable to do so' and transition relief.",
      "D": "Guidance, educational material, and other efforts to facilitate application and consideration of skills, capabilities, and resources.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "9-10",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Basis.pdf",
    "source_text": "(b) data availability —high-quality external data is less available in some markets, industries and parts of the value chain; and (c) specialist availability —skills or expertise are less available to some entities and in some markets. The ISSB developed a range of mechanisms to respond to these ‘proportionality ’ challenges, and made a number of decisions intended to support the application of IFRS S2 by a wide range of entities. The proportionality mechanisms were used in requirements that are included in both IFRS S1 and IFRS S2. These requirements include those associated with identification of risks and opportunities, determination of the scope of the value chain, disclosure of current and anticipated financial effects, and other areas such as timing of reporting and providing comparative information in the first year of application. The proportionality mechanisms were also used in specific requirements that are included only in IFRS S2. These requirements are associated with climate-related scenario analysis, measurement of Scope 1, Scope 2 and Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions, and calculation of metrics in particular cross-industry metric categories. These proportionality mechanisms are summarised in Table 1 and described in more detail in this document. Table 1—Summary of ISSB decisions that assist with proportionality or in the application of IFRS S2 AreaMechanisms to address proportionality challenges Transition reliefAdditional clarifications/ mechanisms to facilitate application Concept of ‘reasonable and supportable informa- tion… without undue cost or effort ’(a)Considera- tion of skills, capabilities and resour- cesConcept of ‘unable to do so’(b)Guidance, educational material and other efforts to facilitate application Identification of risks and opportunitiesX X Determina- tion of the scope of the value chainX X Current financial effectsX X Anticipated financial effectsX X X X continued...BC15IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES —JUNE 2023 8 © IFRS Foundation\n\n[Page 10]\n...continued AreaMechanisms to address proportionality challenges Transition reliefAdditional clarifications/ mechanisms to facilitate application Concept of ‘reasonable and supportable informa- tion… without undue cost or effort ’(a)Considera- tion of skills, capabilities and resour- cesConcept of ‘unable to do so’(b)Guidance, educational material and other efforts to facilitate application Climate- related scenario analysisX X X Measure- ment of Scope 1 and Scope 2 greenhouse gas emissionsX X Measure- ment of Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissionsX X X Calculation of metrics in particular cross- industry metric categoriesX X continued...IFRS S2 BASIS FOR CONCLUSIONS © IFRS Foundation 9",
    "new_id": 1025
  },
  {
    "id": 80528,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the conditions under which water obtained from a utility can be assumed to meet the definition of fresh water, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 39: Water Utilities & Services?",
    "options": {
      "B": "If it complies with jurisdictional drinking water regulations, regardless of local legal definitions of fresh water.",
      "A": "Only if it is explicitly classified as drinking water by local laws or regulations.",
      "C": "Whenever it is sourced from regions with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress.",
      "D": "If it contains less than 1,000 parts per million of dissolved solids, irrespective of compliance with drinking water regulations.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "13",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol39.pdf",
    "source_text": "Metrics IF-WU-440a.1. Total water sourced from regions with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress; percentage purchased from a third party 1 The entity shall disclose the amount of fresh water, in thousands of cubic metres, sourced from all sources in regions with High (40 –80%) or Extremely High (>80%) Baseline Water Stress. 1.1 Water sources include surface water (including water from wetlands, rivers, lakes and oceans), groundwater and wholesale water purchased from a third party. 1.2 Fresh water may be defined according to the local laws and regulations where the entity operates. If no legal definition exists, fresh water shall be considered to be water that has less than 1,000 parts per million of dissolved solids. 1.3 Water obtained from a water utility in compliance with jurisdictional drinking water regulations can be assumed to meet the definition of fresh water. 1.4 High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress shall be classified by the World Resources Institute ’s (WRI) Water Risk Atlas tool, Aqueduct. 2 The entity shall disclose the percentage of fresh water sourced in regions with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress that was purchased from a third party. 2.1 The percentage shall be calculated as the amount of fresh water sourced in regions with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress (in thousands of cubic metres) purchased from a third party divided by the total amount of fresh water sourced in regions with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress (in thousands of cubic metres). IF-WU-440a.2. Volume of recycled water delivered to customers 1 The entity shall disclose the volume, in cubic metres, of water recycled and delivered to its customers. 2 Recycled water shall be defined as wastewater treated to meet specific water quality criteria with the intention of being used for a range of purposes, which may include: 2.1 Potable reuse, such as direct augmentation of the drinking water supply and indirect augmentation of a drinking water source when an environmental buffer precedes drinking water treatment 2.2 Non-potable reuse, such as recreational landscape irrigation, agricultural reuse, industrial process reuse and environmental reuse (for example, wetland enhancement and groundwater recharge) 3 The amount of recycled water delivered shall be calculated as the amount of water that meets the quality standards for approved uses of recycled water as set forth through applicable jurisdictional laws or regulations where the recycling occurs.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 12 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 1026
  },
  {
    "id": 80560,
    "question": "Which of the following most accurately reflects the relationship between operational efficiencies and financial impacts as implied in the discussion on greenhouse gas emissions, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 8: Construction Materials?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Operational efficiencies reduce financial risks by lowering both absolute emissions and the potential cost burden from emissions regulations.",
      "A": "Operational efficiencies primarily increase capital expenditures by requiring costly carbon sequestration technologies.",
      "B": "Operational efficiencies mitigate financial risks exclusively through reductions in fuel costs, irrespective of regulatory impacts.",
      "D": "Operational efficiencies are irrelevant to financial impacts since increasing production inherently leads to higher absolute emissions.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "5",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol8.pdf",
    "source_text": "...continued TOPIC METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Product InnovationPercentage of products that qualify for credits in sustainable building design and construction certificationsQuantitative Percentage (%) by annual sales revenueEM-CM-410a.1 Total addressable market and share of market for products that reduce energy, water or material impacts during usage or productionQuantitative Presentation currency, Percentage (%)EM-CM-410a.2 Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Production by major product line 8Quantitative Metric tons (t) EM-CM-000.A Greenhouse Gas Emissions Topic Summary The production of construction materials, particularly cement, generates significant direct greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from on-site fuel combustion and chemical processes. The industry has achieved efficiency gains in reducing emissions per ton of materials produced. At the same time, increasing production is associated with increasing absolute emissions from cement production. The production of construction materials remains carbon-intensive relative to other industries, exposing the industry to higher operating and capital expenditures from emissions regulations. Strategies to reduce GHG emissions include energy efficiency, use of alternative and renewable fuels, carbon sequestration and clinker substitution. Operational efficiencies can be achieved through the cost-effective reduction of GHG emissions. Such efficiencies can mitigate the potential financial impact of increased fuel costs as well as direct emissions from regulations that limit —or put a price on —GHG emissions. Metrics EM-CM-110a.1. Gross global Scope 1 emissions, percentage covered under emissions-limiting regulations 1 The entity shall disclose its gross global Scope 1 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to the atmosphere of the seven GHGs covered under the Kyoto Protocol —carbon dioxide (CO 2), methane (CH 4), nitrous oxide (N 2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), sulphur hexafluoride (SF 6), and nitrogen trifluoride (NF 3). 8Note to EM-CM-000.A – Determination of major product line (e.g., cement and aggregates, composites, roofing materials, fibreglass, brick, and tile, or others) should be based on revenue generation, and may include a category of “other” construction materials products that combines multiple smaller revenue streams.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 4 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 1027
  },
  {
    "id": 80752,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why an entity in the Cruise Lines industry might prioritize reducing the number of Conditions of Class or Recommendations, even if they do not directly lead to the withdrawal of a vessel’s class certificate, as outlined in the Cruise Lines – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Because addressing these conditions is crucial for maintaining consumer confidence by signaling adherence to safety standards that protect brand value and lower risk profiles.",
      "A": "Because these conditions are legally binding and failure to address them results in immediate financial penalties.",
      "B": "Because port state control organizations impose additional deficiencies based solely on the existence of unresolved Conditions of Class.",
      "C": "Because classification societies require full compliance with all recommendations before any vessel can enter international waters.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "23",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Cruise Lines.pdf",
    "source_text": "Accident Management Topic Summary Although cruise ships are one of the safest forms of travel for holidays, the industry competes on customer experience and satisfaction, making safety management a top priority. Given the scale of cruise vessels and the vulnerability of passengers at sea, one mismanaged accident may significantly reduce consumer confidence in an entity. Although major accidents are rare, they may affect not only an entity ’s revenue and brand value, but those of the entire Cruise Lines industry. Proper equipment maintenance, staff training and implementation of the latest safety technologies and practices may protect an entity ’s safety record and ensure high customer satisfaction while lowering an entity ’s risk profile and cost of capital. Metrics TR-CL-540a.1. Number of Conditions of Class or Recommendations 1The entity shall disclose the total number of Conditions of Class or Recommendations received from a flag administration or a recognised organisation (RO) that has been delegated the authority to issue them. 1.1 Conditions of Class or Recommendations are understood to be interchangeable terms, defined as requirements imposed by an administration (or its delegate, such as a classification society) to be carried out within a specific time limit to retain vessel class, which may include: 1.1.1 repairs or renewals related to damages that affect classification (for example, grounding, structural damages, machinery damages and wastage over the allowable limits); 1.1.2 supplementary survey requirements; and 1.1.3 temporary repairs. 1.2 The scope of the disclosure includes all Conditions of Class regardless of whether they resulted in withdrawal, suspension or invalidation of a vessel ’s class certificate. TR-CL-540a.2. Number of port state control (1) deficiencies and (2) detentions 1The entity shall disclose (1) the total number of deficiencies received from regional port state control (PSC) organisations. 1.1 A deficiency is defined as a condition found non-compliant with the requirements of one or more of these conventions: 1.1.1 International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973, as modified by the Protocols of 1978 and 1997 relating thereto, as amended (MARPOL); 1.1.2 International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS). SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |CRUISE LINES |23",
    "new_id": 1028
  },
  {
    "id": 80753,
    "question": "Which of the following statements accurately describes a necessary condition for an entity to disclose compliance with ballast water treatment under the D2 standard, as outlined in the Cruise Lines – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The entity must implement an integrated system approved by the applicable jurisdictional authority meeting the D2 standard performance criteria.",
      "B": "The entity must ensure that all ships in its fleet perform ballast water exchange with at least 95% volumetric efficiency.",
      "C": "The entity must demonstrate that its ships discharge less than 10 viable organisms per cubic meter for organisms smaller than 10 micrometers.",
      "D": "The entity must calculate compliance percentages based solely on the number of ships docked in marine protected areas.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "15",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Cruise Lines.pdf",
    "source_text": "TR-CL-160a.2. Percentage of fleet implementing ballast water (1) exchange and (2) treatment 1 The entity shall disclose (1) the percentage of its fleet that has implemented ballast water exchange. 1.1 Ballast water exchange is defined by the D1 standard of the International Maritime Organization ’s (IMO) International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships ’ Ballast Water and Sediments (BWM) and requires that ships performing ballast water exchange do so with an efficiency of at least a 95% volumetric exchange of ballast water. The three accepted methods of ballast water exchange are the sequential, flow-through and dilution methods. 1.2 The percentage shall be calculated as the number of ships in the entity ’s fleet that have implemented ballast water exchange that meet the D1 standard specifications divided by the total number of ships in the fleet. 2 The entity shall disclose (2) the percentage of its fleet that has implemented ballast water treatment. 2.1 Ballast water treatment includes implementation of an integrated system of ballast water treatment equipment that is approved by the applicable jurisdictional legal or regulatory authority to meet the performance criteria in the D2 standard of the BWM. 2.1.1 Approved systems must discharge (a) less than 10 viable organisms per cubic metre that are greater than or equal to 50 micrometres in minimum dimension and (b) less than 10 viable organisms per millilitre that are less than 50 micrometres in minimum dimension and greater than or equal to 10 micrometres in minimum dimension. 2.2 The percentage shall be calculated as the number of ships in the entity ’s fleet that have implemented ballast water treatment systems that meet the D2 standard specifications divided by the total number of ships in the fleet. TR-CL-160a.3. Cruise duration in marine protected areas or areas of protected conservation status 1The entity shall disclose the cruise duration spent in marine protected areas or areas with protected conservation status. 1.1 Cruise duration is the sum of the travel days (24-hour periods or fractions thereof), including time spent docked at ports. 1.2 A marine protected area is defined according to the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) as any area of the intertidal or subtidal terrain, together with its overlying water and associated flora, fauna, and historical and cultural features, that has been reserved by law or other effective means to protect part or all of the environment. Marine protected areas include areas internationally established and regulated in International Maritime Organization (IMO) conventions as well as areas established nationally by member states, such as: 1.2.1 Areas to be Avoided established by IMO International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), Chapter V, Regulation 10; SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |CRUISE LINES |15",
    "new_id": 1029
  },
  {
    "id": 80754,
    "question": "Which of the following statements accurately reflects a necessary condition for classifying an event as a 'very serious marine casualty' under the provided definitions in the Cruise Lines – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "The event must result in either the total loss of the ship, a death, or severe environmental damage, with no exceptions.",
      "A": "The event must involve material damage to marine infrastructure external to the ship, regardless of whether it endangers safety or the environment.",
      "C": "The event must lead to a detention by port state authorities due to non-adherence to applicable conventions.",
      "D": "The event must include a collision between ships, provided it causes at least one fatality or significant harm to the environment.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "24-25",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Cruise Lines.pdf",
    "source_text": "1.1.3 International Convention on Load Lines (Load Lines); 1.1.4 International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers, 1978, as amended (STCW); 1.1.5 International Convention on the Control of Harmful Anti-Fouling Systems on Ships (AFS); 1.1.6 International Convention on Tonnage Measurement of Ships, 1969 (Tonnage); and 1.1.7 International Labour Organization (ILO) Maritime Labour Convention , 2006. 2 The entity shall disclose (2) the total number of detentions received from regional PSC organisations. 2.1 A detention is defined as an intervention action by a port state, taken if the condition of a ship or its crew does not substantially adhere to the applicable conventions. A detention ensures that the ship will not sail until it can proceed to sea without presenting a danger to the ship or persons on board, and without presenting an unreasonable threat of harm to the marine environment, regardless of whether such action affects the normal schedule of the ship ’s departure. 3The scope of the disclosure includes deficiencies and detentions issued by PSC organisations that are signatories to memoranda of understanding (MoU) of regional PSC organisations. TR-CL-540a.3. (1) Number of marine casualties, (2) percentage classified as very serious 1The entity shall disclose (1) the total number of marine casualties involving its fleet. 1.1 A marine casualty is defined, based on the International Maritime Organization (IMO) ’s Code of International Standards and Recommended Practices for a Safety Investigation into a Marine Casualty or Marine Incident Resolution MSC 255(84), Chapter 2, Paragraph 2.9 as an event, or sequence of events, that occurs directly in connection with the operations of a ship and results in: 1.1.1 the death of, or serious injury to, a person; 1.1.2 the loss of a person from a ship; 1.1.3 the loss, presumed loss or abandonment of a ship; 1.1.4 material damage to a ship; 1.1.5 the stranding or disabling of a ship, or the involvement of a ship in a collision; 1.1.6 material damage to marine infrastructure external to a ship, that could seriously endanger the safety of the ship, another ship or an individual; or 1.1.7 severe damage to the environment, or the potential for severe damage to the environment, brought about by the damage of a ship or ships. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |CRUISE LINES |24\n\n[Page 25]\n2 The entity shall disclose (2) the percentage of marine casualties classified as very serious marine casualties. 2.1 A very serious marine casualty is defined as a marine casualty involving the total loss of the ship, a death, or severe damage to the environment. 2.2 The percentage shall be calculated as the number of very serious marine casualties divided by the total number of marine casualties. Note to TR-CL-540a.3 1The entity shall describe marine casualties and very serious marine casualties, including causes, outcomes and any corrective actions implemented in response. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |CRUISE LINES |25",
    "new_id": 1030
  },
  {
    "id": 80771,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why the GRI 411 Standard emphasizes both collective rights and universal human rights for indigenous peoples, as described in GRI 411: Rights of Indigenous Peoples 2016?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Because indigenous peoples are considered a vulnerable group due to historic injustices, necessitating unique protections beyond universal human rights.",
      "A": "Because the GRI Standards prioritize environmental impacts over social ones, requiring a dual focus on collective and individual rights.",
      "B": "Because the distinction between collective and universal rights is irrelevant in the context of sustainability reporting.",
      "D": "Because universal human rights apply exclusively to indigenous peoples, making their inclusion redundant in broader reporting frameworks.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "4",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 411_ Rights of Indigenous Peoples 2016.pdf",
    "source_text": "Introduction GRI 411: Rights of Indigenous Peoples 2016 contains disclosures for organizations to report information about their impacts related to the rights of indigenous peoples , and how they manage these impacts. The Standard is structured as follows: The rest of the Introduction section provides a background on the topic, an overview of the system of GRI Standards and further information on using this Standard. Background on the topic This Standard addresses the rights of indigenous peoples. While there is no universal definition of indigenous peoples, they are generally identified as: Many indigenous peoples have suffered from historic injustices and therefore are considered a vulnerable group. Such a group could experience negative impacts as a result of the organization’s activities more severely than the general population. In addition to their collective rights, each person belonging to indigenous peoples shares universal human rights . These concepts are covered in key instruments of the International Labour Organization and the United Nations: see the Bibliography . System of GRI Standards This Standard is part of the GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards (GRI Standards). The GRI Standards enable an organization to report information about its most significant impacts on the economy, environment, and people, including impacts on their human rights , and how it manages these impacts. The GRI Standards are structured as a system of interrelated standards that are organized into three series: GRI Universal Standards, GRI Sector Standards, and GRI Topic Standards (see Figure 1 in this Standard). Universal Standards: GRI 1, GRI 2 and GRI 3 GRI 1: Foundation 2021 specifies the requirements that the organization must comply with to report in accordance with the GRI Standards. The organization begins using the GRI Standards by consulting GRI 1 . GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 contains disclosures that the organization uses to provide information about its reporting practices and other organizational details, such as its activities, governance, and policies. GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 provides guidance on how to determine material topics . It also contains disclosures that the organization uses to report information about its process of determining material topics, its list of material topics, and how it manages each topic. Sector Standards The Sector Standards provide information for organizations about their likely material topics. The organization uses the Sector Standards that apply to its sectors when determining its material topics and when determining what to report for each material topic.Section 1 contains a requirement, which provides information about how the organization manages its impacts related to the rights of indigenous peoples.• Section 2 contains one disclosure, which provides information about the organization’s impacts related to the rights of indigenous peoples.• The Glossary contains defined terms with a specific meaning when used in the GRI Standards. The terms are underlined in the text of the GRI Standards and linked to the definitions.• The Bibliography lists authoritative intergovernmental instruments and additional references used in developing this Standard.• 1 tribal peoples in independent countries whose social, cultural and economic conditions distinguish them from other sections of the national community, and whose status is regulated wholly or partially by their own customs or traditions or by special laws or regulations;• peoples in independent countries who are regarded as indigenous on account of their descent from the populations which inhabited the country, or a geographical region to which the country belongs, at the time of conquest or colonization or the establishment of present state boundaries and who, irrespective of their legal status, retain some or all of their own social, economic, cultural and political institutions.• 2 1Source: International Labour Organization (ILO) Convention 169, ‘Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention’, 1989. 2Source: United Nations (UN) Declaration, ‘United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples’, 2007. GRI 411: Rights of Indigenous Peoples 2016 4",
    "new_id": 1031
  },
  {
    "id": 80784,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the implicit relationship between consumer information categories and their implications for targeted advertising, as described in the Advertising & Marketing – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Location data provides an advantage over other types of consumer information by enabling real-time ad targeting, though it requires integration with personal data to ensure individual identification.",
      "A": "Demographic data is the most critical type of consumer information because it directly identifies individuals and is therefore essential for all forms of targeted advertising.",
      "B": "Behavioral data allows advertisers to predict future buying habits based on past actions, making it more valuable than location data for crafting long-term targeted advertising strategies.",
      "C": "Personal data is indispensable for targeted advertising since it inherently combines demographic, behavioral, and location data into a single identifiable profile.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "8",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Advertising & Marketing.pdf",
    "source_text": "Data Privacy Topic Summary Because of the prevalence of social media, location-based mobile applications and e-commerce, customers ’ digital footprints offer a more complete picture of their habits than might otherwise be available to advertisers. Advertisers can collect or purchase highly detailed information about buyers, and advertising strategies can be precisely targeted to potential buyers. As part of an industry that uses large quantities of data about private citizens, advertising and marketing entities must balance the potential benefits of targeted advertising with protecting customer data and privacy. Metrics SV-AD-220a.1. Discussion of policies and practices relating to targeted advertising and consumer privacy 1The entity shall describe the nature, scope and implementation of its policies and practices related to the privacy of consumer information, with a specific focus on how the entity manages the collection, use and retention of consumers ’ information and its approach to targeted advertising. 1.1 Consumer information is defined as information that pertains to a user ’s attributes or actions which may include records of communications, content of communications, demographic data, behavioural data, location data and personal data. 1.1.1 Demographic data is defined as information that identifies and distinguishes a given population. Examples of demographic data include gender, age, ethnicity, language, disabilities, mobility, home ownership and employment status. 1.1.2 Behavioural data is defined as information that tracks, measures and records individual behaviours such as consumers ’ online browsing patterns, buying habits, brand preferences and product usage patterns, among others. 1.1.3 Location data is defined as information that describes the physical location or movement patterns of an individual, such as Global Positioning System (GPS) coordinates or other related data that would enable identifying and tracking of an individual ’s physical location. 1.1.4 Personal data is defined as information that relates to an identified or identifiable living individual. Various pieces of information, which collected together can lead to the identification of a particular person, also constitute personal data. 1.1.5 The entity may define personal data based on an applicable jurisdictional definition. In such cases, the entity shall disclose the applicable jurisdictional standard or definition used. 1.2 Targeted advertising is defined as the practice of selecting and displaying advertisements to individual users based on their user information. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |ADVERTISING & MARKETING |8",
    "new_id": 1032
  },
  {
    "id": 80797,
    "question": "Which scenario would most likely be classified as a notable recall requiring detailed disclosure under the outlined reporting framework in the Auto Parts – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "An involuntary recall of 2,000 vehicles caused by a non-compliance issue with rearview mirror regulations, mentioned in periodic jurisdictional recall reports.",
      "B": "A voluntary recall of 500 vehicles due to a minor defect in an interior component that poses no safety risk but was flagged in jurisdictional reports.",
      "C": "A voluntary recall of 10,000 vehicles addressing a software bug that intermittently disables infotainment systems without affecting vehicle safety.",
      "D": "An involuntary recall of 15,000 vehicles triggered by a manufacturing error linked to several serious injuries, but not explicitly referenced in jurisdictional recall reports.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "11-12",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Auto Parts.pdf",
    "source_text": "Product Safety Topic Summary Driving is a risky activity, since distracted driving, speeding, drunk driving, dangerous weather conditions and other factors may result in accidents that expose drivers, passengers and bystanders to injuries and deaths. Accidents can also be caused by defective vehicle parts, and an entity ’s failure to detect defects before vehicles are sold may have significant financial repercussions for both automobile and auto parts manufacturers. Entities improving vehicle safety and responding quickly when defects are identified may mitigate potentially costly regulatory action or customer lawsuits. These efforts may preserve relationships with original equipment manufacturers (OEMs), who often select Tier 1 suppliers based on their safety performance and reliability. As cars integrate more sophisticated electronics and technologies, risks related to recalls may increase. Through effective management of product safety, entities may enhance their brand value and improve sales over the long term. Metrics TR-AP-250a.1. Number of vehicles recalled 1The entity shall disclose (1) the total number of product recalls it issued during the reporting period, including voluntary and involuntary recalls. 1.1 A recall is defined as the removal of alleged, potentially or known defective or hazardous products from the distribution chain and from the possession of consumers. 1.2 Voluntary recalls are those initiated by the entity to remove products from the market for safety-related concerns. 1.3 Involuntary recalls are those requested or mandated by applicable jurisdictional legal or regulatory authorities when (i) a vehicle or item of vehicle-related equipment does not comply with governmental vehicle safety regulations, or (ii) when a safety-related defect in a vehicle or vehicle-related equipment is identified. 2The entity shall disclose (2) the total number of units subject to product recalls. 3The entity may separately disclose the percentage of recalls that were (a) voluntary and (b) involuntary. Note to TR-AP-250a.1 1The entity shall describe notable recalls such as those that affected a significant number of vehicles, vehicle models or those related to serious injuries or fatalities. 1.1 A recall may be considered notable if it is mentioned in periodic jurisdictional recall reports. 2 For such recalls the entity may provide: 2.1 corrective actions; SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |AUTO PARTS |11\n\n[Page 12]\n2.2 description and cause of the recall issue; 2.3 the total number of units (or vehicles) recalled; 2.4 the cost to remedy the issue; 2.5 whether the recall was voluntary or involuntary; and 2.6 any other significant outcomes (for example, legal proceedings or fatalities). SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |AUTO PARTS |12",
    "new_id": 1033
  },
  {
    "id": 80820,
    "question": "Under what condition can an entity claim renewable energy generated on-site as part of its renewable energy scope, considering the roles of RECs and GOs, as described in the Auto Parts – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "The entity must retain and retire or cancel the associated RECs and GOs, ensuring they are not sold to any external party.",
      "A": "The entity must sell the associated RECs and GOs to a third party to demonstrate financial investment in renewable energy.",
      "C": "The entity is required to purchase additional RECs or GOs from the grid mix to supplement on-site generation claims.",
      "D": "The entity can claim the energy as renewable if it participates in any Green-e Energy Certified utility programme, regardless of REC or GO retention.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "8",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Auto Parts.pdf",
    "source_text": "3.3 The scope of renewable energy includes renewable fuel the entity consumed, renewable energy the entity directly produced and renewable energy the entity purchased, if purchased through a renewable power purchase agreement (PPA) that explicitly includes renewable energy certificates (RECs) or Guarantees of Origin (GOs), a Green ‐e Energy Certified utility or supplier programme, or other green power products that explicitly include RECs or GOs, or for which Green ‐e Energy Certified RECs are paired with grid electricity. 3.3.1 For any renewable electricity generated on-site, any RECs and GOs shall be retained (not sold) and retired or cancelled on behalf of the entity for the entity to claim them as renewable energy. 3.3.2 For renewable PPAs and green power products, the agreement shall explicitly include and convey that RECs and GOs be retained or replaced and retired or cancelled on behalf of the entity for the entity to claim them as renewable energy. 3.3.3 The renewable portion of the electricity grid mix outside the control or influence of the entity is excluded from the scope of renewable energy. 3.4 For the purposes of this disclosure, the scope of renewable energy from biomass sources is limited to materials certified to a third-party standard (for example, Forest Stewardship Council, Sustainable Forest Initiative, Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification or American Tree Farm System), materials considered eligible sources of supply according to the Green-e Framework for Renewable Energy Certification, Version 1.0 (2017) or Green-e regional standards or materials that are eligible for an applicable state renewable portfolio standard. 4The entity shall apply conversion factors consistently for all data reported under this disclosure, such as the use of HHVs for fuel use (including biofuels) and conversion of kilowatt hours (kWh) to GJ (for energy data including electricity from solar or wind energy). SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |AUTO PARTS |8",
    "new_id": 1034
  },
  {
    "id": 80823,
    "question": "Which of the following best reflects the rationale behind reporting a spill that qualifies as both soil and water contamination solely as a spill to water, according to the outlined framework in the Road Transportation – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "To ensure accurate apportionment of spill volumes while maintaining consistency in environmental impact assessments.",
      "A": "To simplify regulatory reporting by reducing the number of required disclosures for multi-environment spills.",
      "B": "Because water contamination is legally considered more severe than soil contamination under all jurisdictional frameworks.",
      "D": "Due to the assumption that spills reaching water have a higher likelihood of evaporation or natural dispersion compared to soil.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "16-17",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Road Transportation.pdf",
    "source_text": "1.5.2 First aid is defined as emergency care or treatment for an ill or injured person before regular medical aid can be provided. 1.5.3 The entity may use applicable jurisdictional legal or regulatory criteria for definitions of recordable incident and first aid. 2The minimum scope of disclosure includes accidents and incidents reported to an applicable jurisdictional legal or regulatory authority. TR-RO-540a.3. (1) Number and (2) aggregate volume of spills and releases to the environment 1 The entity shall disclose (1) the total number of spills and releases of hazardous material to the environment. 1.1 Hazardous material is defined as a substance or material that an applicable jurisdictional legal or regulatory authority has determined can pose an unreasonable risk to health, safety and property when transported in commerce (including explosives; radioactive materials; infectious substances; flammable or combustible liquids, solids or gases; toxic, oxidising or corrosive materials; and compressed gases), and has been designated as hazardous in accordance with hazardous materials transportation law. 1.1.1 The scope of hazardous materials includes hazardous substances, hazardous wastes, marine pollutants, elevated temperature materials, and materials designated as hazardous by the applicable jurisdictional legal and regulatory framework(s) where the materials were generated. 1.1.2 The entity may use definitions of hazardous waste from the United Nations Environment Programme ’s (UNEP) Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal . 2The entity shall disclose (2) the total volume of spills and releases of hazardous material to the environment in cubic metres. 2.1 The volume shall be calculated as the total estimated amount spilled that reached the environment, without reducing that figure by the amount of such material that was subsequently recovered, evaporated or otherwise lost. 3A spill that qualifies as a spill to both soil and water shall be reported as a single spill to water, with the volume properly apportioned to soil and water. 4 The entity additionally may disclose spills to soil and water separately. 4.1 A release that qualifies as a release to both soil and water may be reported as a single release to water, with the quantity of the release properly apportioned to soil and water. 5If relevant, the entity may disaggregate spills and releases by type, such as hydrocarbons and hazardous substances. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |ROAD TRANSPORTATION |16\n\n[Page 17]\n| |17 sasb.org/contact",
    "new_id": 1035
  },
  {
    "id": 80858,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between regulatory changes and sustainability disclosures in the Mortgage Finance industry, as implied in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 19: Mortgage Finance?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The shift towards consumer protection and accountability has indirectly influenced the integration of climate-related risks into mortgage underwriting practices.",
      "A": "Regulatory changes post-2008 have directly mandated the specific metrics for climate-related risks in mortgage finance.",
      "B": "Sustainability disclosures are now legally required to align with the exact standards set by the SASB for all mortgage finance entities.",
      "C": "The inclusion of environmental risk metrics is primarily driven by investor demand rather than regulatory pressures.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "3-4",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol19.pdf",
    "source_text": "Introduction This volume is part of the Industry-based Guidance on Implementing IFRS S2 Climate-related Disclosures . This guidance suggests possible ways to apply some of the disclosure requirements in IFRS S2 but does not create additional requirements. This volume suggests possible ways to identify, measure and disclose information about climate-related risks and opportunities that are associated with particular business models, economic activities and other common features that characterise participation in this industry. This industry-based guidance has been derived from Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) Standards, which are maintained by the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB). The metric codes used in SASB Standards have been included for ease of reference. For additional context regarding the industry-based guidance contained in this volume, including structure and terminology, application and illustrative examples, refer to Section III of the Accompanying Guidance to IFRS S2.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 2 © IFRS Foundation\n\n[Page 4]\nVolume 19 —Mortgage Finance Industry Description The Mortgage Finance industry provides an essential public good by enabling consumers to purchase homes and contributing to the overall home ownership rate. Entities in the industry lend capital to individual and commercial customers using property as collateral. The primary products are residential and commercial mortgages, while other services offered include mortgage servicing, title insurance, closing and settlement services, and valuation. In addition, mortgage finance entities own, manage and finance real estate-related investments such as mortgage pass-through certificates and collateralised mortgage obligations. Recent trends in the regulatory environment indicate a significant shift towards consumer protection, disclosure and accountability. Regulatory changes made in response to the global 2008 financial crisis demonstrate the potential for further alignment between the interests of society and those of long-term investors. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Environmental Risk to Mortgaged Properties(1) Number and (2) value of mortgage loans in 100-year flood zonesQuantitative Number, Presentation currencyFN-MF-450a.1 (1) Total expected loss and (2) Loss Given Default (LGD) attributable to mortgage loan default and delinquency because of weather-related natural catastrophes, by geographical regionQuantitative Presentation currency, Percentage (%)FN-MF-450a.2 Description of how climate change and other environmental risks are incorporated into mortgage origination and underwritingDiscussion and Analysisn/a FN-MF-450a.3 Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE (1) Number and (2) value of mortgages originated by category: (a) residential and (b) commercialQuantitative Number, Presentation currencyFN-MF-000.A (1) Number and (2) value of mortgages purchased by category: (a) residential and (b) commercialQuantitative Number, Presentation currencyFN-MF-000.BIFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 3",
    "new_id": 1036
  },
  {
    "id": 80920,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why an entity in the car rental industry might face increased challenges in balancing cost savings with safety standards, as outlined in the Car Rental & Leasing – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Vehicle recalls temporarily reduce the available fleet, leading to higher operational costs and potential customer dissatisfaction, while frequent maintenance adds further financial strain.",
      "B": "The franchise model inherently reduces fleet uniformity, making it harder to enforce consistent safety policies across all regions.",
      "C": "Customers are less likely to rent vehicles with lower NCAP safety ratings, forcing entities to invest heavily in upgrading their fleets to 5-star rated vehicles.",
      "D": "Legal fees from accidents are the primary factor driving up costs, overshadowing the impact of recalls or maintenance expenses.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "7-8",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Car Rental & Leasing.pdf",
    "source_text": "Customer Safety Topic Summary Meeting customer satisfaction standards for the Car Rental & Leasing industry means ensuring vehicles are in proper working condition and customers understand how to safely operate the vehicles. Since rental vehicles accumulate significant mileage compared to private vehicles, frequent maintenance and repair are required, which can be costly. Vehicle recalls are materially significant to the industry because the associated repairs temporarily may reduce entities’ available fleet, create customer service issues and decrease the residual value of cars. In addition, if customers are involved in accidents and the car rental entity is found negligent, the entity may face legal fees, impaired brand value and a higher risk profile. Balancing cost savings while ensuring safety can be complex. The franchise model under which car rental and leasing entities operate adds to the complexity, since franchisees separately own and manage their fleets. Metrics TR-CR-250a.1. Percentage of rental fleet vehicles rated by NCAP with an overall 5- star safety rating, by region 1The entity shall disclose the percentage of its rental fleet rated by a New Car Assessment Program (NCAP) with an overall 5-star safety rating, by geographical region. 1.1 The percentage shall be calculated as the number of vehicles in its rental fleet rated by an NCAP with an overall 5-star rating divided by the total number of vehicles in its rental fleet rated by an NCAP . 1.2 The scope of the disclosure includes existing vehicles and newly introduced vehicles in the entity ’s rental fleet that have received a rating by an NCAP , including carry-over vehicles. 1.2.1 Carry-over vehicles are defined as vehicles tested under an NCAP in previous years and the vehicle design remains unchanged and has retained the safety rating. 1.3 The scope of the disclosure includes vehicles available for rent through the entity ’s franchises. 1.4 The scope of the disclosure excludes vehicles that do not have an applicable NCAP rating. 2The entity shall disclose the percentage by geographical region. 2.1 Geographical regions are defined as the regions for which the entity conducts segment financial reporting and in which vehicles are subject to an NCAP or an applicable jurisdictional equivalent. TR-CR-250a.2. Number of vehicles recalled 1The entity shall disclose the total number of vehicles in its rental fleet subject to voluntary or involuntary recalls issued during the reporting period. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |CAR RENTAL & LEASING |7\n\n[Page 8]\n1.1 Voluntary recalls are those initiated by the entity to remove products from the market for safety-related concerns. 1.2 Involuntary recalls are those requested or mandated by applicable jurisdictional legal or regulatory authorities when (i) a vehicle or item of vehicle-related equipment does not comply with a governmental vehicle safety standard or (ii) when a safety-related defect in vehicle or vehicle-related equipment is identified. 2 The scope of the disclosure shall include vehicles available for rent through the entity ’s franchises. 3 The entity may disclose the percentage of recalls that were (a) voluntary and (b) involuntary. Note to TR-CR-250a.2 1The entity shall describe its policy for renting vehicles subject to a recall notice, including how this policy extends to global and franchise operations. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |CAR RENTAL & LEASING |8",
    "new_id": 1037
  },
  {
    "id": 80921,
    "question": "Which inference about the Car Rental & Leasing industry's approach to sustainability disclosures is most strongly supported by the text in the Car Rental & Leasing – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Companies operating in multiple industries under SICS® must evaluate the relevance of additional SASB Standards beyond their primary industry.",
      "A": "Entities are required to report on all metrics listed in the SASB Standard, regardless of their materiality to the business.",
      "C": "The disclosure topics and metrics are designed primarily to align with global regulatory requirements rather than investor needs.",
      "D": "Fleet utilisation rate is identified as the single most critical metric for assessing long-term profitability in the industry.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "5-6",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Car Rental & Leasing.pdf",
    "source_text": "Use of the Standards SASB Standards are intended to aid entities in disclosing information about sustainability-related risks and opportunities that could reasonably be expected to affect the entity ’s cash flows, its access to finance or cost of capital over the short, medium or long term. An entity determines which Industry Standard(s) and which disclosure topics are relevant to its business, and which associated metrics to report. In general, an entity should use the SASB Standard specific to its primary industry as identified in SICS® . However, companies with substantial business in multiple SICS® industries should refer to and consider the applicability of the disclosure topics and associated metrics in additional SASB Standards. The disclosure topics and associated metrics contained in this Standard have been identified as those that are likely to be useful to investors. However, the responsibility for making materiality judgements and determinations rests with the reporting entity. Industry Description Entities in this industry rent or lease passenger vehicles to customers. Consumers typically rent vehicles for periods of less than a month, whereas leases may last a year or more. The industry includes car-sharing business models in which rentals are measured hourly and typically include subscription fees. Car rental entities operate out of airport locations, which serve business and leisure travellers, and out of neighbourhood locations, which mostly provide repair-shop and weekend rentals. The industry is concentrated, with several dominant market players, who operate globally using a franchise model. The growth of public transit and ride-sharing services in major metropolitan areas may represent a threat to the long-term profitability of the Car Rental & Leasing industry if customers choose to hail rides or take public transit rather than rent vehicles. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |CAR RENTAL & LEASING |5\n\n[Page 6]\nSUSTAINABILITY DISCLOSURE TOPICS & METRICS Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORYUNIT OF MEASURECODE Customer SafetyPercentage of rental fleet vehicles rated by NCAP with an overall 5-star safety rating, by regionQuantitativePercentage (%)TR-CR-250a.1 Number of vehicles recalled 1Quantitative Number TR-CR-250a.2 Fleet Fuel Economy & UtilisationRental day-weighted average rental fleet fuel economy, by regionQuantitativeMpg, L/km, gCO₂/km, km/LTR-CR-410a.1 Fleet utilisation rate Quantitative Rate TR-CR-410a.2 Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORYUNIT OF MEASURECODE Average vehicle age Quantitative Months TR-CR-000.A Total available rental days2Quantitative Days TR-CR-000.B Average rental fleet size3QuantitativeNumber of vehiclesTR-CR-000.C 1Note to TR-CR-250a.2 – The disclosure shall include a description of the entity ’s policy for renting vehicles subject to a recall notice. 2Note to TR-CR-000.B – The total number of available rental days is the number of 24-hour periods —or portions thereof —that the entity offered vehicles for rental during the reporting period. 3Note to TR-CR-000.C – The average rental fleet size is the simple average of the maximum number of vehicles available for rental each month during the reporting period. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |CAR RENTAL & LEASING |6",
    "new_id": 1038
  },
  {
    "id": 80923,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why entities in the Car Rental & Leasing industry might need to consider disclosure topics beyond their primary SICS® industry classification, as outlined in the Car Rental & Leasing – Sustainability Accounting Standard?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Because companies with substantial business in multiple SICS® industries may face sustainability risks and opportunities that are not fully captured by their primary industry’s disclosure topics.",
      "A": "Because SASB Standards mandate reporting across all SICS® industries regardless of an entity’s primary focus.",
      "B": "Because the growth of public transit and ride-sharing services automatically qualifies all car rental entities for additional disclosures.",
      "D": "Because the technical protocols require entities to adopt metrics from unrelated industries to ensure data normalization.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "4-5",
    "ref_doc": "SASB Car Rental & Leasing.pdf",
    "source_text": "INTRODUCTION Overview of SASB Standards The SASB Standards are a set of 77 industry-specific sustainability accounting standards ( “SASB Standards ” or “Industry Standards ”), categorised pursuant to the Sustainable Industry Classification System® (SICS®). SASB Standards include: 1. Industry descriptions – which are intended to help entities identify applicable industry guidance by describing the business models, associated activities and other common features that characterise participation in the industry. 2. Disclosure topics – which describe specific sustainability-related risks or opportunities associated with the activities conducted by entities within a particular industry. 3. Metrics – which accompany disclosure topics and are designed to, either individually or as part of a set, provide useful information regarding an entity ’s performance for a specific disclosure topic. 4. Technical protocols – which provide guidance on definitions, scope, implementation and presentation of associated metrics. 5. Activity metrics – which quantify the scale of specific activities or operations by an entity and are intended for use in conjunction with the metrics referred to in point 3 to normalise data and facilitate comparison. Entities using the SASB Standards as part of their implementation of ISSB Standards should consider the relevant ISSB application guidance. For entities using the SASB Standards independently from ISSB Standards, the SASB Standards Application Guidance establishes guidance applicable to the use of all Industry Standards and is considered part of the Standards. Unless otherwise specified in the technical protocols contained in the Industry Standards, the guidance in the SASB Standards Application Guidance applies to the definitions, scope, implementation, compilation and presentation of the metrics in the Industry Standards. Historically, the SASB Conceptual Framework set out the basic concepts, principles, definitions and objectives that guided the SASB Standards Board in its approach to setting standards for sustainability accounting. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |CAR RENTAL & LEASING |4\n\n[Page 5]\nUse of the Standards SASB Standards are intended to aid entities in disclosing information about sustainability-related risks and opportunities that could reasonably be expected to affect the entity ’s cash flows, its access to finance or cost of capital over the short, medium or long term. An entity determines which Industry Standard(s) and which disclosure topics are relevant to its business, and which associated metrics to report. In general, an entity should use the SASB Standard specific to its primary industry as identified in SICS® . However, companies with substantial business in multiple SICS® industries should refer to and consider the applicability of the disclosure topics and associated metrics in additional SASB Standards. The disclosure topics and associated metrics contained in this Standard have been identified as those that are likely to be useful to investors. However, the responsibility for making materiality judgements and determinations rests with the reporting entity. Industry Description Entities in this industry rent or lease passenger vehicles to customers. Consumers typically rent vehicles for periods of less than a month, whereas leases may last a year or more. The industry includes car-sharing business models in which rentals are measured hourly and typically include subscription fees. Car rental entities operate out of airport locations, which serve business and leisure travellers, and out of neighbourhood locations, which mostly provide repair-shop and weekend rentals. The industry is concentrated, with several dominant market players, who operate globally using a franchise model. The growth of public transit and ride-sharing services in major metropolitan areas may represent a threat to the long-term profitability of the Car Rental & Leasing industry if customers choose to hail rides or take public transit rather than rent vehicles. SUSTAINABILITY ACCOUNTING STANDARD |CAR RENTAL & LEASING |5",
    "new_id": 1039
  },
  {
    "id": 80968,
    "question": "Which scenario demonstrates compliance with the renewable energy disclosure requirements when an entity uses on-site renewable electricity generation, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 27: Drug Retailers?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The entity retains, retires, or cancels Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs) associated with its on-site generation and includes the electricity in both its renewable energy and total energy consumption figures.",
      "A": "The entity sells Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs) associated with its on-site generation and claims the electricity as part of its renewable energy consumption.",
      "B": "The entity retains and retires Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs) linked to its on-site generation but does not include the electricity in its total energy consumption.",
      "C": "The entity purchases additional Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs) from off-site sources to offset the absence of retiring its own RECs.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "5-6",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol27.pdf",
    "source_text": "Metrics HC-DR-130a.1. (1) Total energy consumed, (2) percentage grid electricity and (3) percentage renewable 1 The entity shall disclose (1) the total amount of energy it consumed as an aggregate figure, in gigajoules (GJ). 1.1 The scope of energy consumption includes energy from all sources, including energy purchased from external sources and energy produced by the entity itself (self-generated). For example, direct fuel usage, purchased electricity, and heating, cooling and steam energy are all included within the scope of energy consumption. 1.2 The scope of energy consumption includes only energy directly consumed by the entity during the reporting period. 1.3 In calculating energy consumption from fuels and biofuels, the entity shall use higher heating values (HHV), also known as gross calorific values (GCV), which are measured directly or taken from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2 The entity shall disclose (2) the percentage of energy it consumed that was supplied from grid electricity. 2.1 The percentage shall be calculated as purchased grid electricity consumption divided by total energy consumption. 3 The entity shall disclose (3) the percentage of energy it consumed that was renewable energy. 3.1 Renewable energy is defined as energy from sources that are replenished at a rate greater than or equal to their rate of depletion, such as geothermal, wind, solar, hydro and biomass. 3.2 The percentage shall be calculated as renewable energy consumption divided by total energy consumption. 3.3 The scope of renewable energy includes renewable fuel the entity consumed, renewable energy the entity directly produced and renewable energy the entity purchased, if purchased through a renewable power purchase agreement (PPA) that explicitly includes renewable energy certificates (RECs) or Guarantees of Origin (GOs), a Green ‐e Energy Certified utility or supplier programme, or other green power products that explicitly include RECs or GOs, or for which Green ‐e Energy Certified RECs are paired with grid electricity. 3.3.1 For any renewable electricity generated on-site, any RECs and GOs shall be retained (not sold) and retired or cancelled on behalf of the entity for the entity to claim them as renewable energy. 3.3.2 For renewable PPAs and green power products, the agreement shall explicitly include and convey that RECs and GOs be retained or replaced and retired or cancelled on behalf of the entity for the entity to claim them as renewable energy.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 4 © IFRS Foundation\n\n[Page 6]\n3.3.3 The renewable portion of the electricity grid mix that is outside of the control or influence of the entity is excluded from the scope of renewable energy. 3.4 For the purposes of this disclosure, the scope of renewable energy from biomass sources is limited to materials certified to a third-party standard (for example, Forest Stewardship Council, Sustainable Forest Initiative, Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification or American Tree Farm System), materials considered eligible sources of supply according to the Green-e Framework for Renewable Energy Certification, Version 1.0 (2017) or Green-e regional standards, or materials eligible for an applicable state renewable portfolio standard. 4 The entity shall apply conversion factors consistently for all data reported under this disclosure, such as the use of HHVs for fuel usage (including biofuels) and conversion of kilowatt hours (kWh) to GJ (for energy data including electricity from solar or wind energy).IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 5",
    "new_id": 1040
  },
  {
    "id": 80969,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the implicit relationship between energy management strategies and the operational characteristics of drug retailers, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 27: Drug Retailers?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Operational energy efficiency and diversification of energy sources are critical for mitigating exposure to rising energy costs and reducing indirect greenhouse gas emissions.",
      "B": "Energy efficiency initiatives are primarily driven by the need to reduce the environmental impact of refrigeration systems in retail pharmacies.",
      "C": "The 24-hour operation of many retail locations directly necessitates a reliance on non-renewable energy sources to meet heightened energy demands.",
      "D": "The expansion of health-focused services, such as in-store clinics, is the main factor increasing energy consumption and prompting a shift toward renewable energy usage.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "3-4",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol27.pdf",
    "source_text": "Introduction This volume is part of the Industry-based Guidance on Implementing IFRS S2 Climate-related Disclosures . This guidance suggests possible ways to apply some of the disclosure requirements in IFRS S2 but does not create additional requirements. This volume suggests possible ways to identify, measure and disclose information about climate-related risks and opportunities that are associated with particular business models, economic activities and other common features that characterise participation in this industry. This industry-based guidance has been derived from Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) Standards, which are maintained by the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB). The metric codes used in SASB Standards have been included for ease of reference. For additional context regarding the industry-based guidance contained in this volume, including structure and terminology, application and illustrative examples, refer to Section III of the Accompanying Guidance to IFRS S2.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 2 © IFRS Foundation\n\n[Page 4]\nVolume 27 —Drug Retailers Industry Description Drug Retailers industry entities operate retail pharmacies and distribution centres that supply retail stores. Stores may be entity-owned or franchised. Large entities source drugs and other merchandise through wholesalers and distributors. Consumer sales of prescription and over-the-counter pharmaceutical products generate a majority of the industry ’s revenue; other goods sold include household goods, personal care products and a limited selection of groceries. Additionally, the pharmacy retailer segment is expanding its health-focused services by offering clinics at various retail locations, which may add to the industry ’s shifting sustainability landscape. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Energy Management in Retail(1) Total energy consumed, (2) percentage grid electricity and (3) percentage renewableQuantitative Gigajoules (GJ), Percentage (%)HC-DR-130a.1 Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Number of pharmacy locations Quantitative Number HC-DR-000.A Total area of retail spaceQuantitative Square metres (m²)HC-DR-000.B Number of prescriptions filled, percentage for controlled substancesQuantitative Number, Percentage (%)HC-DR-000.C Number of pharmacists 28Quantitative Number HC-DR-000.D Energy Management in Retail Topic Summary Chain drug retailers operate thousands of locations that consume large quantities of energy. Electricity is used primarily for lighting and refrigeration. Many retail locations may operate 24 hours a day, thereby increasing energy demand. Operational energy efficiency and diversification among a range of energy supply sources may mitigate exposure to rising energy costs and limit an entity ’s indirect greenhouse gas emissions. 28Pharmacists are employees who dispense drugs prescribed by physicians and other health practitioners and provide information to patients about medications and their use. Pharmacists may advise physicians and other health practitioners on the selection, dosage, interactions, and side effects of medications.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 3",
    "new_id": 1041
  },
  {
    "id": 81018,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the implications of energy consumption disclosure requirements for entities in the Fuel Cells & Industrial Batteries industry, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 42: Fuel Cells & Industrial Batteries?",
    "options": {
      "B": "An entity's reported percentage of grid electricity consumption can exceed its total energy consumption if renewable energy sources are included.",
      "A": "Entities must calculate renewable energy consumption as a percentage of total self-generated energy only, excluding grid electricity.",
      "C": "The use of higher heating values (HHV) is optional when reporting energy consumption from biofuels, provided the entity discloses its methodology.",
      "D": "The calculation of total energy consumed excludes energy produced by the entity itself unless it is derived from renewable sources.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "5",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol42.pdf",
    "source_text": "Energy Management Topic Summary Manufacturing in the Fuel Cells & Industrial Batteries industry requires energy to power machines and cooling, ventilation, lighting and product-testing systems. Purchased electricity is a major share of the energy sources used in the industry and accounts for a notable proportion of the total cost of materials and value added. Various sustainability factors are increasing the cost of conventional electricity while making alternative sources cost-competitive. Energy efficiency efforts may have a significant positive impact on operational efficiency and profitability, especially because many entities operate on relatively low or negative margins. By improving manufacturing process efficiency and exploring alternative energy sources, fuel cell and industrial battery entities may reduce both their indirect environmental impacts and their operating expenses. Metrics RR-FC-130a.1. (1) Total energy consumed, (2) percentage grid electricity and (3) percentage renewable 1 The entity shall disclose (1) the total amount of energy it consumed as an aggregate figure, in gigajoules (GJ). 1.1 The scope of energy consumption includes energy from all sources, including energy purchased from external sources and energy produced by the entity itself (self-generated). For example, direct fuel usage, purchased electricity, and heating, cooling and steam energy are all included within the scope of energy consumption. 1.2 The scope of energy consumption includes only energy directly consumed by the entity during the reporting period. 1.3 In calculating energy consumption from fuels and biofuels, the entity shall use higher heating values (HHV), also known as gross calorific values (GCV), which are measured directly or taken from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2 The entity shall disclose (2) the percentage of energy it consumed that was supplied from grid electricity. 2.1 The percentage shall be calculated as purchased grid electricity consumption divided by total energy consumption. 3 The entity shall disclose (3) the percentage of energy it consumed that was renewable energy. 3.1 Renewable energy is defined as energy from sources that are replenished at a rate greater than or equal to their rate of depletion, such as geothermal, wind, solar, hydro and biomass. 3.2 The percentage shall be calculated as renewable energy consumption divided by total energy consumption.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 4 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 1042
  },
  {
    "id": 81027,
    "question": "Which scenario would disqualify an entity from claiming renewable energy under the scope defined in the text, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 42: Fuel Cells & Industrial Batteries?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The entity purchases renewable energy through a PPA that explicitly includes RECs but sells the associated RECs to another party.",
      "A": "The entity generates renewable electricity on-site and retains all associated RECs without selling them.",
      "B": "The entity uses grid electricity paired with Green-e Energy Certified RECs that are retired on its behalf.",
      "D": "The entity consumes renewable fuel certified by a third-party standard such as the Forest Stewardship Council.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "6",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol42.pdf",
    "source_text": "3.3 The scope of renewable energy includes renewable fuel the entity consumed, renewable energy the entity directly produced and renewable energy the entity purchased, if purchased through a renewable power purchase agreement (PPA) that explicitly includes renewable energy certificates (RECs) or Guarantees of Origin (GOs), a Green ‐e Energy Certified utility or supplier programme, or other green power products that explicitly include RECs or GOs, or for which Green ‐e Energy Certified RECs are paired with grid electricity. 3.3.1 For any renewable electricity generated on-site, any RECs and GOs shall be retained (not sold) and retired or cancelled on behalf of the entity for the entity to claim them as renewable energy. 3.3.2 For renewable PPAs and green power products, the agreement shall explicitly include and convey that RECs and GOs be retained or replaced and retired or cancelled on behalf of the entity for the entity to claim them as renewable energy. 3.3.3 The renewable portion of the electricity grid mix that is outside of the control or influence of the entity is excluded from the scope of renewable energy. 3.4 For the purposes of this disclosure, the scope of renewable energy from biomass sources is limited to materials certified to a third-party standard (for example, Forest Stewardship Council, Sustainable Forest Initiative, Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification or American Tree Farm System), materials considered eligible sources of supply according to the Green-e Framework for Renewable Energy Certification, Version 1.0 (2017) or Green-e regional standards, or materials eligible for an applicable jurisdictional renewable portfolio standard. 4 The entity shall apply conversion factors consistently for all data reported under this disclosure, such as the use of HHVs for fuel usage (including biofuels) and conversion of kilowatt hours (kWh) to GJ (for energy data including electricity from solar or wind energy). Product Efficiency Topic Summary Both customer demand and regulatory requirements are driving innovation in energy- efficient products with lower environmental impacts and lower total cost of ownership. Therefore, research and development in the Fuel Cells & Industrial Batteries industry that drive energy and thermal efficiency and enhance storage capacities may lower barriers to adoption. Advances in battery technology to increase storage capabilities and improve charging efficiencies, while reducing costs for customers, are critical for the integration of renewable energy technologies into the grid. Pressured by stricter environmental regulations, high energy costs and customer preferences, fuel cell and industrial battery manufacturers that improve efficiency in the use phase may increase revenue and market share.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 5",
    "new_id": 1043
  },
  {
    "id": 81028,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why an entity might choose to disclose additional categories for new products with low sales volumes but strategic importance, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 42: Fuel Cells & Industrial Batteries?",
    "options": {
      "D": "To highlight products that may have a significant future impact despite current low market penetration.",
      "A": "To comply with mandatory reporting standards for all product types regardless of sales volume.",
      "B": "To ensure that energy efficiency measurements are uniform across all technology types.",
      "C": "To provide a comprehensive breakdown of operating lifetime metrics for all existing fuel cell technologies.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "8",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol42.pdf",
    "source_text": "2.2 The entity shall disclose the standard(s) used for energy efficiency measurements. 3 The entity shall disclose electrical and thermal efficiency by these application types, if applicable: portable, motive, stationary and ‘all other ’, each further categorised by these technology types, if applicable: direct methanol (DMFC), polymer electrolyte (PEM), alkaline (AFC), phosphoric acid (PAFC), molten carbonate (MCFC), solid oxide fuel cell (SOFC) and all other types. 3.1 The entity may include additional categories of application types or technology types if appropriate, including categories for new products with low sales volumes, but strategic importance in terms of product efficiency or other attributes. 4 The entity may disclose any other fuel cell outputs that have economic value (for example, hydrogen), including an appropriate measurement of sales-weighted average value, by product application and technology type. RR-FC-410a.3. Average battery efficiency as coulombic efficiency, by product application and technology type 1 The entity shall disclose the average energy efficiency of batteries as coulombic efficiency, weighted by unit sales volume per product application and technology type. 1.1 Coulombic efficiency is calculated as energy removed from a battery during discharge divided by the energy used during charging to restore the original capacity. 2 The entity shall measure and disclose coulombic efficiency in accordance with standard(s) applicable to the product application or technology type. 2.1 Applicable standard(s) include SAE J240 —Automotive storage batteries and SAE J2185 —Heavy-duty storage batteries. 3 The entity shall disclose coulombic efficiency by these application types, if applicable: portable, motive, stationary and ‘all other ’, each further categorised by these technology types, if applicable: lead-based, nickel-based, lithium-based, sodium-based and all other types. 3.1 The entity may include additional categories of application types or technology types if appropriate, including categories for new products with low sales volumes, but strategic importance in terms of product efficiency or other attributes. RR-FC-410a.4. Average operating lifetime of fuel cells, by product application and technology type 1 The entity shall disclose the average operating lifetime of fuel cells, weighted by unit sales volume per product application and technology type. 1.1 Operating lifetime of fuel cells is calculated as operating hours until 20% net power degradation occurs. 2 The entity shall measure and disclose operating lifetime in accordance with standard(s) applicable to the product application or technology type.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 7",
    "new_id": 1044
  },
  {
    "id": 81134,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why entities in the Household & Personal Products industry might face increased costs or lose water access in regions with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 5: Household & Personal Products?",
    "options": {
      "A": "As population growth, urbanization, and climate change contribute to water scarcity, affecting operations in these regions.",
      "B": "Because water is primarily used as a coolant in manufacturing, making it less critical for product formulation.",
      "C": "Due to their reliance on third-party retail establishments, which are typically located in areas with high water stress.",
      "D": "Since all entities exclusively source palm oil from regions impacted by water stress, increasing logistical challenges.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "4",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol5.pdf",
    "source_text": "Volume 5 —Household & Personal Products Industry Description Household & Personal Products industry entities manufacture a wide range of goods for personal and commercial consumption, including cosmetics, household and industrial cleaning supplies, soaps and detergents, sanitary paper products, household batteries, razors and kitchen utensils. Household and personal products entities operate globally and typically sell their products to mass merchants, grocery stores, membership club stores, drug stores, high-frequency stores, distributors and e-commerce retailers. Some entities sell products through independent representatives rather than third-party retail establishments. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Water Management(1) Total water withdrawn, (2) total water consumed; percentage of each in regions with High or Extremely High Baseline Water StressQuantitative Thousand cubic metres (m³), Percentage (%)CG-HP-140a.1 Description of water management risks and discussion of strategies and practices to mitigate those risksDiscussion and Analysisn/a CG-HP-140a.2 Environmental & Social Impacts of Palm Oil Supply ChainAmount of palm oil sourced, percentage certified through the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) supply chains as (a) Identity Preserved, (b) Segregated, (c) Mass Balance or (d) Book & ClaimQuantitative Metric tons (t), Percentage (%)CG-HP-430a.1 Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Units of products sold, total weight of products soldQuantitative Number, Metric tons (t)CG-HP-000.A Number of manufacturing facilities Quantitative Number CG-HP-000.B Water Management Topic Summary Water is vital to the Household & Personal Products industry, both as a coolant in manufacturing processes and as a main input for many of the industry ’s products. Water is becoming a scarce resource around the world because of population growth and increasing consumption, rapid urbanisation, and declining supplies because of subsurface aquifer depletion, drought and climate change. Many entities in this industry have operations in regions of the world facing water scarcity. Without careful planning, entities could face increased costs or lose water access in these regions, which may be aIFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 3",
    "new_id": 1045
  },
  {
    "id": 81135,
    "question": "Which of the following most accurately reflects a necessary condition for an entity's water management practices to align with the disclosed strategies, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 5: Household & Personal Products?",
    "options": {
      "B": "The entity must disclose mechanisms for achieving targets, including efficiency efforts and collaborations, regardless of whether those mechanisms were fully implemented during the reporting period.",
      "A": "The entity must prioritize goals related exclusively to reducing water withdrawals, as this is the primary focus of intensity-based targets.",
      "C": "An entity’s disclosure of water management activities requires reporting on lifecycle trade-offs only if those trade-offs involve increased greenhouse gas emissions.",
      "D": "Entities are required to use specific tools like the World Wildlife Fund Water Risk Filter to analyze water risks, as these tools define the scope of their water management strategies.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "7",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol5.pdf",
    "source_text": "4.1 The scope of its strategy, plans, goals or targets, such as how they relate to various business units, geographies or water-consuming operational processes. 4.2 Any water management goals or targets it has prioritised, and an analysis of performance against those goals or targets. 4.2.1 Goals and targets include those associated with reducing water withdrawals, reducing water consumption, reducing water discharges, reducing aquatic impingements, improving the quality of water discharges and regulatory compliance. 4.3 The activities and investments required to achieve the plans, goals or targets, and any risks or limiting factors that might affect achievement of the plans or targets. 4.4 Disclosure of strategies, plans, goals or targets shall be limited to activities that were ongoing (active) or reached completion during the reporting period. 5 For water management targets, the entity shall additionally disclose: 5.1 Whether the target is absolute or intensity-based, and the metric denominator if it is an intensity-based target. 5.2 The time lines for the water management activities, including the start year, the target year and the base year. 5.3 The mechanism(s) for achieving the target, including: 5.3.1 Efficiency efforts, such as the use of water recycling or closed-loop systems; 5.3.2 Product innovations, such as redesigning products or services to require less water; 5.3.3 Process and equipment innovations, such as those that enable the reduction of aquatic impingements or entrainments; 5.3.4 Use of tools and technologies (for example, the World Wildlife Fund Water Risk Filter, the Global Water Tool and Water Footprint Network Footprint Assessment Tool) to analyse water use, risks and opportunities; and 5.3.5 Collaborations or programmes in place with the community or other organisations 5.4 The percentage reduction or improvement from the base year, in which the base year is the first year against which water management targets are evaluated towards the achievement of the target. 6 The entity shall discuss whether its water management practices result in any additional lifecycle impacts or trade-offs in its organisation, including trade-offs in land use, energy production and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and why the entity chose these practices despite lifecycle trade-offs.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 6 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 1046
  },
  {
    "id": 81182,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects a logical implication of the reporting requirements for payload fuel economy and environmental impact reduction efforts, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 29: Health Care Distributors?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The calculation of payload fuel economy inherently excludes all non-revenue-generating transportation activities from its scope.",
      "A": "Entities must report payload fuel economy separately for outsourced logistics operations if they account for more than half of total operations.",
      "B": "An entity can achieve compliance with disclosure standards without specifying whether any portion of its logistics operations is outsourced.",
      "D": "Programs focused on fleet upgrades and alternative fuels are considered sufficient to meet all environmental impact disclosure requirements.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "5-6",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol29.pdf",
    "source_text": "2.1 The entity shall disclose payload fuel economy for vehicles it operates (for example, those it owns or leases long-term) and specify if all or a portion of its logistics operations are outsourced. 3 Payload fuel economy shall be calculated as: total litres of fuel consumed/revenue tonne-kilometres (RTK). 3.1 Payload includes the total weight of paid tonnage transported and excludes the vehicle weight. 3.2 Revenue tonne-kilometres (RTK) is computed by multiplying the vehicle- kilometres travelled on each leg (distance goods were transported) by the number of metric tons of revenue traffic (payload) carried on that leg. 4 The entity shall aggregate payload fuel economy for types of transportation, which include: 4.1 Air transportation 4.2 Marine transportation 4.3 Rail transportation 4.4 Road transportation HC-DI-110a.2. Description of efforts to reduce the environmental impact of logistics 1 The entity shall describe the nature, scope and implementation of its programmes and initiatives to reduce the environmental impact of its logistics operations. 2 Relevant efforts to describe may include fleet upgrades (fuel efficiency), alternative or renewable fuels use, optimised logistics routes, and idling reduction programmes.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 4 © IFRS Foundation\n\n[Page 6]\n© IFRS Foundation 5 Columbus Building 7 Westferry Circus Canary Wharf London E14 4HD, UK Tel +44 (0) 20 7246 6410 Email sustainability_licensing@ifrs.org ifrs.org International Financial Reporting Standards®, IFRS Foundation®, IFRS®, IAS®, IFRIC®, SIC®, IASB®, ISSBTM, IFRS for SMEs®",
    "new_id": 1047
  },
  {
    "id": 81184,
    "question": "Which implication regarding the relationship between fleet fuel management and value creation for health care distributors is most consistent with the guidance provided in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 29: Health Care Distributors?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Efforts to enhance payload fuel economy are positioned as a strategic initiative to mitigate long-term cost risks associated with climate change and resource scarcity.",
      "A": "Entities that fail to disclose payload fuel economy are likely to face immediate regulatory penalties, as metrics like HC-DI-110a.1 are legally enforceable under IFRS S2.",
      "B": "Improving transportation efficiencies primarily benefits entities by reducing greenhouse gas emissions, which directly correlates with increased profitability.",
      "C": "The disclosure of payload fuel economy is intended to standardize global health care distribution practices, ensuring equal operational costs across regions.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "3-4",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol29.pdf",
    "source_text": "Introduction This volume is part of the Industry-based Guidance on Implementing IFRS S2 Climate-related Disclosures . This guidance suggests possible ways to apply some of the disclosure requirements in IFRS S2 but does not create additional requirements. This volume suggests possible ways to identify, measure and disclose information about climate-related risks and opportunities that are associated with particular business models, economic activities and other common features that characterise participation in this industry. This industry-based guidance has been derived from Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) Standards, which are maintained by the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB). The metric codes used in SASB Standards have been included for ease of reference. For additional context regarding the industry-based guidance contained in this volume, including structure and terminology, application and illustrative examples, refer to Section III of the Accompanying Guidance to IFRS S2.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 2 © IFRS Foundation\n\n[Page 4]\nVolume 29 —Health Care Distributors Industry Description Health care distributors purchase, inventory and sell pharmaceutical products and medical equipment to hospitals, pharmacies and physicians. Demand for the industry ’s services is driven largely by insurance rates, pharmaceutical spending, illness and demographics. The health care sector continues to face an emphasis on reduced costs and improved efficiencies, which also will affect the Health Care Distributors industry. Entities in this industry face challenges from consolidation and partnerships between pharmacies, payers and manufacturers. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Fleet Fuel ManagementPayload fuel economy Quantitative Litres/RTK HC-DI-110a.1 Description of efforts to reduce the environmental impact of logisticsDiscussion and Analysisn/a HC-DI-110a.2 Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Number of pharmaceutical units sold by product categoryQuantitative Number HC-DI-000.A Number of medical devices sold by product category Quantitative Number HC-DI-000.B Fleet Fuel Management Topic Summary The distribution of health care products and supplies requires significant transportation networks. Concern over climate change and dwindling natural resources may affect fuel pricing, and it may expose health care distributors to cost fluctuations. Entities that improve transportation efficiencies may be better positioned to create value over the long-term. Metrics HC-DI-110a.1. Payload fuel economy 1 The entity shall disclose its aggregate payload fuel economy for its transportation fleet. 2 The entity shall calculate payload fuel economy among its delivery fleet, limited to vehicles used for the delivery of products (excluding vehicles used primarily for the transportation of passengers).IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 3",
    "new_id": 1048
  },
  {
    "id": 81215,
    "question": "Which of the following represents a necessary but insufficient condition for a fuel to qualify as sustainable according to the definitions and criteria provided in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 61: Airlines?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The fuel must be classified as an alternative fuel.",
      "B": "The fuel must avoid competition with food and water through marginal or unviable land use.",
      "C": "The fuel must contribute to local social and economic development, such as through expanded employment and revitalised infrastructure.",
      "D": "The fuel must achieve net greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction on a life cycle basis.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "8-9",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol61.pdf",
    "source_text": "TR-AL-110a.3. (1) Total fuel consumed, (2) percentage alternative and (3) percentage sustainable 1 The entity shall disclose (1) the total amount of fuel consumed from all sources as an aggregate figure, in gigajoules (GJ). 1.1 The calculation methodology for fuel consumed shall be based on actual fuel consumed as opposed to design parameters. 1.2 Acceptable calculation methodologies for fuel consumed may include methodologies based on: 1.2.1 Adding fuel purchases made during the reporting period to beginning inventory at the start of the reporting period, less any fuel inventory at the end of the reporting period 1.2.2 Tracking fuel consumed by vehicles 1.2.3 Tracking fuel expenses 2 The entity shall disclose (2) the percentage of fuel consumption that was alternative fuel. 2.1 Alternative fuel is defined by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) as fuel from sources other than petroleum that has the potential to generate lower carbon emissions than petroleum-based fuel on a life cycle basis. 2.2 The percentage shall be calculated as the amount of alternative fuel consumed (in GJ) divided by the total amount of fuel consumed (in GJ). 3 The entity shall disclose (3) the percentage of fuel consumed that was sustainable fuel. 3.1 Sustainable fuel is defined as a subset of alternative fuel that meets all of the following criteria described by ICAO: 3.1.1 Achieves net greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction on a life cycle basis 3.1.2 Avoids competition with food and water through marginal or unviable land use 3.1.3 Contributes to local social and economic development, such as through expanded employment and revitalised infrastructure. 3.2 The percentage shall be calculated as the amount of sustainable fuel consumed (in GJ) divided by the total amount of fuel consumed (in GJ). 4 The scope of disclosure is limited to fuel the entity directly consumes. In calculating energy consumption from fuels, the entity shall use higher heating values (HHV), also known as gross calorific values (GCV), which are measured directly or taken from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the US Department of Energy or the US Energy Information Agency. 5 The entity shall apply conversion factors consistently for all data reported under this disclosure, such as the use of HHVs for fuel use (including biofuels).IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 7\n\n[Page 9]\n8 © IFRS Foundation Columbus Building 7 Westferry Circus Canary Wharf London E14 4HD, UK Tel +44 (0) 20 7246 6410 Email sustainability_licensing@ifrs.org ifrs.org International Financial Reporting Standards®, IFRS Foundation®, IFRS®, IAS®, IFRIC®, SIC®, IASB®, ISSBTM, IFRS for SMEs®",
    "new_id": 1049
  },
  {
    "id": 81227,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why the inclusion of activity metrics like Available Seat Kilometres (ASK) and Revenue Passenger Kilometres (RPK) is critical for assessing sustainability in the airlines industry, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 61: Airlines?",
    "options": {
      "B": "They provide a quantitative basis for evaluating capacity utilisation and operational efficiency, which indirectly influence emissions through resource allocation.",
      "A": "They directly measure greenhouse gas emissions, enabling precise tracking of environmental impact.",
      "C": "They represent alternative fuel usage percentages, offering insights into emission reduction strategies.",
      "D": "They allow airlines to calculate load factors, which are mandated disclosures under IFRS S2.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "3-4",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol61.pdf",
    "source_text": "Introduction This volume is part of the Industry-based Guidance on Implementing IFRS S2 Climate-related Disclosures . This guidance suggests possible ways to apply some of the disclosure requirements in IFRS S2 but does not create additional requirements. This volume suggests possible ways to identify, measure and disclose information about climate-related risks and opportunities that are associated with particular business models, economic activities and other common features that characterise participation in this industry. This industry-based guidance has been derived from Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) Standards, which are maintained by the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB). The metric codes used in SASB Standards have been included for ease of reference. For additional context regarding the industry-based guidance contained in this volume, including structure and terminology, application and illustrative examples, refer to Section III of the Accompanying Guidance to IFRS S2.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 2 © IFRS Foundation\n\n[Page 4]\nVolume 61 —Airlines Industry Description Airlines industry entities provide air transportation globally to passengers for both leisure and business purposes. This includes commercial full-service, low-cost and regional airlines. Full-service carriers typically use a hub-and-spoke model to design their routes within countries and internationally. Low-cost carriers usually offer a smaller number of routes as well as no-frills service to their customers. Regional carriers typically operate under contract to full-service carriers, expanding the network of the larger carriers. Many airline entities also have a cargo segment in their operations to generate additional revenue. Entities in the industry commonly form partnerships or join alliances to increase network size. Operating as an alliance allows airlines to offer customers access to international or otherwise underserved itineraries on more than one airline under one ticket. At the same time, airlines share some overhead costs and increase their competitive position in the global market without having to operate outside their home country. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Greenhouse Gas EmissionsGross global Scope 1 emissions Quantitative Metric tons (t) CO₂-eTR-AL-110a.1 Discussion of long- and short-term strategy or plan to manage Scope 1 emissions, emissions reduction targets, and an analysis of performance against those targetsDiscussion and Analysisn/a TR-AL-110a.2 (1) Total fuel consumed, (2) percentage alternative and (3) percentage sustainableQuantitative Gigajoules (GJ), Percentage (%)TR-AL-110a.3 Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Available seat kilometres (ASK) 111Quantitative ASK TR-AL-000.A Passenger load factor 112Quantitative Rate TR-AL-000.B Revenue passenger kilometres (RPK) 113Quantitative RPK TR-AL-000.C continued... 111Note to TR-AL-000.A – Available seat kilometres (ASK) is defined as the maximum potential cumulative kilometres travelled by passengers (that is, kilometres travelled by occupied and unoccupied seats). 112Note to TR-AL-000.B – Load factor is a measure of capacity utilisation and is calculated as passenger kilometres travelled divided by available seat kilometres. 113Note to TR-AL-000.C – Revenue passenger kilometres (RPK) is defined as the cumulative total kilometres travelled by revenue passengers. A revenue passenger is a passenger for whose transportation an air carrier receives commercial remuneration.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 3",
    "new_id": 1050
  },
  {
    "id": 81228,
    "question": "Which of the following accurately reflects a necessary condition for an entity's emission reduction target to be considered compliant with the described reporting requirements, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 61: Airlines?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The scope of the target must explicitly include either absolute reductions or intensity-based metrics, but not both simultaneously.",
      "A": "The target must always apply to all seven GHGs covered under the Kyoto Protocol without exception.",
      "B": "The base year used for evaluating emissions reductions can be recalculated retrospectively only if it aligns with regulatory program adjustments.",
      "D": "The timeline for achieving the target must specify a start year earlier than the reporting period unless reset due to extraordinary circumstances.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "7",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol61.pdf",
    "source_text": "1.1 Scope 1 emissions are defined according to The Greenhouse Gas Protocol: A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard (GHG Protocol), Revised Edition, March 2004, published by the World Resources Institute and the World Business Council on Sustainable Development (WRI/WBCSD). 1.2 The scope of GHG emissions includes the seven GHGs covered under the Kyoto Protocol —carbon dioxide (CO 2), methane (CH 4), nitrous oxide (N 2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), sulphur hexafluoride (SF6), and nitrogen trifluoride (NF 3). 2 The entity shall discuss its emission reduction target(s) and analyse its performance against the target(s), including, if relevant: 2.1 The scope of the emission reduction target (for example, the percentage of total emissions to which the target is applicable); 2.2 Whether the target is absolute or intensity-based, and the metric denominator if it is an intensity-based target; 2.3 The percentage reduction against the base year, with the base year representing the first year against which emissions are evaluated towards the achievement of the target; 2.4 The time lines for the reduction activity, including the start year, the target year and the base year; 2.5 The mechanism(s) for achieving the target; and 2.6 Any circumstances in which the target or base year emissions have been, or may be, recalculated retrospectively or the target or base year has been reset. 3 The entity shall discuss the activities and investments required to achieve the plans or targets, and any risks or limiting factors that might affect achievement of the plans or targets. 3.1 Relevant activities and investments may include fuel optimisation efforts such as the use of ground power and pre-conditioned air rather than auxiliary power units (APU) when parked at gate, adjusting flight speed to optimise fuel efficiency, route design (for example, NextGen), use of winglets, reduction in aircraft weight and upgrading of the fleet with new aircraft. 4 The entity shall discuss the scope of its strategies, plans or reduction targets, such as whether they pertain differently to different business units, geographies or emissions sources. 5 The entity shall discuss whether its strategies, plans or reduction targets are related to, or associated with, emissions limiting or emissions reporting-based programmes or regulations (for example, the EU Emissions Trading Scheme, Quebec Cap-and-Trade System, California Cap-and-Trade Program), including regional, national, international or sectoral programmes. 6 Disclosure of strategies, plans or reduction targets shall be limited to activities that were ongoing (active) or reached completion during the reporting period.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 6 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 1051
  },
  {
    "id": 81229,
    "question": "Which inference about the relationship between sustainability topics and metrics in the Aerospace & Defence industry is most strongly supported, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 46: Aerospace & Defence?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Reporting revenue from alternative energy-related products serves as a direct indicator of progress toward improving the energy efficiency of in-use products.",
      "A": "The focus on fuel economy and GHG emissions in use-phase primarily targets reducing production costs for manufacturers.",
      "B": "Alternative energy-related products are central to addressing both energy management and fuel economy concerns across all segments of the industry.",
      "C": "Energy management strategies emphasize renewable energy adoption, but only for reducing manufacturing-related environmental impacts.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "3-4",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol46.pdf",
    "source_text": "Introduction This volume is part of the Industry-based Guidance on Implementing IFRS S2 Climate-related Disclosures . This guidance suggests possible ways to apply some of the disclosure requirements in IFRS S2 but does not create additional requirements. This volume suggests possible ways to identify, measure and disclose information about climate-related risks and opportunities that are associated with particular business models, economic activities and other common features that characterise participation in this industry. This industry-based guidance has been derived from Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) Standards, which are maintained by the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB). The metric codes used in SASB Standards have been included for ease of reference. For additional context regarding the industry-based guidance contained in this volume, including structure and terminology, application and illustrative examples, refer to Section III of the Accompanying Guidance to IFRS S2.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 2 © IFRS Foundation\n\n[Page 4]\nVolume 46 —Aerospace & Defence Industry Description Entities in the Aerospace & Defence industry include manufacturers of commercial aircraft, aircraft parts, aerospace and defence products, as well as defence prime contractors. Commercial aircraft manufacturers represent approximately one quarter of industry revenue and sell mainly to commercial airlines and governments. Aerospace and defence parts manufacturers represent the largest segment of the industry by total revenue, selling primarily to governments. Both aerospace and defence manufacturers operate globally and serve a global customer base. Defence primes represent approximately one quarter of total industry revenue and manufacture products including military aircraft, space vehicles, missile systems, ammunition, small arms, naval ships, and other commercial and military vehicles. Their customers consist of various government agencies and related businesses with global operations. The defence prime category also includes firearms manufacturers that sell to law enforcement agencies, businesses, distributors, retailers and consumers. Important sustainability topics within the industry include the energy efficiency and emissions profile of products and management of manufacturing energy and waste. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Energy Management(1) Total energy consumed, (2) percentage grid electricity and (3) percentage renewableQuantitative Gigajoules (GJ), Percentage (%)RT -AE-130a.1 Fuel Economy & Emissions in Use-phaseRevenue from alternative energy-related productsQuantitative Presentation currencyRT -AE-410a.1 Description of approach and discussion of strategy to address fuel economy and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of productsDiscussion and Analysisn/a RT -AE-410a.2 Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Production by reportable segment 80Quantitative Number RT -AE-000.A Number of employees Quantitative Number RT -AE-000.B 80Note to RT-AE-000.A – Production should be disclosed as the number of units produced by product category, where relevant product categories include (1) ground vehicles, (2) aircraft, (3) marine vehicles, (4) vehicle and aircraft components, and (5) space and weapons systems.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 3",
    "new_id": 1052
  },
  {
    "id": 81232,
    "question": "Which scenario accurately reflects the conditions under which an entity can claim renewable energy usage while adhering to the outlined requirements for RECs and GOs, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 46: Aerospace & Defence?",
    "options": {
      "A": "An entity generates renewable electricity on-site, retains the associated RECs, and cancels them explicitly on its behalf to claim the energy as renewable.",
      "B": "An entity purchases renewable energy through a PPA but sells the associated RECs to a third party, relying on the grid mix to substantiate its renewable energy claim.",
      "C": "An entity utilizes a green power product that includes RECs but fails to ensure these RECs are retired or cancelled, instead using them for future trading.",
      "D": "An entity claims renewable energy from the grid’s renewable portion, assuming it is within their control, without any additional action regarding RECs or GOs.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "6",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol46.pdf",
    "source_text": "Certified utility or supplier programme, or other green power products that explicitly include RECs or GOs, or for which Green ‐e Energy Certified RECs are paired with grid electricity. 3.3.1 For any renewable electricity generated on-site, any RECs and GOs shall be retained (not sold) and retired or cancelled on behalf of the entity for the entity to claim them as renewable energy. 3.3.2 For renewable PPAs and green power products, the agreement shall explicitly include and convey that RECs and GOs be retained or replaced and retired or cancelled on behalf of the entity for the entity to claim them as renewable energy. 3.3.3 The renewable portion of the electricity grid mix that is outside of the control or influence of the entity is excluded from the scope of renewable energy. 3.4 For the purposes of this disclosure, the scope of renewable energy from biomass sources is limited to materials certified to a third-party standard (for example, Forest Stewardship Council, Sustainable Forest Initiative, Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification or American Tree Farm System), materials considered eligible sources of supply according to the Green-e Framework for Renewable Energy Certification, Version 1.0 (2017) or Green-e regional standards, or materials eligible for an applicable jurisdictional renewable portfolio standard. 4 The entity shall apply conversion factors consistently for all data reported under this disclosure, such as the use of HHVs for fuel usage (including biofuels) and conversion of kilowatt hours (kWh) to GJ (for energy data including electricity from solar or wind energy). Fuel Economy & Emissions in Use-phase Topic Summary Customer preferences and regulatory incentives are increasing the demand for energy- efficient and reduced-emissions products in the Aerospace & Defence industry. Many of the industry ’s products are powered by fossil fuels and release greenhouse gases (GHGs) and other air emissions during use. As the designers and manufacturers of most of the global aerospace and defence transportation fleet, entities in this industry have a unique opportunity to support many industries and government agencies that are striving to meet GHG emissions and fuel-management goals and imperatives. Products with higher fuel economy and lower use-phase emissions may capture expanding market share and adapt to changing customer preferences and regulations around fuel economy and emissions more effectively. Metrics RT -AE-410a.1. Revenue from alternative energy-related products 1 The entity shall disclose total revenue from the sale of alternative energy-related products, where:IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 5",
    "new_id": 1053
  },
  {
    "id": 81251,
    "question": "Which of the following best represents an action that is explicitly required by the reporting organization when managing procurement practices, as opposed to being merely encouraged or optional, according to GRI 204: Procurement Practices 2016?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Reporting how it manages procurement practices using Disclosure 3-3 in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021.",
      "A": "Adjusting payment policies and procedures after identifying negative impacts in the supply chain.",
      "C": "Describing policies used to promote economic inclusion when selecting suppliers.",
      "D": "Explaining the rationale for tracing the source or origin of raw materials purchased.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "6-7",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 204_ Procurement Practices 2016.pdf",
    "source_text": "Requirements, guidance and defined terms The following apply throughout this Standard: Requirements are presented in bold font and indicated by the word 'shall'. An organization must comply with requirements to report in accordance with the GRI Standards. Requirements may be accompanied by guidance. Guidance includes background information, explanations, and examples to help the organization better understand the requirements. The organization is not required to comply with guidance. The Standards may also include recommendations. These are cases where a particular course of action is encouraged but not required. The word ‘should’ indicates a recommendation, and the word ‘can’ indicates a possibility or option. Defined terms are underlined in the text of the GRI Standards and linked to their definitions in the Glossary . The organization is required to apply the definitions in the Glossary. GRI 204: Procurement Practices 2016 6\n\n[Page 7]\n1. Topic management disclosures An organization reporting in accordance with the GRI Standards is required to report how it manages each of its material topics . An organization that has determined procurement practices to be a material topic is required to report how it manages the topic using Disclosure 3-3 in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 (see clause 1.1 in this section). This section is therefore designed to supplement – and not replace – Disclosure 3-3 in GRI 3 . REQUIREMENTSThe reporting organization shall report how it manages procurement practices using Disclosure 3-3 in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 .1.1 The reporting organization can also: Procurement practices that cause or contribute to negative impacts in the supply chain can include: Forms of economic inclusion can include:GUIDANCE describe actions taken to identify and adjust the organization’s procurement practices that cause or contribute to negative impacts in the supply chain , including: how dialogue with suppliers is used to identify procurement practices that cause or contribute to negative impacts in the supply chain;- actions taken to adjust payment policies and procedures;-• describe policies and practices used to select locally-based suppliers , either organization- wide or for specific locations;• explain the rationale and methodology for tracing the source, origin, or production conditions of raw materials and production inputs purchased, if applicable;• describe policies and practices used to promote economic inclusion when selecting suppliers.• stability or length of relationships with suppliers;• lead times;• ordering and payment routines;• purchasing prices;• changing or cancelling orders.• small and medium-sized suppliers;• suppliers owned by women;• suppliers which are owned by or recruit workers from members of vulnerable, marginalized, or under-represented social groups.• GRI 204: Procurement Practices 2016 7",
    "new_id": 1054
  },
  {
    "id": 81283,
    "question": "Which of the following best reflects the underlying rationale for why an organization should define both 'local' and 'significant locations of operation' when reporting on local supplier spending, as described in GRI 204: Procurement Practices 2016?",
    "options": {
      "C": "To clarify how supporting local suppliers contributes to community relations and economic stability in key areas.",
      "A": "To ensure compliance with International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) and avoid legal penalties.",
      "B": "To enable accurate comparisons across different financial reporting frameworks, such as IPSAS or national standards.",
      "D": "To standardize procurement budgets globally and eliminate discrepancies in financial statements.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "8",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 204_ Procurement Practices 2016.pdf",
    "source_text": "2. Topic disclosures An organization is expected to compile information for economic disclosures using figures from its audited financial statements or from its internally-audited management accounts, whenever possible. Data can be compiled using, for example: Disclosure 204-1 Proportion of spending on local suppliersthe relevant International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS), published by the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB), and the Interpretations developed by the IFRS Interpretations Committee (specific IFRS are referenced for some of the disclosures);• the International Public Sector Accounting Standards (IPSAS) issued by the International Federation of Accountants (IFAC);• national or regional standards recognized internationally for the purpose of financial reporting.• The reporting organization shall report the following information:REQUIREMENTS Percentage of the procurement budget used for significant locations of operation that is spent on suppliers local to that operation (such as percentage of products and services purchased locally).a. The organization’s geographical definition of ‘local’. b. The definition used for ‘significant locations of operation’. c. RECOMMENDATIONSWhen compiling the information specified in Disclosure 204-1, the reporting organization should calculate the percentages based on invoices or commitments made during the reporting period, e.g, using accruals accounting.2.1 Guidance for Disclosure 204-1 Local purchases can be made either from a budget managed at the location of operation or at an organization’s headquarters. Background By supporting local suppliers, an organization can indirectly attract additional investment to the local economy. Local sourcing can be a strategy to help ensure supply, support a stable local economy, and maintain community relations.GUIDANCE GRI 204: Procurement Practices 2016 8",
    "new_id": 1055
  },
  {
    "id": 81284,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why an organization might prioritize local supplier spending while also adjusting its payment policies and routines, according to GRI 204: Procurement Practices 2016?",
    "options": {
      "D": "To address potential negative impacts in the supply chain and strengthen community relations by fostering local economic stability.",
      "A": "To ensure compliance with International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) and reduce dependency on regional economic variations.",
      "B": "To simplify procurement logistics by centralizing purchasing decisions at headquarters and minimizing dialogue with suppliers.",
      "C": "To exclusively support small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) without considering broader implications for vulnerable social groups.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "7-8",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 204_ Procurement Practices 2016.pdf",
    "source_text": "1. Topic management disclosures An organization reporting in accordance with the GRI Standards is required to report how it manages each of its material topics . An organization that has determined procurement practices to be a material topic is required to report how it manages the topic using Disclosure 3-3 in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 (see clause 1.1 in this section). This section is therefore designed to supplement – and not replace – Disclosure 3-3 in GRI 3 . REQUIREMENTSThe reporting organization shall report how it manages procurement practices using Disclosure 3-3 in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 .1.1 The reporting organization can also: Procurement practices that cause or contribute to negative impacts in the supply chain can include: Forms of economic inclusion can include:GUIDANCE describe actions taken to identify and adjust the organization’s procurement practices that cause or contribute to negative impacts in the supply chain , including: how dialogue with suppliers is used to identify procurement practices that cause or contribute to negative impacts in the supply chain;- actions taken to adjust payment policies and procedures;-• describe policies and practices used to select locally-based suppliers , either organization- wide or for specific locations;• explain the rationale and methodology for tracing the source, origin, or production conditions of raw materials and production inputs purchased, if applicable;• describe policies and practices used to promote economic inclusion when selecting suppliers.• stability or length of relationships with suppliers;• lead times;• ordering and payment routines;• purchasing prices;• changing or cancelling orders.• small and medium-sized suppliers;• suppliers owned by women;• suppliers which are owned by or recruit workers from members of vulnerable, marginalized, or under-represented social groups.• GRI 204: Procurement Practices 2016 7\n\n[Page 8]\n2. Topic disclosures An organization is expected to compile information for economic disclosures using figures from its audited financial statements or from its internally-audited management accounts, whenever possible. Data can be compiled using, for example: Disclosure 204-1 Proportion of spending on local suppliersthe relevant International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS), published by the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB), and the Interpretations developed by the IFRS Interpretations Committee (specific IFRS are referenced for some of the disclosures);• the International Public Sector Accounting Standards (IPSAS) issued by the International Federation of Accountants (IFAC);• national or regional standards recognized internationally for the purpose of financial reporting.• The reporting organization shall report the following information:REQUIREMENTS Percentage of the procurement budget used for significant locations of operation that is spent on suppliers local to that operation (such as percentage of products and services purchased locally).a. The organization’s geographical definition of ‘local’. b. The definition used for ‘significant locations of operation’. c. RECOMMENDATIONSWhen compiling the information specified in Disclosure 204-1, the reporting organization should calculate the percentages based on invoices or commitments made during the reporting period, e.g, using accruals accounting.2.1 Guidance for Disclosure 204-1 Local purchases can be made either from a budget managed at the location of operation or at an organization’s headquarters. Background By supporting local suppliers, an organization can indirectly attract additional investment to the local economy. Local sourcing can be a strategy to help ensure supply, support a stable local economy, and maintain community relations.GUIDANCE GRI 204: Procurement Practices 2016 8",
    "new_id": 1056
  },
  {
    "id": 81326,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the implicit relationship between minimizing environmental and social externalities and the likelihood of an entity maintaining compliance with regulations, based on the outlined considerations in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 55: Hardware?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Reducing externalities helps entities lower exposure to increasing regulation and costs, while also potentially growing consumer demand and market share.",
      "B": "Entities that minimize externalities solely through energy-efficient designs will avoid all regulatory costs associated with extended producer responsibility.",
      "C": "Minimizing externalities guarantees immunity from future regulatory changes but does not influence market share or consumer demand.",
      "D": "The exclusion of hazardous materials is the only necessary action for entities to reduce their exposure to regulatory risks and achieve full compliance.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "5",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol55.pdf",
    "source_text": "Product Lifecycle Management Topic Summary Entities in the Hardware industry face increasing challenges associated with environmental and social externalities attributed to product manufacturing, transport, use and disposal. Rapid obsolescence of hardware products may worsen these externalities. Entities are designing more products with the entire lifecycle in mind. Specific considerations include energy efficiency of products, hazardous material inputs, and designing for and facilitating safe end-of-life disposal and recycling. Entities that prioritise designing and manufacturing products with improved environmental and social impacts may avoid costs associated with externalities, and they may be more likely to grow consumer demand and market share, while eliminating potentially harmful materials. Furthermore, entities that minimise environmental and social externalities of products may be less exposed to increasing regulation and costs, such as those related to extended producer responsibility. Metrics TC-HW-410a.1. Percentage of products by revenue that contain IEC 62474 declarable substances 1 The entity shall disclose the percentage of products sold during the reporting period that contain declarable substances. 1.1 A product contains a declarable substance if, according to the International Electrotechnical Commission ’s IEC 62474 —Material Declaration for Products of and for the Electrotechnical Industry , it contains an amount of the declarable substance that is: 1.1.1 Above the ‘reporting threshold ’ 1.1.2 Within the scope of the ‘reporting application ’ identified 1.1.3 Within the mandatory ‘reporting requirement ’ 1.2 The entity shall calculate the percentage as the revenue from electrical, electronic and related technology products sold that contain a declarable substance(s) divided by total revenue from electrical, electronic and related technology products sold. 2 The scope of disclosure includes all electrical, electronic and related technology products, including products from an entity not required to declare or otherwise making declarations, according to IEC 62474. Note to TC-HW-410a.1 1 The entity shall describe how it manages the use of substances listed as declarable substance groups or declarable substances in IEC 62474, including a discussion of specific operational processes during which use of these substances is considered and the actions the entity has taken to manage the use of these substances. 1.1 Relevant management approaches and actions to describe may include: 1.1.1 Product design criteria for the exclusion of substances (for example, banned substances lists)IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 4 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 1057
  },
  {
    "id": 81327,
    "question": "Which scenario best illustrates an entity's failure to meet the requirements of managing declarable substances as implied by the text, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 55: Hardware?",
    "options": {
      "B": "An entity discloses the use of declarable substances only for products explicitly required to comply with IEC 62474, ignoring other applicable products.",
      "A": "An entity designs products excluding all banned substances but does not track whether suppliers adhere to these exclusions.",
      "C": "An entity calculates the percentage of products containing declarable substances based on unit sales rather than revenue.",
      "D": "An entity focuses exclusively on energy efficiency in product design without addressing hazardous material inputs.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "5",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol55.pdf",
    "source_text": "Product Lifecycle Management Topic Summary Entities in the Hardware industry face increasing challenges associated with environmental and social externalities attributed to product manufacturing, transport, use and disposal. Rapid obsolescence of hardware products may worsen these externalities. Entities are designing more products with the entire lifecycle in mind. Specific considerations include energy efficiency of products, hazardous material inputs, and designing for and facilitating safe end-of-life disposal and recycling. Entities that prioritise designing and manufacturing products with improved environmental and social impacts may avoid costs associated with externalities, and they may be more likely to grow consumer demand and market share, while eliminating potentially harmful materials. Furthermore, entities that minimise environmental and social externalities of products may be less exposed to increasing regulation and costs, such as those related to extended producer responsibility. Metrics TC-HW-410a.1. Percentage of products by revenue that contain IEC 62474 declarable substances 1 The entity shall disclose the percentage of products sold during the reporting period that contain declarable substances. 1.1 A product contains a declarable substance if, according to the International Electrotechnical Commission ’s IEC 62474 —Material Declaration for Products of and for the Electrotechnical Industry , it contains an amount of the declarable substance that is: 1.1.1 Above the ‘reporting threshold ’ 1.1.2 Within the scope of the ‘reporting application ’ identified 1.1.3 Within the mandatory ‘reporting requirement ’ 1.2 The entity shall calculate the percentage as the revenue from electrical, electronic and related technology products sold that contain a declarable substance(s) divided by total revenue from electrical, electronic and related technology products sold. 2 The scope of disclosure includes all electrical, electronic and related technology products, including products from an entity not required to declare or otherwise making declarations, according to IEC 62474. Note to TC-HW-410a.1 1 The entity shall describe how it manages the use of substances listed as declarable substance groups or declarable substances in IEC 62474, including a discussion of specific operational processes during which use of these substances is considered and the actions the entity has taken to manage the use of these substances. 1.1 Relevant management approaches and actions to describe may include: 1.1.1 Product design criteria for the exclusion of substances (for example, banned substances lists)IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 4 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 1058
  },
  {
    "id": 81373,
    "question": "Which statement accurately captures the strategic importance of lifecycle environmental impacts for appliance manufacturers, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 2: Appliance Manufacturing?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Designing products with lower lifecycle environmental impacts can lead to competitive advantages through reduced ownership costs and improved adaptability to stricter regulations.",
      "A": "Lifecycle environmental impacts are primarily a regulatory compliance issue, with limited influence on market differentiation or consumer preference.",
      "B": "Efforts to manage end-of-life impacts are considered secondary to energy efficiency certifications, as the latter directly correlates with increased market share.",
      "D": "The primary goal of reducing lifecycle environmental impacts is to achieve universal certification under environmental product lifecycle standards, ensuring global market dominance.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "4",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol2.pdf",
    "source_text": "Volume 2 —Appliance Manufacturing Industry Description Appliance Manufacturing industry entities design and manufacture household appliances and hand tools. Entities in this industry sell and manufacture products all over the world, primarily selling products to consumers through retailers. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Product Lifecycle Environmental ImpactsPercentage of eligible products by revenue certified to an energy efficiency certificationQuantitative Percentage (%) by revenueCG-AM-410a.1 Percentage of eligible products by revenue certified to an environmental product lifecycle standardQuantitative Percentage (%) by revenueCG-AM-410a.2 Description of efforts to manage products ’ end-of-life impactsDiscussion and Analysisn/a CG-AM-410a.3 Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Annual production 2Quantitative Number of unitsCG-AM-000.A Product Lifecycle Environmental Impacts Topic Summary Entities in the Appliance Manufacturing industry seek to differentiate their products from those of competitors. One important differentiating factor is the lifecycle environmental impact of products and an entity ’s ability to design products with the entire lifecycle in mind, from creation and use to disposal. This includes appliance energy and water efficiency, which account for a significant proportion of a home ’s energy and water use, as well as designing for and facilitating safe end-of-life disposal and recycling. Entities designing and manufacturing products to decrease lifecycle environmental impacts are more likely to increase market share owing to a lower cost of ownership, and they may better manage increased regulation related to issues such as extended producer responsibility. 2Note to CG-AM-000.A – Production shall be disclosed as the number of units produced by product category, where relevant product categories may include small appliances and major appliances.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 3",
    "new_id": 1059
  },
  {
    "id": 81374,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes an entity's obligation regarding the disclosure of product certification timelines and participation in extended producer responsibility (EPR) initiatives, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 2: Appliance Manufacturing?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The entity must provide certification timelines regardless of the version its products are certified to, and detail whether its EPR participation involves direct actions or support through partnerships, specifying initiative scope and performance measures.",
      "A": "The entity must disclose timelines for achieving current certification only if its products are not already certified to the latest version, and it is required to lead all EPR initiatives directly.",
      "B": "The entity is only required to disclose certification timelines for jurisdictions with mandatory EPR programs and must exclusively focus on eliminating hazardous materials in product design.",
      "C": "The entity needs to report certification timelines only for voluntary EPR programs and must ensure that all products are labeled to facilitate disassembly, without detailing recovery targets.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "6-7",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol2.pdf",
    "source_text": "2.1 If the entity has products certified to a previous version of certification requirements, it shall disclose this information, including to which version its products are certified, a breakdown of how many products are certified to that version, and its time line(s) for achieving certification to the most current requirements version. 3 For each jurisdiction where the entity sells products, the entity shall disclose the applicable certification programme or disclose the applicable international certification programme. CG-AM-410a.3. Description of efforts to manage products ’ end-of-life impacts 1 The entity shall describe its efforts to manage the end-of-life impacts of its products, including those related to safe and proper disposal or recycling of constituent chemicals and other product components, which may include toxic heavy metals (for example, mercury and cadmium), rigid polymers, refrigerants and other metals (for example, steel and aluminium). 2 The entity shall describe the scope of its efforts, including to which product categories, business segments or operating regions they relate. 3 The entity shall discuss how it includes end-of-life considerations in product design such as: 3.1 Use of materials that are easily and commonly recyclable in existing recycling infrastructure 3.2 Eliminating or minimising the use of hazardous materials or materials that may otherwise pose environmental harm upon disposal (for example, refrigerants with ozone depleting potential or global warming potential) 3.3 Designing products for disassembly (i.e., designing products so they can be easily, rapidly, and cost-effectively disassembled with commonly available tools) 3.4 Proper labelling of products and their component materials to facilitate disassembly and recycling 4 The entity shall discuss its participation in extended producer responsibility (EPR) initiatives, including: 4.1 Whether the entity directly conducts product take-back, recovery and recycling or if the entity supports infrastructure for product recovery and recycling through joint ventures, partnerships with retailers and others, or by funding research into recycling technologies 4.2 Whether the initiative is voluntary or mandatory 4.3 Relevant performance measures or targets for the initiative such as the total amount of material recovered and the total amount of material recycledIFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 5\n\n[Page 7]\n6 © IFRS Foundation Columbus Building 7 Westferry Circus Canary Wharf London E14 4HD, UK Tel +44 (0) 20 7246 6410 Email sustainability_licensing@ifrs.org ifrs.org International Financial Reporting Standards®, IFRS Foundation®, IFRS®, IAS®, IFRIC®, SIC®, IASB®, ISSBTM, IFRS for SMEs®",
    "new_id": 1060
  },
  {
    "id": 81375,
    "question": "Which statement accurately captures the relationship between certification requirements and eligible products, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 2: Appliance Manufacturing?",
    "options": {
      "A": "An entity must disclose both the percentage of revenue from eligible products certified to current standards and the timeline for upgrading products certified to outdated versions.",
      "B": "Products certified to a previous version of the requirements are excluded from revenue calculations for energy efficiency certifications.",
      "C": "Eligible products include only those categories explicitly mentioned for environmental product lifecycle standards, regardless of whether they overlap with energy efficiency certifications.",
      "D": "The scope of disclosure is limited to products meeting the most current version of certification requirements, with no obligation to report on older versions.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "5",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol2.pdf",
    "source_text": "Metrics CG-AM-410a.1. Percentage of eligible products by revenue certified to an energy efficiency certification 1 The entity shall disclose the percentage of its revenue from eligible products certified to an energy efficiency certification. 1.1 The entity shall calculate the percentage as the revenue from products meeting the requirements for the applicable certification divided by total revenue from products eligible for certification by each certification. 1.1.1 Eligible products are those in a product category for which certification exists, such as: heating and cooling product categories such as air purifiers, clothes dryers, clothes washers, dehumidifiers, dishwashers, freezers, refrigerators, air conditioners, boilers, ductless heating and cooling, furnaces, heat pumps and ventilation fans. 2 The scope of disclosure includes products that meet the requirements of the most current version of the applicable certification requirements. 2.1 If the entity has products certified to a previous version of certification requirements, it shall disclose this information, including to which version its products are certified, a breakdown of how many products are certified to that version and the time line(s) for achieving certification to the most current requirements version. 3 For each jurisdiction where the entity sells products, the entity shall disclose the applicable certification programme. CG-AM-410a.2. Percentage of eligible products by revenue certified to an environmental product lifecycle standard 1 The entity shall disclose the percentage of its revenue from eligible products certified to a third-party environmental product lifecycle standard. 1.1 Environmental product lifecycle standard is defined as a certification programme or standard focused product design and materials, manufacturing processes, product performance during use-phase, and product end-of-life. 1.2 The entity shall calculate the percentage as the revenue from products meeting the requirements for the applicable certification divided by total revenue from products eligible for certification by each certification. 1.2.1 Eligible products are those in a product category for which certification exists, including: refrigeration appliances, washers, dryers, cooking appliances, air conditioners, microwave oven appliances, dehumidifier appliances and floor care appliances. 2 The scope of disclosure includes products that meet the requirements of the most current version of the applicable certification requirements.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 4 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 1061
  },
  {
    "id": 81400,
    "question": "Which scenario demonstrates an entity's compliance with the disclosure requirements while also highlighting a specific voluntary action that could enhance its emergency preparedness, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 28: Health Care Delivery?",
    "options": {
      "B": "An entity complies with mandatory regulations on emergency response and voluntarily adopts best practices from the World Health Organization’s Hospital Emergency Response Checklist.",
      "A": "An entity focuses exclusively on waterborne diseases as part of its emergency preparedness plan, dismissing other potential risks outlined in regulatory frameworks.",
      "C": "An entity implements policies addressing human developmental disorders but does not disclose whether external practices were adopted voluntarily.",
      "D": "An entity describes its emergency response plans without acknowledging any regulatory environment or adopting supplementary external guidelines.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "10-11",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol28.pdf",
    "source_text": "2.2.3 Waterborne diseases (for example, cholera because of increased flooding incidence) 2.2.4 Human developmental disorders (for example, malnutrition because of decreased food availability) 3 The entity shall describe the nature, scope and implementation of its policies and practices related to emergency preparedness and response. 3.1 The discussion shall include the regulatory environment in which the entity operates and whether it requires specific emergency preparedness and response plans. 3.2 The entity may disclose whether it has implemented external policies or best practices voluntarily, such as those outlined in the World Health Organization ’s Hospital Emergency Response Checklist.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 9\n\n[Page 11]\n10 © IFRS Foundation Columbus Building 7 Westferry Circus Canary Wharf London E14 4HD, UK Tel +44 (0) 20 7246 6410 Email sustainability_licensing@ifrs.org ifrs.org International Financial Reporting Standards®, IFRS Foundation®, IFRS®, IAS®, IFRIC®, SIC®, IASB®, ISSBTM, IFRS for SMEs®",
    "new_id": 1062
  },
  {
    "id": 81402,
    "question": "Which of the following statements accurately reflects a distinction between the handling requirements for hazardous and non-hazardous pharmaceutical waste, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 28: Health Care Delivery?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The calculation method for determining percentages of final disposition methods applies equally to both hazardous and non-hazardous pharmaceutical waste but relies on jurisdictional regulatory frameworks only for hazardous waste.",
      "A": "Hazardous pharmaceutical waste must always be disposed of according to definitions from the UNEP Basel Convention, whereas non-hazardous waste does not require jurisdictional standards.",
      "B": "Non-hazardous pharmaceutical waste is explicitly defined by its ignitibility, corrosivity, reactivity, or toxicity, while hazardous waste lacks such specific characteristics.",
      "D": "Recycling or treatment includes commercial composting exclusively for non-hazardous waste, while hazardous waste recycling excludes this option.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "8",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol28.pdf",
    "source_text": "HC-DY -150a.2. Total amount of: (1) hazardous and (2) non-hazardous pharmaceutical waste, percentage (a) incinerated, (b) recycled or treated and (c) landfilled 1 The entity shall disclose (1) the total amount of hazardous pharmaceutical waste generated, in metric tons, aggregated for all facilities it owns and operates, and the percentage (a) incinerated, (b) recycled or treated and (c) landfilled. 1.1 Hazardous pharmaceutical waste is defined in accordance with applicable jurisdictional legal or regulatory framework(s) where the waste was generated. 1.2 Hazardous pharmaceutical waste generally displays these characteristics: ignitibility, corrosivity, reactivity or toxicity. 1.3 The entity shall calculate the percentage of hazardous pharmaceutical waste by the final disposition method as the total weight of hazardous pharmaceutical waste generated that was (a) incinerated, (b) recycled or treated and (c) landfilled, divided by the total weight of hazardous pharmaceutical waste generated. 1.3.1 Recycling or treatment shall include disposal via recycling facility, treatment facility or other (for example, return to a supplier or commercial composting). 1.4 The entity may use the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal for the purposes of defining hazardous pharmaceutical waste for operations located in jurisdictions that lack applicable legal or regulatory definitions. 1.5 The entity shall disclose the applicable jurisdictional standard or regulation used to define hazardous pharmaceutical waste. 2 The entity shall disclose (2) the total amount of non-hazardous pharmaceutical waste generated, in metric tons, aggregated for all facilities it owns and operates, and the percentage (a) incinerated, (b) recycled or treated and (c) landfilled. 2.1 Non-hazardous (solid) waste is defined as any garbage or refuse, sludge from a wastewater treatment plant, water supply treatment plant, or air pollution control facility and other discarded material, including solid, liquid, semi-solid, or contained gaseous material resulting from industrial, commercial, mining and agricultural operations, and from community activities. It may require special handling because it is a controlled substance or poses an environmental or human health threat. 2.2 The entity shall calculate the percentages of non-hazardous pharmaceutical waste by their final disposition method as the total weight of non-hazardous pharmaceutical waste generated that was (a) incinerated, (b) recycled or treated and (c) landfilled, divided by the total weight of non- hazardous pharmaceutical waste generated. 2.2.1 Recycling or treatment shall include disposal via recycling facility, treatment facility or other (for example, return to a supplier or commercial composting).IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 7",
    "new_id": 1063
  },
  {
    "id": 81442,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why the inclusion of third-party security personnel in the calculation of training percentages is emphasized as a critical factor, according to GRI 410: Security Practices 2016?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Because it highlights potential gaps in the implementation of human rights training across different organizational structures.",
      "A": "Because it ensures that all security personnel, regardless of employment status, are equally accountable for upholding human rights policies.",
      "B": "Because it allows organizations to shift responsibility for human rights violations to third-party contractors.",
      "C": "Because it guarantees that third-party organizations will adopt the same human rights standards as the reporting organization.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "8",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 410_ Security Practices 2016.pdf",
    "source_text": "2. Topic disclosures Disclosure 410-1 Security personnel trained in human rights policies or procedures The reporting organization shall report the following information:REQUIREMENTS Percentage of security personnel who have received formal training in the organization’s human rights policies or specific procedures and their application to security.a. Whether training requirements also apply to third-party organizations providing security personnel.b. RECOMMENDATIONSWhen compiling the information specified in Disclosure 410-1-a, the reporting organization should:2.1 calculate the percentage using the total number of security personnel, whether they are employees of the organization or employees of third-party organizations;2.1.1 state whether employees of third-party organizations are also included in the calculation.2.1.2 Guidance for Disclosure 410-1 The training can refer either to training dedicated to the subject of human rights or to a human rights module within a general training program. Training can cover issues such as the use of force, inhuman or degrading treatment or discrimination, or identification and registering. Background The use of security personnel can play an essential role in allowing an organization to operate in a safe and productive manner, and can contribute to the security of local communities and populations. However, as set out in the International Code of Conduct for Private Security Service Providers, the use of security personnel can also have negative impacts on local populations and on the upholding of human rights and the rule of law. According to the UN Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner, ‘human rights education constitutes an essential contribution to the long-term prevention of human rights abuses and represents an important investment in the endeavor to achieve a just society in which all human rights of all persons are valued and respected. Training security personnel in human rights can therefore help to ensure their appropriate conduct towards third parties, particularly regarding the use of force. This disclosure indicates the proportion of the security force that can reasonably be assumed to be aware of an organization’s expectations of human rights performance. Information provided under this disclosure can demonstrate the extent to which management systems pertaining to human rights are implemented.GUIDANCE 1 1United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner (OHCHR), http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Education/Training/Pages/HREducationTrainingIndex.aspx , accessed on 1 September 2016. GRI 410: Security Practices 2016 8",
    "new_id": 1064
  },
  {
    "id": 81458,
    "question": "Which statement accurately captures the relationship between an organization's impacts and its contribution to sustainable development, as implied by the definitions provided in GRI 410: Security Practices 2016?",
    "options": {
      "A": "An organization’s impacts, including those affecting human rights, serve as indicators of its contribution to sustainable development, regardless of their nature or intent.",
      "B": "An organization’s impacts are considered contributions to sustainable development only when they align with the United Nations’ International Bill of Human Rights.",
      "C": "All organizational impacts, whether positive or negative, inherently contribute to sustainable development as long as they involve human rights considerations.",
      "D": "Only intended and reversible impacts can be classified as contributions to sustainable development under the GRI Standards framework.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "9-10",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 410_ Security Practices 2016.pdf",
    "source_text": "Glossary This glossary provides definitions for terms used in this Standard. The organization is required to apply these definitions when using the GRI Standards. The definitions included in this glossary may contain terms that are further defined in the complete GRI Standards Glossary . All defined terms are underlined. If a term is not defined in this glossary or in the complete GRI Standards Glossary , definitions that are commonly used and understood apply. employee individual who is in an employment relationship with the organization according to national law or practice human rights rights inherent to all human beings, which include, at a minimum, the rights set out in the United Nations (UN) International Bill of Human Rights and the principles concerning fundamental rights set out in the International Labour Organization (ILO) Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work Source: United Nations (UN), Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework , 2011; modified Note: See Guidance to 2-23-b-i in GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 for more information on ‘human rights’. impact effect the organization has or could have on the economy, environment, and people, including on their human rights , which in turn can indicate its contribution (negative or positive) to sustainable development Note 1: Impacts can be actual or potential, negative or positive, short-term or long-term, intended or unintended, and reversible or irreversible. Note 2: See section 2.1 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 for more information on ‘impact’. material topics topics that represent the organization’s most significant impacts on the economy, environment, and people, including impacts on their human rights Note: See section 2.2 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 and section 1 in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 for more information on ‘material topics’. security personnel individuals employed for the purposes of guarding property of the organization; crowd control; loss prevention; and escorting persons, goods, and valuables sustainable development / sustainability development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs Source: World Commission on Environment and Development, Our Common Future , 1987 Note: The terms ‘sustainability’ and ‘sustainable development’ are used interchangeably in the GRI Standards. Bibliography GRI 410: Security Practices 2016 9\n\n[Page 10]\nBibliography This section lists references used in developing this Standard. References: International Code of Conduct for Private Security Service Providers, 2010. 1. Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights, http://voluntaryprinciples.org/ , accessed on 1 September 2016.2. GRI 410: Security Practices 2016 10",
    "new_id": 1065
  },
  {
    "id": 81459,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the implications of the GSSB's role and the limitations explicitly or implicitly outlined in GRI 410: Security Practices 2016?",
    "options": {
      "B": "While the GSSB develops the Standards in the public interest, organizations producing reports bear sole responsibility for their content and any resulting impacts.",
      "A": "The GSSB assumes full legal responsibility for any consequences arising from the application of the GRI Standards, as it is the issuing body.",
      "C": "Organizations using the GRI Standards are relieved of accountability for their reports since the Standards were developed through a multi-stakeholder process.",
      "D": "The GSSB’s Due Process Protocol guarantees that all reports based on the GRI Standards will align with intergovernmental instruments and widely held expectations.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "2-3",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 410_ Security Practices 2016.pdf",
    "source_text": "GRI 410: Security Practices 2016 Topic Standard Effective Date This Standard is effective for reports or other materials published on or after 1 July 2018 Responsibility This Standard is issued by the Global Sustainability Standards Board (GSSB) . Any feedback on the GRI Standards can be submitted to gssbsecretariat@globalreporting.org for the consideration of the GSSB. Due Process This Standard was developed in the public interest and in accordance with the requirements of the GSSB Due Process Protocol. It has been developed using multi-stakeholder expertise, and with regard to authoritative intergovernmental instruments and widely held expectations of organizations relating to social, environmental, and economic responsibilities. Legal Liability This document, designed to promote sustainability reporting, has been developed by the Global Sustainability Standards Board (GSSB) through a unique multi-stakeholder consultative process involving representatives from organizations and report information users from around the world. While the GRI Supervisory Board, Management Board, and GSSB encourage the use of the GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards (GRI Standards) and related Interpretations by all organizations, the preparation and publication of reports based fully or partially on the GRI Standards and related Interpretations are the full responsibility of those producing them. Neither the GRI Supervisory Board, Management Board, GSSB, nor Stichting Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) can assume responsibility for any consequences or damages resulting directly or indirectly from the use of the GRI Standards and related Interpretations in the preparation of reports, or the use of reports based on the GRI Standards and related Interpretations. Copyright and trademark notice This document is copyright-protected by Stichting Global Reporting Initiative (GRI). The reproduction and distribution of this document for information and/or use in preparing a sustainability report is permitted without prior permission from GRI. However, neither this document nor any extract from it may be reproduced, stored, translated, or transferred in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photocopied, recorded, or otherwise) for any other purpose without prior written permission from GRI. Global Reporting Initiative, GRI and logo, GSSB and logo, and GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards (GRI Standards) and logo are trademarks of Stichting Global Reporting Initiative. © 2024 GRI. All rights reserved. ISBN 978-90-8866-121-1\n\n[Page 3]\nContent Introduction 4 1. Topic management disclosures 7 2. Topic disclosures 8 Disclosure 410-1 Security personnel trained in human rights policies or procedures 8 Glossary 9 Bibliography 10 GRI 410: Security Practices 2016 3",
    "new_id": 1066
  },
  {
    "id": 81460,
    "question": "Which of the following best reflects an implication of the training requirements for security personnel, as outlined in GRI 410: Security Practices 2016?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Training exclusively on general programs is deemed insufficient unless it integrates a dedicated human rights module.",
      "A": "Third-party organizations are exempt from reporting their personnel's training status if they do not directly employ them.",
      "B": "The inclusion of third-party employees in the calculation of trained personnel is optional but encouraged to ensure transparency.",
      "D": "Human rights training ensures compliance with international standards even without specific organizational policies.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "8",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 410_ Security Practices 2016.pdf",
    "source_text": "2. Topic disclosures Disclosure 410-1 Security personnel trained in human rights policies or procedures The reporting organization shall report the following information:REQUIREMENTS Percentage of security personnel who have received formal training in the organization’s human rights policies or specific procedures and their application to security.a. Whether training requirements also apply to third-party organizations providing security personnel.b. RECOMMENDATIONSWhen compiling the information specified in Disclosure 410-1-a, the reporting organization should:2.1 calculate the percentage using the total number of security personnel, whether they are employees of the organization or employees of third-party organizations;2.1.1 state whether employees of third-party organizations are also included in the calculation.2.1.2 Guidance for Disclosure 410-1 The training can refer either to training dedicated to the subject of human rights or to a human rights module within a general training program. Training can cover issues such as the use of force, inhuman or degrading treatment or discrimination, or identification and registering. Background The use of security personnel can play an essential role in allowing an organization to operate in a safe and productive manner, and can contribute to the security of local communities and populations. However, as set out in the International Code of Conduct for Private Security Service Providers, the use of security personnel can also have negative impacts on local populations and on the upholding of human rights and the rule of law. According to the UN Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner, ‘human rights education constitutes an essential contribution to the long-term prevention of human rights abuses and represents an important investment in the endeavor to achieve a just society in which all human rights of all persons are valued and respected. Training security personnel in human rights can therefore help to ensure their appropriate conduct towards third parties, particularly regarding the use of force. This disclosure indicates the proportion of the security force that can reasonably be assumed to be aware of an organization’s expectations of human rights performance. Information provided under this disclosure can demonstrate the extent to which management systems pertaining to human rights are implemented.GUIDANCE 1 1United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner (OHCHR), http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Education/Training/Pages/HREducationTrainingIndex.aspx , accessed on 1 September 2016. GRI 410: Security Practices 2016 8",
    "new_id": 1067
  },
  {
    "id": 81523,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between energy efficiency improvements and their implications for telecommunication entities, as inferred from the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 59: Telecommunication Services?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Improvements in operational energy efficiency can lead to increased profit margins, even if total energy consumption rises.",
      "A": "Entities reducing reliance on grid electricity are guaranteed to achieve cost savings due to decreased energy expenditures.",
      "B": "Transitioning to renewable energy sources eliminates sustainability risks associated with climate change for telecommunication entities.",
      "C": "The global regulatory focus on climate change ensures that all telecommunication entities will adopt renewable energy exclusively within the next decade.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "5",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol59.pdf",
    "source_text": "...continued ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Number of broadband subscribers 108Quantitative Number TC-TL-000.C Network traffic Quantitative Petabytes TC-TL-000.D Environmental Footprint of Operations Topic Summary Individual telecommunication services entities consume substantial amounts of energy. Depending on the source of energy and generation efficiency, electricity consumption by telecom network infrastructure can contribute significantly to environmental externalities, such as climate change, creating sustainability risks for the industry. Although network equipment and data centres are becoming more energy efficient, their overall energy consumption is increasing with the expansion in telecommunications infrastructure and data traffic. How telecommunication services entities manage their overall energy efficiency or intensity, reliance on different types of energy, and how they access alternative sources of energy may become increasingly material as the global regulatory focus on climate change increases, creating incentives for energy efficiency and renewable energy as well as pricing of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Because energy expenditures may be significant in the industry, entities that improve operational energy efficiency may increase cost savings and profit margins. Metrics TC-TL-130a.1. (1) Total energy consumed, (2) percentage grid electricity and (3) percentage renewable 1 The entity shall disclose (1) the total amount of energy it consumed as an aggregate figure, in gigajoules (GJ). 1.1 The scope of energy consumption includes energy from all sources, including energy purchased from external sources and energy produced by the entity itself (self-generated). For example, direct fuel usage, purchased electricity, heating, cooling and steam energy are all included within the scope of energy consumption. 1.2 The scope of energy consumption includes only energy directly consumed by the entity during the reporting period. 1.3 In calculating energy consumption from fuels and biofuels, the entity shall use higher heating values (HHV), also known as gross calorific values (GCV), which are measured directly or taken from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2 The entity shall disclose (2) the percentage of energy it consumed that was supplied from grid electricity. 108Note to TC-TL-000.C – Broadband subscribers are defined as those customers that contract with the entity for fixed line cable and internet services, which include WiFi connections.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 4 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 1068
  },
  {
    "id": 81606,
    "question": "Which scenario would most likely require an entity to disclose strategies or reduction targets related to emissions under the conditions described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 12: Oil & Gas – Midstream?",
    "options": {
      "A": "An entity that completed maintenance activities including decoking of furnace tubes during the current reporting period.",
      "B": "An entity planning a new exploratory drilling project expected to begin in the next reporting period.",
      "C": "An entity assessing potential participation in the EU Emissions Trading Scheme for future compliance.",
      "D": "An entity implementing upgrades to pressure relief valves as part of ongoing efforts outside the reporting period.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "9-10",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol12.pdf",
    "source_text": "exploratory drilling, loading/ballasting/transit, and loading racks, (2) venting resulting from maintenance/turn-arounds, which may include decoking of furnace tubes, well unloading, vessel and gas compressor depressurising, compressor starts, gas sampling, and pipeline blowdowns, and (3) venting from non-routine activities, which may include pressure relief valves, pressure control valves, fuel supply unloading valves and emergency shut-down devices 4.1.5 Fugitive emissions, including those emissions which can be individually found and ' ‘fixed’' to make emissions ‘near zero ’ and which may include emissions from valves, flanges, connectors, pumps, compressor seal leaks, Cata-Dyne® heaters, and wastewater treatment and surface impoundments 5 The entity shall discuss whether its strategies, plans, or reduction targets are related to, or associated with, emissions limiting or emissions reporting-based programmes or regulations (for example, the EU Emissions Trading Scheme, Quebec Cap-and-Trade System, California Cap-and-Trade Program), including regional, national, international or sectoral programmes. 6 Disclosure of strategies, plans or reduction targets shall be limited to activities that were ongoing (active) or reached completion during the reporting period.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 8 © IFRS Foundation\n\n[Page 10]\n© IFRS Foundation 9 Columbus Building 7 Westferry Circus Canary Wharf London E14 4HD, UK Tel +44 (0) 20 7246 6410 Email sustainability_licensing@ifrs.org ifrs.org International Financial Reporting Standards®, IFRS Foundation®, IFRS®, IAS®, IFRIC®, SIC®, IASB®, ISSBTM, IFRS for SMEs®",
    "new_id": 1069
  },
  {
    "id": 81617,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why entities in the midstream industry may face varying financial impacts due to greenhouse gas emissions, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 12: Oil & Gas – Midstream?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Financial effects vary based on operational locations and prevailing emissions regulations, influencing expenditures and penalties.",
      "A": "Entities with higher methane fugitive emissions are penalized more heavily, regardless of their location or applicable regulations.",
      "C": "Regulatory compliance costs and risks depend solely on the global warming potential (GWP) values used for emissions calculations.",
      "D": "All midstream entities experience uniform financial impacts because Scope 1 emissions are standardized across the industry.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "5",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol12.pdf",
    "source_text": "Greenhouse Gas Emissions Topic Summary The midstream industry generates significant greenhouse gases and other air emissions from compressor engine exhausts, oil and condensate tank vents, natural gas processing, and fugitive emissions, in addition to emissions from mobile sources. GHG emissions contribute to climate change and create incremental regulatory compliance costs and risks for midstream entities. At the same time, the management of methane fugitive emissions has emerged as a significant operational, reputational and regulatory risk. Financial effects on entities will vary depending on the specific location of operations and prevailing emissions regulations, and they include increased operating or capital expenditures and regulatory or legal penalties. Entities that capture and monetise emissions, or cost-effectively reduce emissions by implementing innovative monitoring and mitigation efforts and fuel efficiency measures, may enjoy substantial financial benefits. Entities can reduce regulatory risks and realise operational efficiencies as regulatory and public concerns about air quality and climate change increase. Metrics EM-MD-110a.1. Gross global Scope 1 emissions, percentage methane, percentage covered under emissions-limiting regulations 1 The entity shall disclose its gross global Scope 1 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to the atmosphere of the seven GHGs covered under the Kyoto Protocol —carbon dioxide (CO 2), methane (CH 4), nitrous oxide (N 2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), sulphur hexafluoride (SF 6), and nitrogen trifluoride (NF 3). 1.1 Emissions of all GHGs shall be consolidated and disclosed in metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO 2-e) and calculated in accordance with published 100-year time horizon global warming potential (GWP) values. To date, the preferred source for GWP values is the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fifth Assessment Report (2014). 1.2 Gross emissions are GHGs emitted into the atmosphere before accounting for offsets, credits or other similar mechanisms that have reduced or compensated for emissions. 2 Scope 1 emissions are defined and shall be calculated according to the methodology contained in The Greenhouse Gas Protocol: A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard (GHG Protocol), Revised Edition, March 2004, published by the World Resources Institute and the World Business Council on Sustainable Development (WRI/WBCSD). 2.1 These emissions include direct emissions of GHGs from stationary or mobile sources; these sources include: equipment at well sites, production facilities, refineries, chemical plants, terminals, fixed site drilling rigs, office buildings, marine vessels transporting products, tank truck fleets, mobile drilling rigs, and moveable equipment at drilling and production facilities.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 4 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 1070
  },
  {
    "id": 81619,
    "question": "Which of the following statements accurately reflects the relationship between GHG emission data consolidation approaches and regulatory compliance disclosures, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 12: Oil & Gas – Midstream?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Entities must consolidate GHG emissions using the financial control approach and disclose the percentage of Scope 1 emissions subject to emissions-limiting regulations.",
      "A": "Entities must align their GHG emission data consolidation with financial reporting, but they are not required to disclose the percentage of emissions covered by limiting regulations.",
      "B": "The financial control approach for consolidating GHG emissions is recommended, yet entities may choose alternative methods if they align with non-financial organizational boundaries.",
      "D": "GHG emissions consolidation follows the CDSB Framework exclusively, while regulatory compliance is determined based on industry-specific guidelines.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "6",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol12.pdf",
    "source_text": "2.2 Acceptable calculation methodologies include those that conform with the GHG Protocol as the base reference, but provide additional guidance, such as industry- or region-specific guidance. Examples include: 2.2.1 GHG Reporting Guidance for the Aerospace Industry provided by the International Aerospace Environmental Group (IAEG) 2.2.2 Greenhouse Gas Inventory Guidance: Direct Emissions from Stationary Combustion Sources published by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 2.2.3 India GHG Inventory Program 2.2.4 ISO 14064-1 2.2.5 Petroleum Industry Guidelines for reporting GHG emissions , 2nd edition, 2011, published by IPIECA 2.2.6 Protocol for the quantification of greenhouse gas emissions from waste management activities provided by Entreprises pour l ’Environnement (EpE) 2.3 GHG emission data shall be consolidated according to the approach with which the entity consolidates its financial reporting data, which generally is aligned with the ‘financial control ’ approach defined by the GHG Protocol as well as: 2.3.1 The financial approach detailed in Chapter 3 of the IPIECA/API/OGP Petroleum Industry Guidelines for Reporting Greenhouse Gas Emissions , 2nd Edition, 2011 (hereafter, the “IPIECA GHG Guidelines ”) 2.3.2 The approach provided by the Climate Disclosure Standards Board (CDSB) that is described in REQ-07, ‘Organisational boundary ’, of the CDSB Framework for reporting environmental and social information 3 The entity shall disclose the percentage of gross global Scope 1 emissions from methane emissions. 3.1 The percentage of gross global Scope 1 GHG emissions from methane emissions shall be calculated as the methane emissions in metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents (CO 2-e) divided by the gross global Scope 1 GHG emissions in metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents (CO 2-e). 4 The entity shall disclose the percentage of its gross global Scope 1 GHG emissions covered under an emissions-limiting regulation or programme intended to limit or reduce emissions directly, such as cap-and-trade schemes, carbon tax/fee systems, and other emissions control (for example, command-and-control approach) and permit-based mechanisms. 4.1 Examples of emissions-limiting regulations include: 4.1.1 California Cap-and-Trade (California Global Warming Solutions Act) 4.1.2 European Union Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS) 4.1.3 Quebec Cap-and-Trade (Quebec Environment Quality Act)IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 5",
    "new_id": 1071
  },
  {
    "id": 81634,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why the metric 'turbine backlog' excludes amounts from operating and maintenance agreements, according to the provided definitions in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 45: Wind Technology & Project Developers?",
    "options": {
      "D": "To ensure consistency with entities' public disclosures regarding order backlogs unrelated to services.",
      "A": "To align with the International Electrotechnical Commission’s turbine class rating system.",
      "B": "Because operating and maintenance agreements are not material to wind turbine design efficiency.",
      "C": "To differentiate between onshore and offshore installation challenges in project development.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "3-4",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol45.pdf",
    "source_text": "Introduction This volume is part of the Industry-based Guidance on Implementing IFRS S2 Climate-related Disclosures . This guidance suggests possible ways to apply some of the disclosure requirements in IFRS S2 but does not create additional requirements. This volume suggests possible ways to identify, measure and disclose information about climate-related risks and opportunities that are associated with particular business models, economic activities and other common features that characterise participation in this industry. This industry-based guidance has been derived from Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) Standards, which are maintained by the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB). The metric codes used in SASB Standards have been included for ease of reference. For additional context regarding the industry-based guidance contained in this volume, including structure and terminology, application and illustrative examples, refer to Section III of the Accompanying Guidance to IFRS S2.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 2 © IFRS Foundation\n\n[Page 4]\nVolume 45 —Wind Technology & Project Developers Industry Description Wind Technology & Project Developers manufacture wind turbines, blades, towers and other components of wind power systems. Entities that develop, build and manage wind energy projects also are included within this industry scope. Manufacturers also may offer post-sale maintenance and support services. Turbines may be installed onshore or offshore, which can create differences in wind-generating capacity and project development challenges for each type of installation. Most major wind technology entities operate globally. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Materials EfficiencyTop five materials consumed, by weight Quantitative Metric tons (t) RR-WT -440b.1 Average top head mass per turbine capacity, by wind turbine classQuantitative Metric tons per megawatts (t/MW)RR-WT -440b.2 Description of approach to optimise materials efficiency of wind turbine designDiscussion and Analysisn/a RR-WT -440b.3 Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Number of delivered wind turbines, by wind turbine class 76Quantitative Number RR-WT -000.A Aggregate capacity of delivered wind turbines, by wind turbine class 77Quantitative Megawatts (MW)RR-WT -000.B Amount of turbine backlog 78Quantitative Presentation currencyRR-WT -000.C Aggregate capacity of turbine backlog 79Quantitative Megawatts (MW)RR-WT -000.D 76Note to RR-WT-000.A – Wind turbine class is defined by the International Electrotechnical Commission ’s IEC 61400-1, Edition 3.0 —Design requirements. Wind turbine class shall be determined by the rating of the turbine. 77Note to RR-WT-000.B – Wind turbine class is defined by the International Electrotechnical Commission ’s IEC 61400-1, Edition 3.0 —Design requirements. Wind turbine class shall be determined by the rating of the turbine. 78Note to RR-WT-000.C – Turbine backlog is defined by the entity, consistent with its existing public disclosure of order backlog. Turbine backlog excludes any backlog amounts resulting from operating and maintenance agreements or other service agreements. 79Note to RR-WT-000.D – Turbine backlog is defined by the entity, consistent with its existing public disclosure of order backlog. Turbine backlog excludes any backlog amounts resulting from operating and maintenance agreements or other service agreements.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 3",
    "new_id": 1072
  },
  {
    "id": 81635,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between the sustainability disclosure metrics and the operational challenges faced by entities in the wind technology industry, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 45: Wind Technology & Project Developers?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The exclusion of operating and maintenance agreements from turbine backlog disclosures is intended to isolate the impact of design efficiency on project timelines.",
      "B": "The average top head mass per turbine capacity is disclosed to directly address the specific challenges of offshore wind installations.",
      "C": "Entities disclose the number of delivered turbines by class to demonstrate compliance with IEC 61400-1 Edition 3.0, which mandates reporting on design requirements.",
      "D": "Materials efficiency optimization descriptions are provided to highlight how manufacturers mitigate resource constraints affecting turbine production scalability.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "4",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol45.pdf",
    "source_text": "Volume 45 —Wind Technology & Project Developers Industry Description Wind Technology & Project Developers manufacture wind turbines, blades, towers and other components of wind power systems. Entities that develop, build and manage wind energy projects also are included within this industry scope. Manufacturers also may offer post-sale maintenance and support services. Turbines may be installed onshore or offshore, which can create differences in wind-generating capacity and project development challenges for each type of installation. Most major wind technology entities operate globally. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Materials EfficiencyTop five materials consumed, by weight Quantitative Metric tons (t) RR-WT -440b.1 Average top head mass per turbine capacity, by wind turbine classQuantitative Metric tons per megawatts (t/MW)RR-WT -440b.2 Description of approach to optimise materials efficiency of wind turbine designDiscussion and Analysisn/a RR-WT -440b.3 Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Number of delivered wind turbines, by wind turbine class 76Quantitative Number RR-WT -000.A Aggregate capacity of delivered wind turbines, by wind turbine class 77Quantitative Megawatts (MW)RR-WT -000.B Amount of turbine backlog 78Quantitative Presentation currencyRR-WT -000.C Aggregate capacity of turbine backlog 79Quantitative Megawatts (MW)RR-WT -000.D 76Note to RR-WT-000.A – Wind turbine class is defined by the International Electrotechnical Commission ’s IEC 61400-1, Edition 3.0 —Design requirements. Wind turbine class shall be determined by the rating of the turbine. 77Note to RR-WT-000.B – Wind turbine class is defined by the International Electrotechnical Commission ’s IEC 61400-1, Edition 3.0 —Design requirements. Wind turbine class shall be determined by the rating of the turbine. 78Note to RR-WT-000.C – Turbine backlog is defined by the entity, consistent with its existing public disclosure of order backlog. Turbine backlog excludes any backlog amounts resulting from operating and maintenance agreements or other service agreements. 79Note to RR-WT-000.D – Turbine backlog is defined by the entity, consistent with its existing public disclosure of order backlog. Turbine backlog excludes any backlog amounts resulting from operating and maintenance agreements or other service agreements.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 3",
    "new_id": 1073
  },
  {
    "id": 81700,
    "question": "Which of the following most accurately reflects the implications of the entity-defined measure of user activity in relation to strategic planning and outsourcing decisions, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 56: Internet Media & Services?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Entities must define a measure of user activity to inform strategic planning, but this measure does not inherently dictate specific levels of data processing or storage outsourcing.",
      "A": "Entities are required to prioritize renewable energy usage based on their defined measure of user activity, ensuring alignment with environmental considerations.",
      "C": "The measure of user activity directly determines the percentage of data processing capacity that must be outsourced to public cloud services.",
      "D": "User activity metrics are exclusively used to calculate water consumption and grid electricity reliance in regions with high baseline water stress.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "4",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol56.pdf",
    "source_text": "Volume 56 —Internet Media & Services Industry Description The Internet Media & Services industry consists of two main segments. Entities in the Internet Media segment provide search engines and internet advertising channels, online gaming, and online communities such as social networks, as well as content, which is usually easily searchable, such as educational, medical, health, sports or news content. Entities in the internet-based Services segment sell services mainly through the internet. The industry generates revenue primarily from online advertising, usually on free content, with other revenue sources being subscription fees, content sales or the sale of user information to third parties. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Environmental Footprint of Hardware Infrastructure(1) Total energy consumed, (2) percentage grid electricity and (3) percentage renewableQuantitative Gigajoules (GJ), Percentage (%)TC-IM-130a.1 (1) Total water withdrawn, (2) total water consumed; percentage of each in regions with High or Extremely High Baseline Water StressQuantitative Thousand cubic metres (m³), Percentage (%)TC-IM-130a.2 Discussion of the integration of environmental considerations into strategic planning for data centre needsDiscussion and Analysisn/a TC-IM-130a.3 Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Entity-defined measure of user activity 96Quantitative See note TC-IM-000.A (1) Data processing capacity, (2) percentage outsourced 97Quantitative See note TC-IM-000.B (1) Amount of data storage, (2) percentage outsourced 98Quantitative Petabytes, Percentage (%)TC-IM-000.C 96Note to TC-IM-000.A – The entity shall define and disclose a basic measure of customer activity suitable for its business activities. This may include, but is not limited to, sales transactions, purchase transactions, number of searches, monthly active users, or page views. 97Note to TC-IM-000.B – Data processing capacity shall be reported in units of measure typically tracked by the entity or used as the basis for contracting software and IT services, such as Million Service Units (MSUs), Million Instructions per Second (MIPS), Mega FloatingPoint Operations per Second (MFLOPS), compute cycles, or other. Alternatively, the entity may disclose owned and outsourced data processing needs in other units of measure, such as rack space or data centre square footage. The percentage outsourced shall include o-premise cloud services, those that are hosted on public cloud, and those that are residing in colocation data centres. 98Note to TC-IM-000.C – The percentage outsourced shall include on-premise cloud services, those that are hosted on public cloud, and those that are residing in colocation data centres.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 3",
    "new_id": 1074
  },
  {
    "id": 81701,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes why an entity in the Internet Media & Services industry might choose to report its data processing capacity using Million Instructions Per Second (MIPS) rather than rack space or data center square footage, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 56: Internet Media & Services?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Because MIPS aligns with units typically tracked internally or used in software and IT service contracts, offering greater relevance to stakeholders.",
      "A": "Because MIPS is the only universally accepted unit of measure for data processing capacity across all industries.",
      "B": "Because reporting in MIPS allows entities to avoid disclosing information about their use of off-premise cloud services.",
      "D": "Because rack space and data center square footage are no longer considered valid metrics under IFRS S2 guidelines.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "3-4",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol56.pdf",
    "source_text": "Introduction This volume is part of the Industry-based Guidance on Implementing IFRS S2 Climate-related Disclosures . This guidance suggests possible ways to apply some of the disclosure requirements in IFRS S2 but does not create additional requirements. This volume suggests possible ways to identify, measure and disclose information about climate-related risks and opportunities that are associated with particular business models, economic activities and other common features that characterise participation in this industry. This industry-based guidance has been derived from Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) Standards, which are maintained by the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB). The metric codes used in SASB Standards have been included for ease of reference. For additional context regarding the industry-based guidance contained in this volume, including structure and terminology, application and illustrative examples, refer to Section III of the Accompanying Guidance to IFRS S2.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 2 © IFRS Foundation\n\n[Page 4]\nVolume 56 —Internet Media & Services Industry Description The Internet Media & Services industry consists of two main segments. Entities in the Internet Media segment provide search engines and internet advertising channels, online gaming, and online communities such as social networks, as well as content, which is usually easily searchable, such as educational, medical, health, sports or news content. Entities in the internet-based Services segment sell services mainly through the internet. The industry generates revenue primarily from online advertising, usually on free content, with other revenue sources being subscription fees, content sales or the sale of user information to third parties. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Environmental Footprint of Hardware Infrastructure(1) Total energy consumed, (2) percentage grid electricity and (3) percentage renewableQuantitative Gigajoules (GJ), Percentage (%)TC-IM-130a.1 (1) Total water withdrawn, (2) total water consumed; percentage of each in regions with High or Extremely High Baseline Water StressQuantitative Thousand cubic metres (m³), Percentage (%)TC-IM-130a.2 Discussion of the integration of environmental considerations into strategic planning for data centre needsDiscussion and Analysisn/a TC-IM-130a.3 Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Entity-defined measure of user activity 96Quantitative See note TC-IM-000.A (1) Data processing capacity, (2) percentage outsourced 97Quantitative See note TC-IM-000.B (1) Amount of data storage, (2) percentage outsourced 98Quantitative Petabytes, Percentage (%)TC-IM-000.C 96Note to TC-IM-000.A – The entity shall define and disclose a basic measure of customer activity suitable for its business activities. This may include, but is not limited to, sales transactions, purchase transactions, number of searches, monthly active users, or page views. 97Note to TC-IM-000.B – Data processing capacity shall be reported in units of measure typically tracked by the entity or used as the basis for contracting software and IT services, such as Million Service Units (MSUs), Million Instructions per Second (MIPS), Mega FloatingPoint Operations per Second (MFLOPS), compute cycles, or other. Alternatively, the entity may disclose owned and outsourced data processing needs in other units of measure, such as rack space or data centre square footage. The percentage outsourced shall include o-premise cloud services, those that are hosted on public cloud, and those that are residing in colocation data centres. 98Note to TC-IM-000.C – The percentage outsourced shall include on-premise cloud services, those that are hosted on public cloud, and those that are residing in colocation data centres.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 3",
    "new_id": 1075
  },
  {
    "id": 81741,
    "question": "Which of the following scenarios would create the most significant challenge for an entity attempting to comply with fleet fuel economy disclosure requirements across multiple regions, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 63: Automobiles?",
    "options": {
      "D": "An entity that calculates its fleet fuel economy averages based solely on vehicle weight despite regulations specifying sales-weighted calculations by footprint in certain regions.",
      "A": "An entity selling identical vehicle models in both the European Union and Japan, where one region mandates reporting in gCO2/km and the other in L/km, but the entity lacks a standardized conversion methodology.",
      "B": "An entity that excludes light commercial vehicles sold in the EU from its disclosures because they are not explicitly listed as passenger cars under the metric definitions provided.",
      "C": "An entity operating exclusively within the US, using mpg units for all vehicle categories, but failing to differentiate between domestic and imported passenger cars in its reporting.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "5",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol63.pdf",
    "source_text": "for high fuel-efficiency conventional vehicles. Moreover, manufacturers are designing innovative vehicles made with lighter-weight materials to improve fuel efficiency. Entities that meet current fuel-efficiency and emissions standards and continue to innovate to meet or exceed future regulatory standards in various markets may strengthen their competitive position and expand their market share, while mitigating the risk of reduced demand for conventional vehicles. Metrics TR-AU-410a.1. Sales-weighted average passenger fleet fuel economy, by region 1 The entity shall disclose the average fuel economy of its passenger and light-duty vehicle fleet, weighted for the footprint of vehicles sold, by geographical region. 1.1 The average fuel economy shall be calculated by model year as required for regulatory purposes. 1.2 In the absence of regulatory guidance on calculating a fleet average, the entity shall calculate performance based on the fuel economy of vehicles sold during the reporting period weighted by sales volume. 1.3 The calculation shall be made on a fleet-average basis regardless of whether regulations are based on vehicle weight. 2 The entity shall disclose the percentage by geographic region. 2.1 Geographical regions are defined as the regions for which the entity conducts segment financial reporting and which are subject to fleet fuel economy, fuel consumption or emissions standards. 3 Disclosure may be provided in various units for each geographical region, which may include: 3.1 Grams of carbon dioxide per kilometre (gCO 2/km) for (1) passenger cars and (2) light commercial vehicles sold in the European Union 3.2 Litres of petrol per kilometre (L/km) for passenger vehicles sold in Japan 3.3 Miles per gallon (mpg) for (1) domestic passenger cars, (2) imported passenger cars and (3) light trucks sold in the US and subject to Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards, where these vehicle categories are defined in US 49 CFR Part 523 3.4 Kilometres per litre (km/L) for passenger vehicles sold in New Zealand 4 The scope of disclosure shall include all vehicles subject to national passenger vehicle standards for fleet fuel economy, fuel consumption or emissions. 5 The entity may disclose fleet performance for other vehicle segments such as: 5.1 Cargo vehicles in Japan 5.2 Heavy-duty vehicles in the US 5.3 Light commercial vehicles in the EUIFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 4 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 1076
  },
  {
    "id": 81760,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the implications of the disclosure requirements for entities operating in multiple geographical regions with differing regulatory standards, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 63: Automobiles?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Entities are required to disclose fleet performance separately for each geographical region based on local regulatory standards, even if this results in using different units across regions.",
      "B": "Entities must standardize their fleet performance disclosures globally by converting all metrics into a single unit, such as grams of carbon dioxide per kilometre.",
      "C": "Entities can choose to aggregate fleet performance data across regions as long as they disclose the methodology used for harmonizing regional differences.",
      "D": "Entities must prioritize disclosing fleet performance in regions with the strictest fuel economy or emissions standards while omitting less stringent markets.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "5",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol63.pdf",
    "source_text": "for high fuel-efficiency conventional vehicles. Moreover, manufacturers are designing innovative vehicles made with lighter-weight materials to improve fuel efficiency. Entities that meet current fuel-efficiency and emissions standards and continue to innovate to meet or exceed future regulatory standards in various markets may strengthen their competitive position and expand their market share, while mitigating the risk of reduced demand for conventional vehicles. Metrics TR-AU-410a.1. Sales-weighted average passenger fleet fuel economy, by region 1 The entity shall disclose the average fuel economy of its passenger and light-duty vehicle fleet, weighted for the footprint of vehicles sold, by geographical region. 1.1 The average fuel economy shall be calculated by model year as required for regulatory purposes. 1.2 In the absence of regulatory guidance on calculating a fleet average, the entity shall calculate performance based on the fuel economy of vehicles sold during the reporting period weighted by sales volume. 1.3 The calculation shall be made on a fleet-average basis regardless of whether regulations are based on vehicle weight. 2 The entity shall disclose the percentage by geographic region. 2.1 Geographical regions are defined as the regions for which the entity conducts segment financial reporting and which are subject to fleet fuel economy, fuel consumption or emissions standards. 3 Disclosure may be provided in various units for each geographical region, which may include: 3.1 Grams of carbon dioxide per kilometre (gCO 2/km) for (1) passenger cars and (2) light commercial vehicles sold in the European Union 3.2 Litres of petrol per kilometre (L/km) for passenger vehicles sold in Japan 3.3 Miles per gallon (mpg) for (1) domestic passenger cars, (2) imported passenger cars and (3) light trucks sold in the US and subject to Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards, where these vehicle categories are defined in US 49 CFR Part 523 3.4 Kilometres per litre (km/L) for passenger vehicles sold in New Zealand 4 The scope of disclosure shall include all vehicles subject to national passenger vehicle standards for fleet fuel economy, fuel consumption or emissions. 5 The entity may disclose fleet performance for other vehicle segments such as: 5.1 Cargo vehicles in Japan 5.2 Heavy-duty vehicles in the US 5.3 Light commercial vehicles in the EUIFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 4 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 1077
  },
  {
    "id": 81762,
    "question": "Which of the following scenarios would most directly challenge an entity's ability to comply with future regulatory obligations regarding fuel economy and emissions as implied by the text, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 63: Automobiles?",
    "options": {
      "B": "An entity invests heavily in California’s LEV III program but ignores China VI emission standards despite planning to expand into the Chinese market.",
      "A": "An entity focuses exclusively on developing hybrid fuel systems while disregarding advancements in particulate filter technologies.",
      "C": "An entity prioritizes meeting customer demand for larger vehicles without considering upcoming changes to Euro 6 standards.",
      "D": "An entity fails to adopt selective catalytic reduction technology, even though it has already achieved compliance with current US CAFE standards.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "7-8",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol63.pdf",
    "source_text": "3.4 Fuels that result in reduced emissions include biodiesel, ethanol, natural gas, propane and hydrogen. 3.5 Internal combustion engines include those equipped with technology (for example, selective catalytic reduction) to reduce nitrogen oxide emissions. 3.6 Particulate filters (for example, wall-flow filter or partial-flow filter) include those that reduce emissions (including carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons and particulate matter). 3.6.1 If relevant, the entity shall discuss the technologies it is prioritising to improve the fuel economy and reduce emissions of its vehicles, such as the specific type of fuel systems it is developing (for example, hybrid, electric or fuel cell). 4 The entity shall discuss the factors influencing fuel economy and emissions efforts, such as meeting customer demand or meeting regulatory requirements of the markets it operates in or plans to operate in. 4.1 Relevant programmes and initiatives may include: 4.1.1 California Low-Emission Vehicle Program – LEV III 4.1.2 China VI emission standard 4.1.3 Euro 6 standards for light duty vehicles 4.1.4 US Clean Air Act 4.1.5 US Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards 5 The entity shall discuss whether it is complying with fuel economy and use-phase regulatory obligations, whether such existing regulations require future improvements, progress towards meeting such regulations and strategies to maintain compliance with emerging regulations. 6 The scope of disclosure includes all vehicles subject to national and local vehicle standards. 7 The entity may discuss the benchmarks used to measure improvements in fuel economy and emissions reductions, including targets for fuel economy improvements and emissions reductions.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 6 © IFRS Foundation\n\n[Page 8]\n© IFRS Foundation 7 Columbus Building 7 Westferry Circus Canary Wharf London E14 4HD, UK Tel +44 (0) 20 7246 6410 Email sustainability_licensing@ifrs.org ifrs.org International Financial Reporting Standards®, IFRS Foundation®, IFRS®, IAS®, IFRIC®, SIC®, IASB®, ISSBTM, IFRS for SMEs®",
    "new_id": 1078
  },
  {
    "id": 81779,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the implications of the disclosed requirements for determining renewable fuel compliance, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 68: Road Transportation?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The standard mandates that all reported data use consistent conversion factors, such as HHVs, including for both renewable and non-renewable fuels, but does not specify which standard must be used.",
      "A": "An entity may calculate the percentage of renewable fuel consumed using either higher heating values (HHV) or lower heating values (LHV), provided consistency is maintained.",
      "B": "The lifecycle GHG emission reduction criterion applies only to fuels derived from renewable biomass and excludes all other types of renewable energy sources.",
      "D": "An entity must disclose the specific regulation used for classification while calculating the percentage of renewable fuel based on volume rather than energy content.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "8-9",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol68.pdf",
    "source_text": "3.1.1 Produced from renewable biomass 3.1.2 Used to replace or reduce the quantity of fossil fuel present in a transportation fuel, heating oil or jet fuel 3.1.3 Achieved net greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction on a lifecycle basis 3.2 The entity shall disclose the standard or regulation used to determine if a fuel is renewable. 3.3 The percentage shall be calculated as the amount of renewable fuel consumed (in GJ) divided by the total amount of fuel consumed (in GJ). 4 The scope of disclosure only includes fuel directly consumed by the entity. 5 In calculating energy consumption from fuels, the entity shall use higher heating values (HHV), also known as gross calorific values (GCV), which are directly measured or taken from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 6 The entity shall apply conversion factors consistently for all data reported under this disclosure, such as the use of HHVs for fuel use (including biofuels).IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 7\n\n[Page 9]\n8 © IFRS Foundation Columbus Building 7 Westferry Circus Canary Wharf London E14 4HD, UK Tel +44 (0) 20 7246 6410 Email sustainability_licensing@ifrs.org ifrs.org International Financial Reporting Standards®, IFRS Foundation®, IFRS®, IAS®, IFRIC®, SIC®, IASB®, ISSBTM, IFRS for SMEs®",
    "new_id": 1079
  },
  {
    "id": 81813,
    "question": "Which scenario best reflects a situation where an entity's disclosed percentage of renewable fuel consumed might be invalidated under the requirements outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 68: Road Transportation?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The entity adopts a standard that defines renewable fuel as having lifecycle GHG reductions but fails to confirm whether the fuel also replaces or reduces fossil fuels in transportation.",
      "A": "The entity calculates the renewable fuel percentage using lower heating values (LHV) instead of higher heating values (HHV), despite HHVs being mandated for consistency.",
      "B": "The entity includes fuel indirectly consumed through third-party transportation services as part of its total fuel consumption in the calculation.",
      "C": "The entity resets its base year emissions retrospectively without recalculating the associated fuel consumption data for the new baseline.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "7-8",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol68.pdf",
    "source_text": "2.6 Any circumstances in which the target or base year emissions have been, or may be, recalculated retrospectively or the target or base year has been reset. 3 The entity shall discuss the activities and investments required to achieve the plans or targets, and any risks or limiting factors that might affect achievement of the plans or targets. 3.1 Relevant activities and investments may include fuel optimisation efforts such as route and load optimisation, adoption of technology such as engine and powertrain efficiency and aerodynamic improvements, use of electric- or natural gas-powered vehicles, weight reduction, improved tyre rolling resistance, hybridisation, and automatic engine shutdown. 4 The entity shall discuss the scope of its strategies, plans or reduction targets, such as whether they pertain differently to different business units, geographies or emissions sources. 5 The entity shall discuss whether its strategies, plans or reduction targets are related to, or associated with, emissions limiting or emissions reporting-based programmes or regulations (for example, the EU Emissions Trading Scheme, Quebec Cap-and-Trade System, California Cap-and-Trade Program), including regional, national, international or sectoral programmes. 6 Disclosure of strategies, plans or reduction targets shall be limited to activities that were ongoing (active) or reached completion during the reporting period. TR-RO-110a.3. (1) Total fuel consumed, (2) percentage natural gas and (3) percentage renewable 1 The entity shall disclose (1) the total amount of fuel consumed from all sources as an aggregate figure, in gigajoules (GJ). 1.1 The calculation methodology for fuel consumed shall be based on actual fuel consumed as opposed to design parameters. 1.2 Acceptable calculation methodologies for fuel consumed may include methodologies based on: 1.2.1 Adding fuel purchases made during the reporting period to beginning inventory at the start of the reporting period, minus any fuel inventory at the end of the reporting period 1.2.2 Tracking fuel consumed by vehicles 1.2.3 Tracking fuel expenses 2 The entity shall disclose (2) the percentage of fuel consumed that is natural gas. 2.1 The percentage shall be calculated as the amount of natural gas consumed (in GJ) divided by the total amount of fuel consumed (in GJ). 3 The entity shall disclose (3) the percentage of fuel consumed that was renewable fuel. 3.1 Renewable fuel generally is defined as fuel that meets all of these requirements:IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 6 © IFRS Foundation\n\n[Page 8]\n3.1.1 Produced from renewable biomass 3.1.2 Used to replace or reduce the quantity of fossil fuel present in a transportation fuel, heating oil or jet fuel 3.1.3 Achieved net greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction on a lifecycle basis 3.2 The entity shall disclose the standard or regulation used to determine if a fuel is renewable. 3.3 The percentage shall be calculated as the amount of renewable fuel consumed (in GJ) divided by the total amount of fuel consumed (in GJ). 4 The scope of disclosure only includes fuel directly consumed by the entity. 5 In calculating energy consumption from fuels, the entity shall use higher heating values (HHV), also known as gross calorific values (GCV), which are directly measured or taken from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 6 The entity shall apply conversion factors consistently for all data reported under this disclosure, such as the use of HHVs for fuel use (including biofuels).IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 7",
    "new_id": 1080
  },
  {
    "id": 81815,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between load factor, fuel consumption, and emissions within the Road Transportation industry as implied by the metrics provided in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 68: Road Transportation?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Entities with a consistently high load factor may reduce their Scope 1 emissions per revenue tonne-kilometre (RTK) by improving fuel efficiency relative to total distance travelled.",
      "B": "A higher load factor directly correlates with increased Scope 1 emissions due to heavier cargo loads.",
      "C": "Load factor is irrelevant to emissions reporting since it measures only capacity utilisation without considering fuel type or consumption.",
      "D": "Reducing the percentage of natural gas in fuel usage will invariably lead to an improved load factor and lower RTK values.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "4",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol68.pdf",
    "source_text": "Volume 68 —Road Transportation Industry Description Road Transportation industry entities provide long- and short-haul freight trucking services. Important activities include containerised and bulk freight shipment, including consumer goods and a wide variety of commodities. Generally, the industry may be categorised two ways: truckload (vehicles carrying the goods of only one customer) and less-than-truckload (vehicles carrying the goods of multiple customers). Owner-operators comprise the vast majority of the industry because of the relative ease of entry. A few large operators maintain market share through contracts with major shippers. Large entities often subcontract with owner-operators to supplement their owned fleet. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Greenhouse Gas EmissionsGross global Scope 1 emissions Quantitative Metric tons (t) CO₂-eTR-RO-110a.1 Discussion of long- and short-term strategy or plan to manage Scope 1 emissions, emissions reduction targets, and an analysis of performance against those targetsDiscussion and Analysisn/a TR-RO-110a.2 (1) Total fuel consumed, (2) percentage natural gas and (3) percentage renewableQuantitative Gigajoules (GJ), Percentage (%)TR-RO-110a.3 Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Revenue tonne-kilometres (RTK) 128Quantitative RTK TR-RO-000.A Load factor 129Quantitative Number TR-RO-000.B Number of employees, number of truck drivers Quantitative Number TR-RO-000.C Greenhouse Gas Emissions Topic Summary The Road Transportation industry generates emissions mainly through the combustion of diesel and other fossil fuels in truck engines. Greenhouse gases (GHGs) including carbon dioxide (CO 2) are of particular importance to government regulators concerned about climate change and to consumers demanding low-carbon or carbon-neutral 128Note to TR-RO-000.A – A revenue tonne-kilometre (RTK) is defined as one metric ton of revenue traffic transported one kilometre. RTK is computed by multiplying the vehicle-kilometres travelled on each leg by the number of metric tons of revenue traffic carried on that leg. 129Note to TR-RO-000.B – Load factor is a measure of capacity utilisation and is calculated as cargo distance travelled divided by total distance travelled.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 3",
    "new_id": 1081
  },
  {
    "id": 81847,
    "question": "Which scenario best illustrates a situation where the entity's disclosure would fail to meet the requirements outlined in the text, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 60: Air Freight & Logistics?",
    "options": {
      "B": "The entity excludes emissions from outsourced freight forwarding services, claiming they fall outside its operational control.",
      "A": "The entity uses only default values for emissions calculations, without describing its allocation methods or boundaries.",
      "C": "The entity calculates emissions based on specific measured values and includes all modes of transportation.",
      "D": "The entity relies on transport operator fleet values but provides detailed descriptions of its boundaries and mix of services.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "10-11",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol60.pdf",
    "source_text": "2.1 The entity shall calculate its disclosure according to EN 16258:2012 – Methodology for calculation and declaration of energy consumption and GHG emissions of transport services (freight and passengers). 2.1.1 Calculations shall be consistent with the methodology used to calculate the ‘tank-to-wheels GHG emissions (Gt) ’ result that is described in EN 16258:2012. 2.1.2 Determination of transportation system scope, boundaries and any necessary allocations shall be consistent with the methodology described in EN 16258:2012. 3 The scope of disclosure includes emissions from all freight transportation and logistics activities, including those from the entity ’s own assets (Scope 1) and those from contract carriers and outsourced freight forwarding services. 4 The scope of disclosure includes emissions from all modes of transportation, such as road freight, air freight, barge transport, marine transport and rail transport. 5 Consistent with EN 16258:2012, disclosure may be based on calculations from a mix of categories of emissions values (specific measured values, transport operator vehicle-type- or route-type-specific values, transport operator fleet values and default values). 6 If relevant and necessary for interpretation of disclosure, the entity shall describe its allocation methods, emissions values, boundaries, mix of transport services used and other information.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 9\n\n[Page 11]\n10 © IFRS Foundation Columbus Building 7 Westferry Circus Canary Wharf London E14 4HD, UK Tel +44 (0) 20 7246 6410 Email sustainability_licensing@ifrs.org ifrs.org International Financial Reporting Standards®, IFRS Foundation®, IFRS®, IAS®, IFRIC®, SIC®, IASB®, ISSBTM, IFRS for SMEs®",
    "new_id": 1082
  },
  {
    "id": 81850,
    "question": "Which of the following best reflects a logical implication regarding the relationship between sustainability disclosure metrics and their role in assessing Air Freight & Logistics entities' strategies to manage climate-related risks, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 60: Air Freight & Logistics?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The metrics provide a framework for evaluating both operational efficiency and emissions management, but they prioritize long-term strategic alignment over short-term performance targets.",
      "A": "The disclosed metrics are optional guidelines that entities may use to voluntarily enhance brand reputation without impacting strategic decision-making.",
      "B": "The metrics primarily serve as tools for regulatory compliance, with little relevance to internal strategic planning or external stakeholder communication.",
      "D": "The metrics focus exclusively on greenhouse gas emissions reduction, disregarding other sustainability factors such as supply chain management or fuel consumption patterns.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "3-4",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol60.pdf",
    "source_text": "Introduction This volume is part of the Industry-based Guidance on Implementing IFRS S2 Climate-related Disclosures . This guidance suggests possible ways to apply some of the disclosure requirements in IFRS S2 but does not create additional requirements. This volume suggests possible ways to identify, measure and disclose information about climate-related risks and opportunities that are associated with particular business models, economic activities and other common features that characterise participation in this industry. This industry-based guidance has been derived from Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) Standards, which are maintained by the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB). The metric codes used in SASB Standards have been included for ease of reference. For additional context regarding the industry-based guidance contained in this volume, including structure and terminology, application and illustrative examples, refer to Section III of the Accompanying Guidance to IFRS S2.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 2 © IFRS Foundation\n\n[Page 4]\nVolume 60 —Air Freight & Logistics Industry Description Air Freight & Logistics industry entities provide freight services and transportation logistics to both businesses and individuals. The industry consists of three main segments: air freight transportation, post and courier services, and transportation logistics services. Entities in the industry earn revenue from one or more of the segments and range from non-asset-based to asset-heavy. Transportation logistics services include contracting with road, rail, marine and air freight entities to select and hire appropriate transportation. Services also may include customs brokerage, distribution management, vendor consolidation, cargo insurance, purchase order management and customised logistics information. The industry is crucial to global trade, granting it a degree of demand stability. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Greenhouse Gas EmissionsGross global Scope 1 emissions Quantitative Metric tons (t) CO₂-eTR-AF-110a.1 Discussion of long- and short-term strategy or plan to manage Scope 1 emissions, emissions reduction targets, and an analysis of performance against those targetsDiscussion and Analysisn/a TR-AF-110a.2 Fuel consumed by (1) road transport, percentage (a) natural gas and (b) renewable, and (2) air transport, percentage (a) alternative and (b) sustainableQuantitative Gigajoules (GJ), Percentage (%)TR-AF-110a.3 Supply Chain ManagementTotal greenhouse gas (GHG) footprint across transport modesQuantitative Metric tons (t) CO₂-e per ton- kilometreTR-AF-430a.2 Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Revenue ton kilometres (RTK) for: (1) road transport and (2) air transport 109Quantitative RTK TR-AF-000.A Load factor for: (1) road transport and (2) air transport 110Quantitative Rate TR-AF-000.B Number of employees, number of truck drivers Quantitative Number TR-AF-000.C 109Note to TR-AF-000.A – Revenue ton kilometres (RTK) is defined as one metric ton of revenue traffic transported one kilometre. RTK is computed by multiplying the vehicle-kilometres travelled on each leg by the number of tons of revenue traffic carried on that leg. 110Note to TR-AF-000.B – Load factor is a measure of capacity utilisation and is calculated as kilometres travelled by cargo divided by total kilometres travelled.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 3",
    "new_id": 1083
  },
  {
    "id": 81997,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the interplay between the entity's long-term strategies and their implications for water management, as inferred from the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 14: Oil & Gas – Services?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The entity’s long-term strategies may involve process redesigns or technological innovations aimed at reducing fresh water withdrawal specifically in water-constrained regions, but not necessarily in areas with abundant water resources.",
      "A": "Long-term strategies focus exclusively on technological innovations that eliminate the need for fresh water withdrawal in all operational regions.",
      "B": "The entity’s long-term strategies are limited to adopting best practices in water recycling and do not extend to process redesigns or technological innovations.",
      "C": "Long-term strategies prioritize reductions in water consumption for hydraulic fracturing fluids and drilling fluids but explicitly exclude produced water or flowback management.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "9-10",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol14.pdf",
    "source_text": "2.1 Fresh water may be defined according to the local statutes and regulations where the entity operates. Where no regulatory definition exists, fresh water shall be considered to be water that has less than 1,000 parts per million of dissolved solids. 2.2 Water obtained from a water utility in compliance with jurisdictional drinking water regulations can be assumed to meet the definition of fresh water. 3 The entity shall disclose the percentage of water recycled as the volume recycled divided by the volume of water handled. 4 Recycled water shall include the amount recycled in closed-loop and open-loop systems as well as recycled produced water or flowback. 4.1 Any volume of water used more than once shall be counted as recycled each time it was recycled and reused. 5 Produced water is defined as water (brine) brought up from the hydrocarbon- bearing formation strata during the extraction of oil and gas and can include formation water, injection water, and any chemicals added downhole or during the oil/water separation process. 6 Flowback is defined as the process of allowing fluids (including water) and entrained solids to flow from a well following a treatment, either in preparation for a subsequent phase of treatment or in preparation for clean-up and returning the well to production. 6.1 The term flowback also means the fluids and entrained solids that emerge from a well during the flowback process. The flowback period begins when material introduced into the well during the treatment returns to the surface following hydraulic fracturing or refracturing. 6.2 The flowback period ends when either the well is shut in and permanently disconnected from the flowback equipment or at production start-up. 6.3 The flowback period includes the initial flowback stage and the separation flowback stage. 7 The scope is limited to operations for which the entity provides hydraulic fracturing, completion, drilling or water management services (for example, water treatment for reuse in drilling or hydraulic fracturing, and reduction of unwanted water in subsurface areas). 7.1 The scope may include water used in hydraulic fracturing fluids, drilling fluids, dust control and drilling cement production. EM-SV-140a.2. Discussion of strategy or plans to address water consumption and disposal-related risks, opportunities and impacts 1 The entity shall discuss its strategy or plans to address water consumption and disposal-related risks, opportunities and impacts. 1.1 The scope of disclosure shall include the entity ’s strategies, plans or reduction activities, including whether they pertain differently to different business units, geographies or water sources.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 8 © IFRS Foundation\n\n[Page 10]\n1.2 The scope of disclosure includes the activities and investments by the entity required to achieve the plans and any risks or limiting factors that might affect achievement of the plans or targets. 2 The entity shall discuss demand for specific products, services and technologies that offer well and field operators reduced water consumption, water recycling or other water impact reductions, and its ability to meet this demand. 3 The entity shall discuss its short- and long-term plans related to water management, where: 3.1 Short-term strategies may include adopting best practices in water recycling or water efficiency initiatives. 3.2 Long-term strategies may include process redesigns or technological innovations that reduce fresh water withdrawal in water constrained regions, reduce excess water production from wells, and provide water treatment or recycling systems. 4 The scope of impact reductions may relate to the following specific areas of water consumption or disposal: 4.1 Hydraulic fracturing fluids 4.2 Drilling fluids 4.3 Dust control 4.4 Cement production 4.5 Produced water or flowback 5 The entity shall discuss risks and opportunities relating to: being able to offer customers services, technologies or solutions that enhance water use efficiency, treatment and reuse, and reduce water consumption or wastewater production.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 9",
    "new_id": 1084
  },
  {
    "id": 82050,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes why entities in the Managed Care industry might need to incorporate climate change effects into their risk models, based on the potential health impacts outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 30: Managed Care?",
    "options": {
      "A": "To mitigate financial risks from heightened encounters with the healthcare system due to infectious disease migration and waterborne illnesses.",
      "B": "To solely address increases in allergic responses and asthma rates driven by rising temperatures.",
      "C": "To focus exclusively on reducing operational costs associated with heat-induced illnesses.",
      "D": "To comply with legislative demands for reporting changes in geographical incidence without regard to morbidity or mortality.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "4-5",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol30.pdf",
    "source_text": "Volume 30 —Managed Care Industry Description The Managed Care industry offers health insurance products for individual, commercial, Medicare and Medicaid members. Entities also provide administrative services and network access for self-funded insurance plans and manage pharmacy benefits. Enrolment in managed care traditionally has been correlated with employment rates, whereas revenue is driven by medical cost inflation. Legislative uncertainty and a focus on reducing health care costs may create downward pricing pressure and continue to drive industry consolidation. In addition, a focus on patient outcomes and plan performance continues to shape the industry ’s sustainability risks and opportunities. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Climate Change Impacts on Human HealthDiscussion of the strategy to address the effects of climate change on business operations and how specific risks presented by changes in the geographical incidence, morbidity and mortality of illnesses and diseases are incorporated into risk modelsDiscussion and Analysisn/a HC-MC-450a.1 Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Number of enrollees by plan type Quantitative Number HC-MC-000.A Climate Change Impacts on Human Health Topic Summary An increase in extreme weather events associated with climate change could have significant health impacts. These events, coupled with the potential spread of infectious diseases and food and water scarcity, may present material implications for the Managed Care industry through an increase in encounters with the health care system. Entities that manage the risks posed by extreme weather events and potential changes in the incidence, morbidity and mortality of illnesses and diseases may protect shareholder value better.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 3\n\n[Page 5]\nMetrics HC-MC-450a.1. Discussion of the strategy to address the effects of climate change on business operations and how specific risks presented by changes in the geographical incidence, morbidity and mortality of illnesses and diseases are incorporated into risk models 1 The entity shall discuss its strategic business approach to addressing significant risks related to the effects of climate change, which may include changes in the following aspects of illnesses and diseases: 1.1 Geographical incidence 1.2 Morbidity 1.3 Mortality 2 Relevant disclosure may include discussion of: 2.1 Increases in allergic responses, asthma rates and heat-induced illness 2.2 Migration of tropical diseases such as malaria, dengue fever and other vector-borne tropical diseases to non-tropical regions 2.3 Increases in waterborne diseases, such as cholera, because of increased natural disaster incidence 2.4 Increased rates of human developmental diseases such as malnutrition because of decreased food availability 3 The entity shall discuss any projected impacts on revenue, costs or plan affordability. 4 The entity may discuss how it incorporates the effects of climate change into its risk assessment and risk adjustment activities.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 4 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 1085
  },
  {
    "id": 82065,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why regulatory uncertainty poses a significant challenge to commercial banks with global operations, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 16: Commercial Banks?",
    "options": {
      "B": "It introduces challenges in managing mismatched assets and liabilities due to evolving rules.",
      "A": "It leads to inconsistencies in applying sustainability disclosure metrics across jurisdictions.",
      "C": "It creates difficulties in aligning credit analysis with environmental, social, and governance factors.",
      "D": "It forces banks to exclude mortgage and revolving credit loans from their disclosed activities.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "3-4",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol16.pdf",
    "source_text": "Introduction This volume is part of the Industry-based Guidance on Implementing IFRS S2 Climate-related Disclosures . This guidance suggests possible ways to apply some of the disclosure requirements in IFRS S2 but does not create additional requirements. This volume suggests possible ways to identify, measure and disclose information about climate-related risks and opportunities that are associated with particular business models, economic activities and other common features that characterise participation in this industry. This industry-based guidance has been derived from Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) Standards, which are maintained by the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB). The metric codes used in SASB Standards have been included for ease of reference. For additional context regarding the industry-based guidance contained in this volume, including structure and terminology, application and illustrative examples, refer to Section III of the Accompanying Guidance to IFRS S2.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 2 © IFRS Foundation\n\n[Page 4]\nVolume 16 —Commercial Banks Industry Description Commercial banks accept deposits and make loans to individuals and corporations, and engage in lending to infrastructure, real estate and other projects. By providing these services, the industry serves an essential role in the functioning of global economies and in facilitating the transfer of financial resources to their most productive capacity. The industry is driven by the volume of deposits, quality of loans made, the economic environment and interest rates. The risk from mismatched assets and liabilities further characterises the industry. The regulatory environment governing the commercial banking industry witnessed significant changes in the wake of the 2008 global financial crisis and continues to evolve today. These and other regulatory trends may affect performance. Commercial banks with global operations must manage new regulations in many jurisdictions that are creating regulatory uncertainty, particularly regarding the consistent application of new rules. Note: This standard addresses ‘pure play ’ commercial banking services, which may not include all the activities of integrated financial institutions, such as investment banking and brokerage services, mortgage finance, consumer finance, asset management and custody services, and insurance. Separate standards address the sustainability issues for activities in those industries. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Incorporation of Environmental, Social, and Governance Factors in Credit AnalysisDescription of approach to incorporation of environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors in credit analysisDiscussion and Analysisn/a FN-CB-410a.2 Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE (1) Number and (2) value of checking and savings accounts by segment: (a) personal and (b) small businessQuantitative Number, Presentation currencyFN-CB-000.A (1) Number and (2) value of loans by segment: (a) personal, (b) small business, and (c) corporate 18Quantitative Number, Presentation currencyFN-CB-000.B 18Note to FN-CB-000.B – Mortgage loans as well as revolving credit loans shall be excluded from the scope of disclosure.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 3",
    "new_id": 1086
  },
  {
    "id": 82095,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between rail infrastructure investment and competitive dynamics in the Rail Transportation industry, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 67: Rail Transportation?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Large sunk costs and economies of density together act as barriers to entry, reinforcing the dominance of incumbent entities within the industry.",
      "A": "The high sunk costs of rail infrastructure primarily serve to reduce operational expenses for new entrants, leveling the competitive playing field.",
      "B": "Economies of density and network effects create conditions where established entities can maintain competitive advantages despite minimal capital expenditures.",
      "D": "Natural monopoly conditions arise solely from renewable energy adoption, overshadowing traditional factors like track ownership and maintenance.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "4",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol67.pdf",
    "source_text": "Volume 67 —Rail Transportation Industry Description Rail Transportation industry entities provide rail freight shipping and support services. Important activities include shipping containerised and bulk freight, including consumer goods and commodities. Rail entities typically own, maintain and operate their rail networks, which may require significant capital expenditures. The industry exhibits economies of density because of its network effects, potentially fostering natural monopoly conditions. Together with the large sunk costs of rail infrastructure, this provides a competitive advantage to incumbent entities in the industry and creates barriers to entry for new entities. Note: The scope of the Rail Transportation industry does not include passenger rail transportation. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Greenhouse Gas EmissionsGross global Scope 1 emissions Quantitative Metric tons (t) CO₂-eTR-RA-110a.1 Discussion of long- and short-term strategy or plan to manage Scope 1 emissions, emissions reduction targets, and an analysis of performance against those targetsDiscussion and Analysisn/a TR-RA-110a.2 Total fuel consumed, percentage renewableQuantitative Gigajoules (GJ), Percentage (%)TR-RA-110a.3 Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Number of carloads transported 124Quantitative Number TR-RA-000.A Number of intermodal units transported 125Quantitative Number TR-RA-000.B Track kilometres 126Quantitative Kilometres (km)TR-RA-000.C continued... 124Note to TR-RA-000.A – The scope of disclosure includes all carloads that the entity transported in conjunction with the shipping of freight (including freight that is not containerised) for its customers. 125Note to TR-RA-000.B – Intermodal units include shipping containers and truck trailers that can be transported across modes of transportation. 126Note to TR-RA-000.C – Track kilometres include route kilometres (the total extent of routes available for trains to operate) and take into account multiple track routes such that each route kilometre with double track is considered two track kilometres.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 3",
    "new_id": 1087
  },
  {
    "id": 82126,
    "question": "Which scenario most accurately reflects a situation where an entity might incorrectly classify water as 'fresh' despite the provided definitions and requirements, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 4: E-Commerce?",
    "options": {
      "D": "An entity utilizes water with 1,200 parts per million of dissolved solids in a region without specific legal definitions for fresh water.",
      "A": "An entity uses water with 950 parts per million of dissolved solids, adhering to local regulations that define fresh water as having less than 1,000 parts per million.",
      "B": "An entity relies on water obtained from a municipal utility compliant with drinking water regulations but assumes it does not meet the definition of fresh water.",
      "C": "An entity collects rainwater directly and stores it for operations, assuming it automatically qualifies as fresh water regardless of its dissolved solids content.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "7",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol4.pdf",
    "source_text": "5.1 PUE is defined as the ratio of the total amount of power a computer data centre facility uses to the amount of power delivered to computing equipment. 5.2 If disclosing PUE, the entity shall follow the guidance and calculation methodology described in PUE™: A Comprehensive Examination of the Metric (2014), published by ASHRAE and The Green Grid Association. CG-EC-130a.2. (1) Total water withdrawn, (2) total water consumed; percentage of each in regions with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress 1 The entity shall disclose the amount of water, in thousands of cubic metres, withdrawn from all sources. 1.1 Water sources include surface water (including water from wetlands, rivers, lakes and oceans), groundwater, rainwater collected directly and stored by the entity, and water and wastewater obtained from municipal water supplies, water utilities or other entities. 2 The entity may disclose portions of its supply by source if, for example, significant portions of withdrawals are from non-freshwater sources. 2.1 Fresh water may be defined according to the local laws and regulations where the entity operates. If no legal definition exists, fresh water shall be considered to be water that has less than 1,000 parts per million of dissolved solids. 2.2 Water obtained from a water utility in compliance with jurisdictional drinking water regulations can be assumed to meet the definition of fresh water. 3 The entity shall disclose the amount of water, in thousands of cubic metres, consumed in its operations. 3.1 Water consumption is defined as: 3.1.1 Water that evaporates during withdrawal, use and discharge; 3.1.2 Water that is directly or indirectly incorporated into the entity ’s product or service 3.1.3 Water that does not otherwise return to the same catchment area from which it was withdrawn, such as water returned to another catchment area or the sea. 4 The entity shall analyse all its operations for water risks and identify activities that withdraw and consume water in locations with High (40 –80%) or Extremely High (>80%) Baseline Water Stress as classified by the World Resources Institute ’s (WRI) Water Risk Atlas tool, Aqueduct. 5 The entity shall disclose water withdrawn in locations with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress as a percentage of the total water withdrawn. 6 The entity shall disclose water consumed in locations with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress as a percentage of the total water consumed.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 6 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 1088
  },
  {
    "id": 82127,
    "question": "Which of the following statements accurately reflects a necessary condition for an entity to comply with the disclosure requirements regarding emissions from transportation systems, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 4: E-Commerce?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The entity must ensure that its determination of transportation system boundaries and allocations aligns with EN 16258:2012 methodology.",
      "B": "The entity must exclusively use specific measured values for all emissions calculations, avoiding default or fleet-specific values.",
      "C": "The entity is required to allocate emissions based solely on transport operator vehicle-type-specific values, without considering other categories.",
      "D": "The entity can omit descriptions of allocation methods if the emissions data are derived from transport operator fleet values alone.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "9-10",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol4.pdf",
    "source_text": "1.2 The entity shall calculate its disclosure according to EN 16258:2012 – Methodology for calculation and declaration of energy consumption and GHG emissions of transport services (freight and passengers). 1.2.1 Calculations shall be consistent with the methodology used to calculate the ‘tank-to-wheels GHG emissions (Gt) ’ result that is described in EN 16258:2012. 1.2.2 Determination of transportation system scope, boundaries and any necessary allocations shall be consistent with the methodology described in EN 16258:2012. 2 The scope of disclosure includes emissions from all freight transportation and logistics activities associated with the outbound shipment of the entity ’s products, including those from contract carriers and outsourced freight forwarding services and logistics providers (Scope 3) as well as those from the entity ’s own assets (Scope 1). 3 The scope of disclosure includes emissions from all modes of transportation, such as road freight, air freight, barge transport, marine transport, and rail transport. 4 Consistent with EN 16258:2012, disclosure may be based on calculations from a mix of categories of emissions values (specific measured values, transport operator vehicle-type- or route-type-specific values, transport operator fleet values and default values). 5 If relevant and necessary for interpretation of disclosure, the entity shall describe its allocation methods, emissions values, boundaries, mix of transport services used and other information. CG-EC-410a.2. Discussion of strategies to reduce the environmental impact of product delivery 1 The entity shall discuss its strategies to reduce the environmental impact of fulfilment and product delivery, including impacts associated with packaging materials and those associated with product transportation. 2 Relevant strategies to discuss may include: 2.1 Discussion of logistics selection, mode selection and management (for example, rail transport vs air freight transport) or operation for route efficiency 2.2 Discussion of packaging choices that may include decisions to use recycled or renewable (for example, bio-based plastic) packaging material, decisions to optimise the amount of packaging materials used (for example, source reduction), use of refillable or reusable packaging, and design for efficient shipping and transport 2.3 Discussion of fuel choices and vehicle choices for fleets owned or operated by the entity, such as decisions to use renewable and low-emission fuels and low-emission vehiclesIFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 8 © IFRS Foundation\n\n[Page 10]\n2.4 Other relevant strategies, such as efforts to reduce idling of vehicles owned or operated by the entity, innovations to improve the efficiency of ‘last- mile’ delivery and strategies to optimise delivery times to reduce traffic congestionIFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 9",
    "new_id": 1089
  },
  {
    "id": 82138,
    "question": "Which inference about the Casinos & Gaming industry's energy management practices is most strongly supported by the text, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 51: Casinos & Gaming?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Energy management metrics exclude considerations related to water usage or food safety because these issues are deemed immaterial for entities focused solely on gambling operations.",
      "A": "Entities in this industry prioritize renewable energy adoption due to their high energy consumption.",
      "C": "The reliance on mechanical systems for HVAC and lighting is a consequence of architectural design choices aimed at enhancing customer experience, rather than regulatory requirements.",
      "D": "The industry’s significant environmental impacts are primarily mitigated through international regulatory standards that enforce the use of renewable energy sources.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "4",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol51.pdf",
    "source_text": "Volume 51 —Casinos & Gaming Industry Description Publicly held casinos and gaming entities operate gambling facilities or platforms, including brick-and-mortar casinos, riverboat casinos, online gambling websites and racetracks. The industry is characterised by intense regulatory oversight, which is the main barrier to entry for new operators. Industry regulation varies significantly worldwide. Note: Some entities in the Casinos & Gaming industry are also engaged in activities of the Hotels & Lodging or Restaurants industries. The disclosure topics for such activities are outlined in the Hotels & Lodging (SV-HL) and Restaurants (FB-RN) industries. For the purposes of this Standard, casinos and gaming entities are assumed to be engaged solely in operating gambling facilities and providing online gaming services, and therefore issues such as water management and food safety, which may be material for entities that have significant hotel and restaurant operations, are not covered by this industry. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Energy Management(1) Total energy consumed, (2) percentage grid electricity and (3) percentage renewableQuantitative Gigajoules (GJ), Percentage (%)SV-CA-130a.1 Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Number of tables Quantitative Number SV-CA-000.A Number of slots Quantitative Number SV-CA-000.B Number of active online gaming customers 88Quantitative Number SV-CA-000.C Total area of gaming floorQuantitative Square metres (m²)SV-CA-000.D Energy Management Topic Summary With many facilities open 24 hours a day, the Casinos & Gaming industry requires a large amount of energy to operate. Casino facilities often have few windows and therefore rely on their buildings ’ mechanical systems for heating, ventilation, air-conditioning (HVAC) and lighting. Fossil fuel-based energy production and consumption contribute to significant environmental impacts, including climate change and pollution, and have the 88Note to SV-CA-000.C – The number of active customers shall be considered as the number for which there was at least one financial transaction (bet, deposit, withdraw) with real currency within the reporting period, where real currency is defined by the U.S. Financial Crimes Enforcement Network.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 3",
    "new_id": 1090
  },
  {
    "id": 82160,
    "question": "Which of the following accurately reflects a necessary condition for an entity to claim renewable energy under the specified framework, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 51: Casinos & Gaming?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The entity must ensure that RECs and GOs are retained, replaced, retired, or cancelled specifically on its behalf.",
      "A": "The entity must ensure that RECs and GOs are transferred to another party for retirement or cancellation.",
      "B": "The entity must rely exclusively on biomass materials certified by any global environmental organization.",
      "D": "The entity can include the renewable portion of the electricity grid mix that falls outside its control or influence.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "6-7",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol51.pdf",
    "source_text": "3.3.2 For renewable PPAs and green power products, the agreement shall explicitly include and convey that RECs and GOs be retained or replaced and retired or cancelled on behalf of the entity for the entity to claim them as renewable energy. 3.3.3 The renewable portion of the electricity grid mix outside the control or influence of the entity is excluded from the scope of renewable energy. 3.4 For the purposes of this disclosure, the scope of renewable energy from biomass sources is limited to: materials certified to a third-party standard (for example, Forest Stewardship Council, Sustainable Forest Initiative, Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification or American Tree Farm System), materials considered eligible sources of supply according to the Green-e Framework for Renewable Energy Certification, Version 1.0 (2017) or Green-e regional standards, or materials eligible for an applicable jurisdictional renewable portfolio standard. 4 The entity shall apply conversion factors consistently for all data reported under this disclosure, such as the use of HHVs for fuel use (including biofuels) and conversion of kilowatt hours (kWh) to GJ (for energy data including electricity from solar or wind energy).IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 5\n\n[Page 7]\n6 © IFRS Foundation Columbus Building 7 Westferry Circus Canary Wharf London E14 4HD, UK Tel +44 (0) 20 7246 6410 Email sustainability_licensing@ifrs.org ifrs.org International Financial Reporting Standards®, IFRS Foundation®, IFRS®, IAS®, IFRIC®, SIC®, IASB®, ISSBTM, IFRS for SMEs®",
    "new_id": 1091
  },
  {
    "id": 82161,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures why the exclusion of water management and food safety in this Standard is considered justified, based on the Casinos & Gaming industry’s operational assumptions, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 51: Casinos & Gaming?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The Standard assumes casinos solely focus on gambling operations, where such issues are not material unless explicitly disclosed elsewhere.",
      "A": "Water management and food safety are universally regulated across all regions, making additional disclosures redundant for the Casinos & Gaming industry.",
      "B": "Casinos and gaming entities typically outsource hotel and restaurant operations, rendering these issues immaterial to their primary business activities.",
      "C": "The intense regulatory oversight already addresses water management and food safety comprehensively, negating the need for separate disclosures.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "4",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol51.pdf",
    "source_text": "Volume 51 —Casinos & Gaming Industry Description Publicly held casinos and gaming entities operate gambling facilities or platforms, including brick-and-mortar casinos, riverboat casinos, online gambling websites and racetracks. The industry is characterised by intense regulatory oversight, which is the main barrier to entry for new operators. Industry regulation varies significantly worldwide. Note: Some entities in the Casinos & Gaming industry are also engaged in activities of the Hotels & Lodging or Restaurants industries. The disclosure topics for such activities are outlined in the Hotels & Lodging (SV-HL) and Restaurants (FB-RN) industries. For the purposes of this Standard, casinos and gaming entities are assumed to be engaged solely in operating gambling facilities and providing online gaming services, and therefore issues such as water management and food safety, which may be material for entities that have significant hotel and restaurant operations, are not covered by this industry. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Energy Management(1) Total energy consumed, (2) percentage grid electricity and (3) percentage renewableQuantitative Gigajoules (GJ), Percentage (%)SV-CA-130a.1 Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Number of tables Quantitative Number SV-CA-000.A Number of slots Quantitative Number SV-CA-000.B Number of active online gaming customers 88Quantitative Number SV-CA-000.C Total area of gaming floorQuantitative Square metres (m²)SV-CA-000.D Energy Management Topic Summary With many facilities open 24 hours a day, the Casinos & Gaming industry requires a large amount of energy to operate. Casino facilities often have few windows and therefore rely on their buildings ’ mechanical systems for heating, ventilation, air-conditioning (HVAC) and lighting. Fossil fuel-based energy production and consumption contribute to significant environmental impacts, including climate change and pollution, and have the 88Note to SV-CA-000.C – The number of active customers shall be considered as the number for which there was at least one financial transaction (bet, deposit, withdraw) with real currency within the reporting period, where real currency is defined by the U.S. Financial Crimes Enforcement Network.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 3",
    "new_id": 1092
  },
  {
    "id": 82285,
    "question": "Which scenario would most directly contradict the entity's obligations under the disclosed material sourcing framework, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 1: Apparel, Accessories & Footwear?",
    "options": {
      "A": "An entity categorizes all synthetic and natural fibers as priority raw materials without assessing their environmental or social risks.",
      "B": "An entity excludes raw materials used in packaging from its priority materials disclosure because they are not directly part of finished goods.",
      "C": "A vertically integrated entity identifies priority raw materials sourced from its owned operations but omits those purchased from third-party suppliers.",
      "D": "An entity discloses climate change impacts as a key environmental factor for one priority raw material but fails to do so for others.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "5",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol1.pdf",
    "source_text": "shortages, supply disruptions, price volatility and reputational risks can be more difficult when supply chains lack transparency. Failure to effectively manage this issue can delay shipments and depress earnings, reduce margins, constrain revenue growth or increase costs of capital. The types of risk associated with sourcing materials can require varying solutions, including engaging with suppliers, enhancing transparency by using certification standards, using innovative alternative materials, or introducing circular economy practices. Entities that are proactive may reduce their exposure to price volatility and potential supply disruptions, while improving their brand reputation and developing new market opportunities. Metrics CG-AA-440a.3. (1) List of priority raw materials; for each priority raw material: (2) environmental or social factor(s) most likely to threaten sourcing, (3) discussion on business risks or opportunities associated with environmental or social factors and (4) management strategy for addressing business risks and opportunities 1 The entity shall disclose its priority raw materials purchased for finished goods. 1.1 The entity shall identify priority raw materials using the definition of ‘priority materials ’ outlined in the Priority Material section of the Textile Exchange ’s Materials Terminology Guide . 1.2 Priority raw materials may include synthetic fibres, natural fibres, manufactured cellulosic materials, materials derived from animals and any other materials used directly to make apparel, accessories or footwear products, which may include cotton, rayon, viscose, polyester, acrylic, spandex, nylon, rubber, foam, leather, wool, cashmere, mohair, flax, silk, hemp and down. 1.3 The entity shall identify priority raw materials using the categorisation scheme presented in the Materials Portfolio section of the Textile Exchange ’s Materials Terminology Guide . 1.4 The scope of disclosure shall include priority raw materials present in finished goods and shall exclude raw materials used in packaging and manufacturing. 1.5 Priority raw materials include materials purchased by the entity or its suppliers for the purposes of producing the entity ’s finished goods. 1.6 If the entity is vertically integrated across the value chain and does not purchase its priority raw materials from a third-party supplier, it shall identify the priority raw materials sourced from its owned operations and used in the production of its finished goods. 2 For each priority raw material, the entity shall identify the important environmental or social factors most likely to threaten its ability to source or purchase each material. 2.1 Environmental factors may include: 2.1.1 Climate change impacts (for example, extreme weather events or water stress)IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 4 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 1093
  },
  {
    "id": 82298,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why entities in the Apparel, Accessories & Footwear industry might prioritize disclosing supplier data beyond Tier 1 despite potential uncertainty in such data, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 1: Apparel, Accessories & Footwear?",
    "options": {
      "B": "To mitigate sustainability risks related to climate change, land use, and resource scarcity affecting their supply chain.",
      "A": "To directly control the manufacturing processes of raw materials like cotton and leather.",
      "C": "To ensure that all suppliers adopt third-party environmental or social standards for raw materials.",
      "D": "To shift responsibility for environmental and social impacts entirely onto Tier 1 suppliers.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "4",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol1.pdf",
    "source_text": "Volume 1 —Apparel, Accessories & Footwear Industry Description The Apparel, Accessories & Footwear industry includes entities involved in the design, manufacturing, wholesaling and retailing of various products, including adult and children ’s clothing, handbags, jewellery, watches and footwear. Products are manufactured primarily by vendors in emerging markets, thereby allowing entities in the industry to focus on design, wholesaling, marketing, supply chain management and retail activities. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Raw Materials Sourcing(1) List of priority raw materials; for each priority raw material: (2) environmental or social factor(s) most likely to threaten sourcing, (3) discussion on business risks or opportunities associated with environmental or social factors and (4) management strategy for addressing business risks and opportunitiesDiscussion and Analysisn/a CG-AA-440a.3 (1) Amount of priority raw materials purchased, by material, and (2) amount of each priority raw material that is certified to a third-party environmental or social standard, by standardQuantitative Metric tons (t) CG-AA-440a.4 Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Number of (1) Tier 1 suppliers and (2) suppliers beyond Tier 1 1Quantitative Number CG-AA-000.A Raw Materials Sourcing Topic Summary The Apparel, Accessories & Footwear industry relies on many raw materials including cotton, leather, wool, rubber, and precious minerals and metals, as inputs for finished products. Sustainability impacts related to climate change, land use, resource scarcity and conflict in regions where the industry ’s supply chain operates affect the industry ’s ability to reliably source materials. The ability of entities to manage potential material 1Note to CG-AA-000.A – Tier 1 suppliers are defined as suppliers that transact directly with the entity, such as finished goods manufacturers (for example cut and sew facilities). Suppliers beyond Tier 1 are the key suppliers to the entity ’s Tier 1 suppliers and can include manufacturers, processing plants, and providers of raw materials extraction (for example mills, dye houses and washing facilities, sundry manufacturers, tanneries, embroiderers, screen printers, farms, and/or slaughter houses). The entity shall disclose whether any supplier data beyond Tier 1 is based on assumptions, estimates, or otherwise includes any uncertainty.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 3",
    "new_id": 1094
  },
  {
    "id": 82299,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between raw materials sourcing strategies and sustainability disclosures in the Apparel, Accessories & Footwear industry, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 1: Apparel, Accessories & Footwear?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Disclosures include both a qualitative discussion of risks and quantitative data on certified raw materials, reflecting a comprehensive approach to sustainability.",
      "A": "Entities must disclose the total financial value of all priority raw materials purchased to align with sustainability metrics.",
      "B": "The management strategy for addressing risks related to raw materials sourcing is only required for Tier 1 suppliers.",
      "D": "Certification standards for raw materials are optional and not explicitly mentioned as part of the disclosure requirements.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "3-4",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol1.pdf",
    "source_text": "Introduction This volume is part of the Industry-based Guidance on Implementing IFRS S2 Climate-related Disclosures . This guidance suggests possible ways to apply some of the disclosure requirements in IFRS S2 but does not create additional requirements. This volume suggests possible ways to identify, measure and disclose information about climate-related risks and opportunities that are associated with particular business models, economic activities and other common features that characterise participation in this industry. This industry-based guidance has been derived from Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) Standards, which are maintained by the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB). The metric codes used in SASB Standards have been included for ease of reference. For additional context regarding the industry-based guidance contained in this volume, including structure and terminology, application and illustrative examples, refer to Section III of the Accompanying Guidance to IFRS S2.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 2 © IFRS Foundation\n\n[Page 4]\nVolume 1 —Apparel, Accessories & Footwear Industry Description The Apparel, Accessories & Footwear industry includes entities involved in the design, manufacturing, wholesaling and retailing of various products, including adult and children ’s clothing, handbags, jewellery, watches and footwear. Products are manufactured primarily by vendors in emerging markets, thereby allowing entities in the industry to focus on design, wholesaling, marketing, supply chain management and retail activities. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Raw Materials Sourcing(1) List of priority raw materials; for each priority raw material: (2) environmental or social factor(s) most likely to threaten sourcing, (3) discussion on business risks or opportunities associated with environmental or social factors and (4) management strategy for addressing business risks and opportunitiesDiscussion and Analysisn/a CG-AA-440a.3 (1) Amount of priority raw materials purchased, by material, and (2) amount of each priority raw material that is certified to a third-party environmental or social standard, by standardQuantitative Metric tons (t) CG-AA-440a.4 Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Number of (1) Tier 1 suppliers and (2) suppliers beyond Tier 1 1Quantitative Number CG-AA-000.A Raw Materials Sourcing Topic Summary The Apparel, Accessories & Footwear industry relies on many raw materials including cotton, leather, wool, rubber, and precious minerals and metals, as inputs for finished products. Sustainability impacts related to climate change, land use, resource scarcity and conflict in regions where the industry ’s supply chain operates affect the industry ’s ability to reliably source materials. The ability of entities to manage potential material 1Note to CG-AA-000.A – Tier 1 suppliers are defined as suppliers that transact directly with the entity, such as finished goods manufacturers (for example cut and sew facilities). Suppliers beyond Tier 1 are the key suppliers to the entity ’s Tier 1 suppliers and can include manufacturers, processing plants, and providers of raw materials extraction (for example mills, dye houses and washing facilities, sundry manufacturers, tanneries, embroiderers, screen printers, farms, and/or slaughter houses). The entity shall disclose whether any supplier data beyond Tier 1 is based on assumptions, estimates, or otherwise includes any uncertainty.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 3",
    "new_id": 1095
  },
  {
    "id": 82300,
    "question": "Which of the following statements accurately captures a necessary condition for an entity to exclude certain raw materials from its disclosure requirements under the guidance provided in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 1: Apparel, Accessories & Footwear?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The raw materials must be used exclusively in the production of packaging and manufacturing components, as these are not considered part of finished goods.",
      "A": "The raw materials must be sourced entirely from suppliers outside the entity’s vertically integrated operations, as internal sourcing is always disclosed.",
      "B": "The raw materials must be identified as non-priority based on the categorization scheme in the Textile Exchange’s Materials Terminology Guide, regardless of their role in finished goods.",
      "C": "The raw materials must be proven to have no environmental or social factors threatening their sourcing, as risks nullify exclusion criteria.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "5",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol1.pdf",
    "source_text": "shortages, supply disruptions, price volatility and reputational risks can be more difficult when supply chains lack transparency. Failure to effectively manage this issue can delay shipments and depress earnings, reduce margins, constrain revenue growth or increase costs of capital. The types of risk associated with sourcing materials can require varying solutions, including engaging with suppliers, enhancing transparency by using certification standards, using innovative alternative materials, or introducing circular economy practices. Entities that are proactive may reduce their exposure to price volatility and potential supply disruptions, while improving their brand reputation and developing new market opportunities. Metrics CG-AA-440a.3. (1) List of priority raw materials; for each priority raw material: (2) environmental or social factor(s) most likely to threaten sourcing, (3) discussion on business risks or opportunities associated with environmental or social factors and (4) management strategy for addressing business risks and opportunities 1 The entity shall disclose its priority raw materials purchased for finished goods. 1.1 The entity shall identify priority raw materials using the definition of ‘priority materials ’ outlined in the Priority Material section of the Textile Exchange ’s Materials Terminology Guide . 1.2 Priority raw materials may include synthetic fibres, natural fibres, manufactured cellulosic materials, materials derived from animals and any other materials used directly to make apparel, accessories or footwear products, which may include cotton, rayon, viscose, polyester, acrylic, spandex, nylon, rubber, foam, leather, wool, cashmere, mohair, flax, silk, hemp and down. 1.3 The entity shall identify priority raw materials using the categorisation scheme presented in the Materials Portfolio section of the Textile Exchange ’s Materials Terminology Guide . 1.4 The scope of disclosure shall include priority raw materials present in finished goods and shall exclude raw materials used in packaging and manufacturing. 1.5 Priority raw materials include materials purchased by the entity or its suppliers for the purposes of producing the entity ’s finished goods. 1.6 If the entity is vertically integrated across the value chain and does not purchase its priority raw materials from a third-party supplier, it shall identify the priority raw materials sourced from its owned operations and used in the production of its finished goods. 2 For each priority raw material, the entity shall identify the important environmental or social factors most likely to threaten its ability to source or purchase each material. 2.1 Environmental factors may include: 2.1.1 Climate change impacts (for example, extreme weather events or water stress)IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 4 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 1096
  },
  {
    "id": 82318,
    "question": "Which scenario would require the entity to disclose the floor area under management that obtained an energy rating during the reporting period, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 37: Real Estate Services?",
    "options": {
      "A": "A building in the European Union with a valid EU Energy Performance Certificate issued six months before the start of the reporting period.",
      "B": "A building located in the United States with an expired ENERGY STAR® rating awarded three years prior to the reporting period.",
      "C": "A newly constructed building in Australia receiving a provisional NABERS Energy rating during the reporting period.",
      "D": "A building in New Zealand undergoing government-mandated energy efficiency benchmarking without an official rating outcome yet.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "7-8",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol37.pdf",
    "source_text": "1.1.1 Operational control is defined, consistent with the 2018 GRESB® Real Estate Assessment Reference Guide, as an instance when the real estate owner can introduce and implement operating policies, health and safety policies, or environmental policies. 1.2 Energy and sustainability services are defined as services provided to clients directly related to resource efficiency (including energy, water and waste), utility data management, energy procurement, obtaining and retaining sustainability and resource-related certifications, environmental reporting, and corporate sustainability consulting and training. 1.3 The scope of energy and sustainability services excludes services that impart improved energy and sustainability performance in an ancillary, indirect or minimal way, as well as environmental services that are part of the ordinary operation and maintenance of buildings (for example, facilities maintenance or janitorial services). 2 The entity shall disclose (2) the number of buildings for which it provided energy and sustainability-related services during the reporting period. 2.1‘Buildings under management ’ is defined as distinct buildings or real estate assets where property management services are provided and where the real estate owner has operational control. 3 The scope of disclosure includes the total floor area and all buildings that were provided with energy and sustainability services during the reporting period, regardless of the date of inception of such services. IF-RS-410a.3. (1) Floor area and (2) number of buildings under management that obtained an energy rating 1 The entity shall disclose (1) the floor area under management that obtained an energy rating during the reporting period. 1.1 Floor area under management is defined as the gross rentable floor area where property management services are provided and for which the real estate owner has operational control. 1.1.1 Operational control is defined consistent with the 2018 GRESB® Real Estate Assessment Reference Guide as an instance in which the real estate owner can introduce and implement operating policies, health and safety policies, or environmental policies. 2 The entity shall disclose (2) the number of buildings that obtained an energy rating during the reporting period, where: 2.1 The number of buildings under management is defined as distinct buildings or real estate assets where property management services are provided and where the real estate owner has operational control. 2.2 An energy rating is defined, consistent with the 2018 GRESB® Real Estate Assessment Reference Guide, as a scheme that measures the energy performance of buildings. 2.3 The scope of energy rating schemes includes:IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 6 © IFRS Foundation\n\n[Page 8]\n2.3.1 ENERGY STAR® for operations in the United States and Canada 2.3.2 EU Energy Performance Certificates (EPC) for operations in the European Union 2.3.3 National Australian Build Environment Rating System (NABERS) Energy for operations in Australia 2.3.4 NABERSNZ for operations in New Zealand 2.3.5 Government energy efficiency benchmarking 2.3.6 Other energy rating schemes that can be demonstrated to have substantially equivalent criteria, methodology, and presentation of results to those schemes above 3 The scope of disclosure is aligned with the 2018 GRESB® Real Estate Assessment Reference Guide in that it ‘only include[s] energy ratings that were awarded before or during the reporting period (pre-assessments or other unofficial forms of pre- certification are not valid). Some energy ratings are valid for a limited period; only the rating should be effective and official during the reporting period. ’ 4 The entity shall consider the GRESB® Real Estate Assessment Reference Guide as a normative reference; thus, any updates made year-on-year shall be considered updates to this guidance.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 7",
    "new_id": 1097
  },
  {
    "id": 82320,
    "question": "Which of the following represents the most accurate implication regarding the validity period and official status of energy ratings as discussed in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 37: Real Estate Services?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Only energy ratings that were officially awarded and remain effective during the reporting period are considered valid, excluding pre-assessments or unofficial certifications.",
      "A": "Energy ratings awarded during the reporting period remain valid indefinitely unless explicitly revoked by the issuing authority.",
      "C": "Pre-assessments or unofficial forms of pre-certification are considered valid if they align with GRESB® updates made year-on-year.",
      "D": "Entities may use energy ratings from previous reporting periods as long as those ratings were based on equivalent criteria to ENERGY STAR® or NABERS schemes.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "8-9",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol37.pdf",
    "source_text": "2.3.1 ENERGY STAR® for operations in the United States and Canada 2.3.2 EU Energy Performance Certificates (EPC) for operations in the European Union 2.3.3 National Australian Build Environment Rating System (NABERS) Energy for operations in Australia 2.3.4 NABERSNZ for operations in New Zealand 2.3.5 Government energy efficiency benchmarking 2.3.6 Other energy rating schemes that can be demonstrated to have substantially equivalent criteria, methodology, and presentation of results to those schemes above 3 The scope of disclosure is aligned with the 2018 GRESB® Real Estate Assessment Reference Guide in that it ‘only include[s] energy ratings that were awarded before or during the reporting period (pre-assessments or other unofficial forms of pre- certification are not valid). Some energy ratings are valid for a limited period; only the rating should be effective and official during the reporting period. ’ 4 The entity shall consider the GRESB® Real Estate Assessment Reference Guide as a normative reference; thus, any updates made year-on-year shall be considered updates to this guidance.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 7\n\n[Page 9]\n8 © IFRS Foundation Columbus Building 7 Westferry Circus Canary Wharf London E14 4HD, UK Tel +44 (0) 20 7246 6410 Email sustainability_licensing@ifrs.org ifrs.org International Financial Reporting Standards®, IFRS Foundation®, IFRS®, IAS®, IFRIC®, SIC®, IASB®, ISSBTM, IFRS for SMEs®",
    "new_id": 1098
  },
  {
    "id": 82380,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between advisory activities and other financial services, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 18: Investment Banking & Brokerage?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Advisory activities are limited to providing financial advice to institutional clients without engaging in underwriting or securitisation.",
      "A": "Advisory activities encompass wealth management and asset management for institutional clients on a fee basis.",
      "B": "Advisory activities exclude wealth management and asset management but include underwriting derivative transactions for institutional clients.",
      "D": "Advisory activities involve creating financial instruments by combining assets and marketing them to investors.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "6",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol18.pdf",
    "source_text": "1.1 Integration of ESG factors is defined as the systematic and explicit inclusion of material ESG factors into underwriting, advisory and securitisation activities and may include review of transactions by the entity’s Environmental and Social Risk Management (ESRM) group or screening (exclusionary, inclusionary or benchmarked). 1.1.1 The entity shall describe how ESG factors are integrated in the aforementioned activities. 2 The entity shall disaggregate the revenue from transactions by important business activities including (a) underwriting, (b) advisory and (c) securitisation. 2.1 Underwriting is defined as activities in which the entity raises investment capital from investors on behalf of corporations and governments that are issuing either equity or debt securities. It includes public offerings and private placements, including local and cross-border transactions and acquisition financing of a wide range of securities and other financial instruments, including loans. Underwriting also includes derivative transactions entered into with public and private sector clients in connection with the entity ’s underwriting activities. 2.2 Advisory is defined as activities in which the entity provides financial advice to institutional clients on a fee basis. It excludes wealth management and asset management activities. 2.3 Securitisation is defined as the process through which the entity creates a financial instrument by combining other financial assets and then marketing different tiers of the repackaged instruments to investors. It may include securitisation of residential and commercial mortgages, corporate bonds, loans and other types of financial assets by selling these assets to securitisation vehicles (for example, trusts, corporate entities and limited liability entities) or through a re-securitisation. 3 The entity shall disaggregate the revenue from transactions by industry. 3.1 The entity shall use the Global Industry Classification Standard (GICS) six- digit industry-level code for classifying transactions. 3.1.1 The entity shall use the latest version of the classification system available at the date of reporting. 3.1.2 The entity shall disclose the classification standard used if different from GICS. 4 The entity shall provide disclosure for at least the 10 largest industries by monetary amount of exposure or to industries representing at least 2% of the overall monetary amount of exposure. FN-IB-410a.2. (1) Number and (2) total value of investments and loans incorporating integration of environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors, by industry 1 The entity shall report the number of proprietary investments and loans incorporating integration of environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 5",
    "new_id": 1099
  },
  {
    "id": 82393,
    "question": "Which of the following best represents a scenario where an investment bank's failure to incorporate ESG factors could lead to both reputational and financial risks, based on the implications of the provided information in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 18: Investment Banking & Brokerage?",
    "options": {
      "D": "An investment bank underwrites transactions for entities with undisclosed social risks, resulting in public backlash and subsequent withdrawal of investor confidence.",
      "A": "An investment bank increases its proprietary investments in sectors with low environmental impact without assessing governance risks, leading to unexpected regulatory penalties.",
      "B": "An investment bank adopts Global Industry Classification Standard (GICS) for all its loans, inadvertently exposing itself to higher currency volatility.",
      "C": "An investment bank focuses exclusively on advisory services for renewable energy projects, neglecting other sectors and missing broader market opportunities.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "5",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol18.pdf",
    "source_text": "Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE (1) Number and (2) value of (a) underwriting, (b) advisory, and (c) securitisation transactions 22Quantitative Number, Presentation currencyFN-IB-000.A (1) Number and (2) value of proprietary investments and loans by sector 23Quantitative Number, Presentation currencyFN-IB-000.B (1) Number and (2) value of market making transactions in (a) fixed income, (b) equity, (c) currency, (d) derivatives, and (e) commodity productsQuantitative Number, Presentation currencyFN-IB-000.C Incorporation of Environmental, Social, and Governance Factors in Investment Banking & Brokerage Activities Topic Summary Environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors may have material impacts on the entities assets and projects across a range of industries to which investment banks provide services or in which they invest. Therefore, by accounting for these factors in underwriting, advisory, investing and lending activities, investment banks may manage significant positive and negative environmental and social externalities effectively. The potential for both value creation and loss associated with ESG factors suggests that investment banking and brokerage entities have a responsibility to shareholders and clients to consider these factors when analysing and valuing core products, including sell- side research, advisory services, origination, underwriting and principal transactions. Investment banking and brokerage entities that fail to manage these risks and opportunities effectively may expose themselves to increased reputational and financial risks. Appropriately pricing ESG risks may reduce investment banks ’ financial risk exposure, help generate additional revenue or open new market opportunities. To help investors better understand how entities in the industry manage these issues, investment banks should disclose how they incorporate ESG factors in their core products and services. Metrics FN-IB-410a.1. Revenue from (1) underwriting, (2) advisory and (3) securitisation transactions incorporating integration of environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors, by industry 1 The entity shall report the total revenue earned from transactions in which the entity incorporates integration of environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors. 22Note to FN-IB-000.A – For syndicate transactions, the entity shall include only the value for which it was accountable. 23Note to FN-IB-000.B – The entity shall use the Global Industry Classification Standard (GICS) for classifying investees and borrowers.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 4 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 1100
  },
  {
    "id": 82406,
    "question": "Which of the following accurately reflects a necessary condition for including vehicles in the fleet fuel economy disclosure under TR-CR-410a.1, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 64: Car Rental & Leasing?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Vehicles are only included if they are subject to national standards for fuel consumption or emissions, regardless of geographic region.",
      "B": "Vehicles must be part of car-sharing fleets to ensure accurate weighting by rental days.",
      "C": "All vehicles offered for rent during the reporting period, including those undergoing maintenance or recall, must be included.",
      "D": "Only passenger cars and light commercial vehicles operating within regions with Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards qualify.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "5-6",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol64.pdf",
    "source_text": "urban settings, car sharing is an attractive alternative to vehicle ownership that reduces congestion and the environmental impacts associated with private ownership of vehicles. By maximising fleet utilisation rates through car-sharing, entities may improve operational efficiency. Metrics TR-CR-410a.1. Rental day-weighted average rental fleet fuel economy, by region 1 The entity shall disclose the average fuel economy of its passenger vehicle rental fleet, weighted for the rental days of each vehicle model during the reporting period, by geographic region. 1.1 The average fuel economy shall be calculated as the rental day-weighted harmonic mean of vehicle fuel efficiency. 1.1.1 The harmonic mean is calculated as the reciprocal of the average of the reciprocals. 1.1.2 Rental day weighting is performed by incorporating into calculations a factor for the fraction of total rental days for which each vehicle model accounted. 2 The entity shall disclose the average fuel economy of its passenger vehicle rental fleet by geographic region. 2.1 Geographic regions are defined as the regions for which the entity conducts segment financial reporting and which are subject to fleet fuel economy, fuel consumption or emissions standards. 3 Disclosure may be provided in different units for each geographic region which may include: 3.1 Grams of CO 2 per kilometre (gCO 2/km) for (1) passenger cars and (2) light commercial vehicles in the European Union 3.2 Litres of petrol per kilometre (L/km) for passenger vehicles in Japan 3.3 Miles per gallon (mpg) for (1) domestic passenger cars, (2) imported passenger cars and (3) light trucks in the US that are subject to Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards, where these vehicle categories are defined in US 49 CFR Part 523 3.4 Kilometres per litre (km/L) for passenger vehicles in New Zealand 4 The scope of disclosure shall include all vehicles subject to national passenger vehicle standards for fleet fuel economy, fuel consumption or emissions. 5 The entity may disclose fleet fuel economy for other vehicle segments such as: 5.1 Cargo vehicles in Japan 5.2 Heavy-duty vehicles in the US 5.3 Light commercial vehicles in the EUIFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 4 © IFRS Foundation\n\n[Page 6]\nTR-CR-410a.2. Fleet utilisation rate 1 The entity shall disclose its fleet utilisation rate. 1.1 The rate shall be calculated as the total number of rental days divided by the total number of available rental days. 1.1.1 Rental days are defined as the number of 24-hour periods —or portions thereof —that vehicles were rented. 1.1.2 Available rental days are defined as the number of 24-hour periods —or portions thereof —that the entity offered vehicles for rental during the reporting period. This figure shall exclude the time when vehicles were undergoing inspection, cleaning or maintenance, and any time when they were subject to recall. 2 The scope of disclosure includes vehicles at all the entity ’s rental locations, including airport locations, off-airport locations and vehicles in the entity ’s car- sharing fleet.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 5",
    "new_id": 1101
  },
  {
    "id": 82407,
    "question": "Which of the following best reflects an accurate implication regarding the calculation and reporting of fleet fuel economy under the given framework, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 64: Car Rental & Leasing?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Geographic regions for disclosure are determined by the entity’s financial reporting segments and regulatory requirements for fuel economy, consumption, or emissions.",
      "A": "Entities must exclude vehicles undergoing maintenance or recall from the calculation of rental day-weighted average fuel economy.",
      "C": "The use of different units for fuel economy across regions is prohibited unless explicitly aligned with Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards.",
      "D": "Harmonic mean calculations ensure that all vehicle models contribute equally to the reported average fuel economy regardless of their rental frequency.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "5-6",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol64.pdf",
    "source_text": "urban settings, car sharing is an attractive alternative to vehicle ownership that reduces congestion and the environmental impacts associated with private ownership of vehicles. By maximising fleet utilisation rates through car-sharing, entities may improve operational efficiency. Metrics TR-CR-410a.1. Rental day-weighted average rental fleet fuel economy, by region 1 The entity shall disclose the average fuel economy of its passenger vehicle rental fleet, weighted for the rental days of each vehicle model during the reporting period, by geographic region. 1.1 The average fuel economy shall be calculated as the rental day-weighted harmonic mean of vehicle fuel efficiency. 1.1.1 The harmonic mean is calculated as the reciprocal of the average of the reciprocals. 1.1.2 Rental day weighting is performed by incorporating into calculations a factor for the fraction of total rental days for which each vehicle model accounted. 2 The entity shall disclose the average fuel economy of its passenger vehicle rental fleet by geographic region. 2.1 Geographic regions are defined as the regions for which the entity conducts segment financial reporting and which are subject to fleet fuel economy, fuel consumption or emissions standards. 3 Disclosure may be provided in different units for each geographic region which may include: 3.1 Grams of CO 2 per kilometre (gCO 2/km) for (1) passenger cars and (2) light commercial vehicles in the European Union 3.2 Litres of petrol per kilometre (L/km) for passenger vehicles in Japan 3.3 Miles per gallon (mpg) for (1) domestic passenger cars, (2) imported passenger cars and (3) light trucks in the US that are subject to Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards, where these vehicle categories are defined in US 49 CFR Part 523 3.4 Kilometres per litre (km/L) for passenger vehicles in New Zealand 4 The scope of disclosure shall include all vehicles subject to national passenger vehicle standards for fleet fuel economy, fuel consumption or emissions. 5 The entity may disclose fleet fuel economy for other vehicle segments such as: 5.1 Cargo vehicles in Japan 5.2 Heavy-duty vehicles in the US 5.3 Light commercial vehicles in the EUIFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 4 © IFRS Foundation\n\n[Page 6]\nTR-CR-410a.2. Fleet utilisation rate 1 The entity shall disclose its fleet utilisation rate. 1.1 The rate shall be calculated as the total number of rental days divided by the total number of available rental days. 1.1.1 Rental days are defined as the number of 24-hour periods —or portions thereof —that vehicles were rented. 1.1.2 Available rental days are defined as the number of 24-hour periods —or portions thereof —that the entity offered vehicles for rental during the reporting period. This figure shall exclude the time when vehicles were undergoing inspection, cleaning or maintenance, and any time when they were subject to recall. 2 The scope of disclosure includes vehicles at all the entity ’s rental locations, including airport locations, off-airport locations and vehicles in the entity ’s car- sharing fleet.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 5",
    "new_id": 1102
  },
  {
    "id": 82409,
    "question": "When calculating the sales-weighted fuel efficiency for non-road equipment, which condition must be satisfied to use model-rated fuel efficiency values, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 50: Industrial Machinery & Goods?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Model-rated fuel efficiency values must be available for each piece of equipment.",
      "A": "The equipment must operate under normal and reasonable conditions during the reporting period.",
      "B": "The entity must lack regulatory guidance on calculating operational efficiency.",
      "D": "The calculation must prioritize load factor, speed, and environmental conditions.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "7",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol50.pdf",
    "source_text": "1.2 The scope of disclosure includes combination tractors (commonly known as semi-trucks or lorries), heavy-duty pickup trucks and vans, and vocational vehicles. 1.3 The scope of disclosure includes vehicles in the fleet that weigh a minimum of 3.5 metric tons or 8,500 pounds. 1.4 If fleet averages are calculated by model year for regulatory purposes, the entity shall use these performance data. 1.5 In the absence of regulatory guidance on calculating a fleet average, the entity shall calculate performance based on the fuel economy of vehicles sold during the reporting period, weighted by sales volume. 2 The entity shall disclose the sales-weighted fuel efficiency requirement for its medium- and heavy-duty vehicles pursuant to the entity ’s applicable jurisdictional heavy-duty vehicle fuel emissions standards or regulations. 3 If the entity operates in more than one jurisdiction, the entity shall disclose the standard or regulation used to determine if a fuel is renewable. RT -IG-410a.2. Sales-weighted fuel efficiency for non-road equipment 1 The entity shall disclose its sales-weighted average fuel efficiency for its non-road equipment and vehicles. 1.1 Fuel efficiency is defined as the average fuel economy of its non-road equipment, weighted by the number of each unit sold during the reporting period and measured in litres of fuel consumed per hour of operation (litres per hour). 1.1.1 In calculating litres per hour, the entity shall use the model-rated fuel efficiency value for each piece of equipment if available. 1.1.2 If model-rated fuel efficiency values are not available, the entity shall calculate the litres operational efficiency for the equipment, assuming normal, reasonable operating conditions (for example, for load factor, speed and environmental conditions). 1.2 Non-road equipment may include excavators and other construction equipment, farm tractors and other agricultural equipment, heavy forklifts, airport ground service equipment, and utility equipment such as generators, pumps and compressors. RT -IG-410a.3. Sales-weighted fuel efficiency for stationary generators 1 The entity shall disclose the sales-weighted average fuel efficiency of its stationary generators. 1.1 Sales-weighted fuel efficiency is the average fuel efficiency of stationary generators sold during the reporting period, measured in kilojoules per litre. 2 Sales-weighted fuel efficiency is calculated as the harmonic mean of design fuel efficiency in kilojoules per litre, in which:IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 6 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 1103
  },
  {
    "id": 82413,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between emissions standards compliance and the entity's disclosure obligations regarding non-compliant products, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 50: Industrial Machinery & Goods?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The entity may choose to disclose if any products do not meet current emissions standards, but such disclosure is not mandatory.",
      "A": "The entity is required to disclose all products that fail to meet current emissions standards as defined by jurisdictional laws or regulations.",
      "B": "The entity must redesign any non-compliant products before the next reporting period and document this process in its disclosures.",
      "C": "The entity is obligated to prioritize research and development efforts exclusively towards products that currently fail emissions standards.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "8-9",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol50.pdf",
    "source_text": "2.1 The harmonic mean captures the average amount of fuel needed by each generator to produce a given amount of power. 2.2 The harmonic mean is the reciprocal of the average of the reciprocal values. RT -IG-410a.4. Sales-weighted emissions of (1) nitrogen oxides (NO x) and (2) particulate matter (PM) for: (a) marine diesel engines, (b) locomotive diesel engines, (c) on-road medium- and heavy-duty engines and (d) other non-road diesel engines 1 The entity shall disclose the sales-weighted average emissions of (1) nitrogen oxides (NO x) and (2) particulate matter (PM) for each of these product categories: (a) marine diesel engines, (b) locomotive diesel engines, (c) on-road medium- and heavy-duty engines and (d) other non-road diesel engines. 1.1 Emissions are calculated as the average emissions of (1) NO x and (2) PM for engines, weighted by the number of each sold during the reporting period and measured in grammes per kilojoule. 1.2 Marine diesel engines, locomotive diesel engines, on-road medium- and heavy-duty engines, and other non-road diesel engines shall be defined based on applicable jurisdictional laws or regulations. 1.2.1 Other non-road diesel engines may include: excavators and other construction equipment, farm tractors and other agricultural equipment, heavy forklifts, airport ground service equipment, and utility equipment such as generators, pumps and compressors. 1.3 The entity shall state the calculation method used to calculate emissions. 1.4 The entity may disclose if any products do not meet current emissions standards established in applicable jurisdictional laws or regulations. 2 The entity may discuss its progress towards, and readiness for, future jurisdictional emissions standards that could affect its products. Note to RT-IG-410a.4 1 The entity shall discuss how it manages fleet fuel economy and emissions risks and opportunities. 2 Relevant aspects of the approach and strategy to discuss include improvements to existing products and technologies, the introduction of new technologies, research and development efforts into advanced technologies, and partnerships with peers, academic institutions or customers (including governmental customers).IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 7\n\n[Page 9]\n8 © IFRS Foundation Columbus Building 7 Westferry Circus Canary Wharf London E14 4HD, UK Tel +44 (0) 20 7246 6410 Email sustainability_licensing@ifrs.org ifrs.org International Financial Reporting Standards®, IFRS Foundation®, IFRS®, IAS®, IFRIC®, SIC®, IASB®, ISSBTM, IFRS for SMEs®",
    "new_id": 1104
  },
  {
    "id": 82414,
    "question": "Which statement accurately captures the relationship between sustainability metrics and the management of fleet fuel economy and emissions risks in the industrial machinery and goods industry, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 50: Industrial Machinery & Goods?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Entities must disclose sales-weighted emissions data and provide a discussion on how they manage risks and opportunities related to fleet fuel economy and emissions.",
      "B": "Entities are required to report the total energy consumed but are not obligated to discuss strategies for managing fuel economy and emissions risks.",
      "C": "The disclosure of sales-weighted emissions is optional, while discussing fleet fuel economy and emissions risks is mandatory for all product categories.",
      "D": "Fuel efficiency metrics are considered sufficient on their own to address emissions risks without additional narrative disclosures.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "4",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol50.pdf",
    "source_text": "Volume 50 —Industrial Machinery & Goods Industry Description Industrial machinery and goods industry entities manufacture equipment for a variety of industries including construction, agriculture, energy, utility, mining, manufacturing, automotive and transportation. Products include engines, earth-moving equipment, trucks, tractors, ships, industrial pumps, locomotives and turbines. Machinery manufacturers use large amounts of raw materials for production, including steel, plastics, rubber, paints and glass. Manufacturers also may machine and cast parts before final assembly. Demand in the industry is tied closely to industrial production, while government emissions standards and customer demand are encouraging innovations to improve energy efficiency and limit air emissions during product use. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Energy Management(1) Total energy consumed, (2) percentage grid electricity and (3) percentage renewableQuantitative Gigajoules (GJ), Percentage (%)RT -IG-130a.1 Fuel Economy & Emissions in Use-phaseSales-weighted fleet fuel efficiency for medium- and heavy-duty vehiclesQuantitative Litres per 100 tonne- kilometresRT -IG-410a.1 Sales-weighted fuel efficiency for non- road equipmentQuantitative Litres per hour RT -IG-410a.2 Sales-weighted fuel efficiency for stationary generatorsQuantitative Kilojoules per litreRT -IG-410a.3 Sales-weighted emissions of (1) nitrogen oxides (NO x) and (2) particulate matter (PM) for: (a) marine diesel engines, (b) locomotive diesel engines, (c) on-road medium- and heavy-duty engines and (d) other non-road diesel engines 86Quantitative Grammes per kilojouleRT -IG-410a.4 Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Number of units produced by product category 87Quantitative Number RT -IG-000.A Number of employees Quantitative Number RT -IG-000.B 86Note to RT-IG-410a.4 – The entity shall discuss how it manages fleet fuel economy and emissions risks and opportunities. 87Note to RT-IG-000.A – At a minimum, the entity should indicate the number of units produced for the following product categories: (1) vehicles and agricultural and construction equipment, (2) engines and power generation equipment, and (3) parts and components.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 3",
    "new_id": 1105
  },
  {
    "id": 82445,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between the calculation of the average Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI) and its underlying components, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 65: Cruise Lines?",
    "options": {
      "B": "New ships are included in the average EEDI calculation only if they were built after 2013 and have an EEDI metric adopted by the IMO, with the average being a simple mean of individual EEDI values.",
      "A": "The EEDI value for each new ship is calculated based on a weighted average of power installed, specific fuel consumption, and carbon conversion, adjusted by the vessel’s maximum speed.",
      "C": "The average EEDI must be calculated using conversion factors such as higher heating values (HHVs) for biofuels, ensuring consistency across all energy data reported.",
      "D": "The entity is required to adopt Green-e regional standards or jurisdictional renewable portfolio standards when calculating the EEDI to ensure compliance with renewable energy benchmarks.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "9-10",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol65.pdf",
    "source_text": "the Green-e Framework for Renewable Energy Certification, Version 1.0 (2017) or Green-e regional standards, or materials that are eligible for an applicable jurisdictional renewable portfolio standard. 5 The entity shall apply conversion factors consistently for all data reported under this disclosure, such as the use of HHVs for fuel use (including biofuels) and conversion of kilowatt hours (kWh) to GJ (for energy data including electricity from solar or wind energy). TR-CL-110a.4. Average Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI) for new ships 1 The entity shall disclose the average Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI) for new ships in grammes of carbon dioxide per ton-nautical mile. 1.1 An EEDI value is the product of power installed, specific fuel consumption and carbon conversion, divided by the product of available capacity and vessel speed at design load 1.2 The entity shall calculate the average EEDI as a simple average of the EEDI value of all new ships added to the entity ’s fleet during the reporting period. 1.2.1 New ships are limited to those built after 2013 and for which the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) has adopted EEDI as a metric. 1.3 The entity shall follow calculation methodologies outlined in IMO MEPC 66/21/Add.1, Annex 5, 2014 Guidelines on the Method of Calculation of the Attained Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI) For New Ships .IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 8 © IFRS Foundation\n\n[Page 10]\n© IFRS Foundation 9 Columbus Building 7 Westferry Circus Canary Wharf London E14 4HD, UK Tel +44 (0) 20 7246 6410 Email sustainability_licensing@ifrs.org ifrs.org International Financial Reporting Standards®, IFRS Foundation®, IFRS®, IAS®, IFRIC®, SIC®, IASB®, ISSBTM, IFRS for SMEs®",
    "new_id": 1106
  },
  {
    "id": 82454,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between the calculation of the average Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI) and its underlying components, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 65: Cruise Lines?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Available lower berth kilometres (ALB-KM) serve as a proxy for both fleet capacity utilization and environmental impact per unit distance traveled.",
      "A": "The Average Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI) is primarily used to measure historical emissions performance, making it a retrospective indicator.",
      "B": "The inclusion of onshore power supply (OPS) percentage in TR-CL-110a.3 ensures direct accountability for operational emissions during port calls.",
      "D": "Cruise passengers and shipboard employees are tracked separately to isolate workforce-related sustainability risks from passenger-related ones.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "3-4",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol65.pdf",
    "source_text": "Introduction This volume is part of the Industry-based Guidance on Implementing IFRS S2 Climate-related Disclosures . This guidance suggests possible ways to apply some of the disclosure requirements in IFRS S2 but does not create additional requirements. This volume suggests possible ways to identify, measure and disclose information about climate-related risks and opportunities that are associated with particular business models, economic activities and other common features that characterise participation in this industry. This industry-based guidance has been derived from Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) Standards, which are maintained by the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB). The metric codes used in SASB Standards have been included for ease of reference. For additional context regarding the industry-based guidance contained in this volume, including structure and terminology, application and illustrative examples, refer to Section III of the Accompanying Guidance to IFRS S2.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 2 © IFRS Foundation\n\n[Page 4]\nVolume 65 —Cruise Lines Industry Description Cruise Lines industry entities provide passenger transportation and leisure entertainment, including deep sea cruises and river cruises. A few large entities dominate the industry. Cruises provide a luxury resort experience for thousands of passengers at a time. The Cruise Lines industry often has been the fastest-growing segment of the travel industry, but it is very cyclical. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Greenhouse Gas EmissionsGross global Scope 1 emissions Quantitative Metric tons (t) CO₂-eTR-CL-110a.1 Discussion of long- and short-term strategy or plan to manage Scope 1 emissions, emissions reduction targets, and an analysis of performance against those targetsDiscussion and Analysisn/a TR-CL-110a.2 (1) Total energy consumed, (2) percentage heavy fuel oil, (3) percentage onshore power supply (OPS) and (4) percentage renewableQuantitative Gigajoules (GJ), Percentage (%)TR-CL-110a.3 Average Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI) for new shipsQuantitative Grammes of CO₂ per ton- nautical mileTR-CL-110a.4 Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Available lower berth kilometres (ALB-KM) 117Quantitative ALB-KM TR-CL-000.A Average passenger cruise days (APCD) 118Quantitative APCD TR-CL-000.B Number of shipboard employees 119Quantitative Number TR-CL-000.C Cruise passengers 120Quantitative Number TR-CL-000.D Number of vessel port calls Quantitative Number TR-CL-000.E 117Note to TR-CL-000.A – Available lower berth (ALB) is a measure of the standard capacity of a cruise ship, usually assuming two people per available cabin. It accounts for changes in fleet size, itineraries, and passenger capacity. Available lower berth kilometres (ALB-KM) are computed by multiplying ALB on each leg by the number of kilometres travelled on that leg. 118Note to TR-CL-000.B – Average passenger cruise days (APCD) is computed as the number of available lower berths on a ship multiplied by the number of days that those berths are available to passengers during the reporting period. 119Note to TR-CL-000.C – Shipboard employees are those employees who work aboard the entity ’s vessels (including direct and contract employees) during the reporting period. 120Note to TR-CL-000.D – Cruise passengers is the number of passengers aboard the entity ’s vessels, excluding employees.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 3",
    "new_id": 1107
  },
  {
    "id": 82455,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the implications of how an entity's GHG emissions disclosures must align with its financial reporting approach, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 65: Cruise Lines?",
    "options": {
      "D": "An entity's GHG emissions data must mirror its financial reporting consolidation method unless explicitly exempted by the Climate Disclosure Standards Board (CDSB) Framework.",
      "A": "Entities are required to use a 'financial control' approach for GHG emissions reporting only if they also adopt it for financial consolidation, as no flexibility exists.",
      "B": "The 'financial control' approach is recommended but not mandatory, allowing entities to choose alternative methods for GHG emissions consolidation at their discretion.",
      "C": "Entities may report GHG emissions using any consolidation method, provided they disclose the divergence from the 'financial control' approach in a footnote.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "6",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol65.pdf",
    "source_text": "2.1.5 Petroleum Industry Guidelines for reporting GHG emissions , 2nd edition, 2011, published by IPIECA 2.1.6 Protocol for the quantification of greenhouse gas emissions from waste management activities published by Entreprises pour l’Environnement (EpE) 2.2 GHG emissions data shall be consolidated and disclosed according to the approach with which the entity consolidates its financial reporting data, which is generally aligned with the 'financial control' approach defined by the GHG Protocol , and the approach published by the Climate Disclosure Standards Board (CDSB) described in REQ-07, ‘Organisational boundary ’, of the CDSB Framework for reporting environmental and social information . 3 The entity may discuss any change in emissions from the previous reporting period, including whether the change was because of emissions reductions, divestment, acquisition, mergers, changes in output or changes in calculation methodology. 4 In the case that current reporting of GHG emissions to the CDP or other entity (for example, a national regulatory disclosure programme) differs in terms of the scope and consolidation approach used, the entity may disclose those emissions. However, primary disclosure shall be according to the guidelines described above. 5 The entity may discuss the calculation methodology for its emissions disclosure, such as if data are from continuous emissions monitoring systems (CEMS), engineering calculations or mass balance calculations. TR-CL-110a.2. Discussion of long- and short-term strategy or plan to manage Scope 1 emissions, emissions reduction targets, and an analysis of performance against those targets 1 The entity shall discuss its long- and short-term strategy or plan to manage its Scope 1 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. 1.1 Scope 1 emissions are defined according to The Greenhouse Gas Protocol: A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard (GHG Protocol), Revised Edition, March 2004, published by the World Resources Institute and the World Business Council on Sustainable Development (WRI/WBCSD). 1.2 The scope of GHG emissions includes the seven GHGs covered under the Kyoto Protocol —carbon dioxide (CO 2), methane (CH 4), nitrous oxide (N 2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), sulphur hexafluoride (SF6), and nitrogen trifluoride (NF 3). 2 The entity shall discuss its emission reduction target(s) and analyse its performance against the target(s), including, if relevant: 2.1 The scope of the emission reduction target (for example, the percentage of total emissions to which the target is applicable); 2.2 Whether the target is absolute or intensity-based, and the metric denominator if it is an intensity-based target;IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 5",
    "new_id": 1108
  },
  {
    "id": 82480,
    "question": "Which of the following best captures the relationship between innovation emphasis in the Software & IT Services industry and the sustainability disclosure topics provided in the text, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 58: Software & IT Services?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Entities focusing on innovation must prioritize environmental considerations in data centers because their high-growth nature inherently increases energy consumption.",
      "B": "The emphasis on innovation directly correlates with the need to reduce customer downtime, as both are driven by the necessity to maintain brand value.",
      "C": "Innovation’s role in driving growth implies that disclosures around technology disruptions are more critical than those addressing environmental impacts of hardware infrastructure.",
      "D": "The reliance on human and intellectual capital underpins the importance of reporting total water usage, as these resources are integral to sustaining innovative practices.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "3-4",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol58.pdf",
    "source_text": "Introduction This volume is part of the Industry-based Guidance on Implementing IFRS S2 Climate-related Disclosures . This guidance suggests possible ways to apply some of the disclosure requirements in IFRS S2 but does not create additional requirements. This volume suggests possible ways to identify, measure and disclose information about climate-related risks and opportunities that are associated with particular business models, economic activities and other common features that characterise participation in this industry. This industry-based guidance has been derived from Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) Standards, which are maintained by the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB). The metric codes used in SASB Standards have been included for ease of reference. For additional context regarding the industry-based guidance contained in this volume, including structure and terminology, application and illustrative examples, refer to Section III of the Accompanying Guidance to IFRS S2.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 2 © IFRS Foundation\n\n[Page 4]\nVolume 58 —Software & IT Services Industry Description The Software & Information Technology (IT) Services industry offers products and services globally to retail, business and government customers, and includes entities that develop and sell applications software, infrastructure software and middleware. The industry generally is competitive but with dominant players in some segments. Although relatively immature, the industry is characterised by high-growth entities that place a heavy emphasis on innovation and depend on human and intellectual capital. The industry also includes IT services entities delivering specialised IT functions, such as consulting and outsourced services. New industry business models include cloud computing, software as a service, virtualisation, machine-to-machine communication, big data analysis and machine learning. Additionally, brand value is important for entities in the industry to scale and achieve network effects, whereby wide adoption of a particular software product may result in self-perpetuating growth in sales. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Environmental Footprint of Hardware Infrastructure(1) Total energy consumed, (2) percentage grid electricity and (3) percentage renewableQuantitative Gigajoules (GJ), Percentage (%)TC-SI-130a.1 (1) Total water withdrawn, (2) total water consumed; percentage of each in regions with High or Extremely High Baseline Water StressQuantitative Thousand cubic metres (m³), Percentage (%)TC-SI-130a.2 Discussion of the integration of environmental considerations into strategic planning for data centre needsDiscussion and Analysisn/a TC-SI-130a.3 Managing Systemic Risks from Technology DisruptionsNumber of (1) performance issues and (2) service disruptions; (3) total customer downtime 102Quantitative Number, Days TC-SI-550a.1 Description of business continuity risks related to disruptions of operationsDiscussion and Analysisn/a TC-SI-550a.2 Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE (1) Number of licences or subscriptions, (2) percentage cloud-basedQuantitative Number, Percentage (%)TC-SI-000.A continued... 102Note to TC-SI-550a.1 – Disclosure shall include a description of each significant performance issue or service disruption and any corrective actions taken to prevent future disruptions.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 3",
    "new_id": 1109
  },
  {
    "id": 82490,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes why an entity might discuss estimated potential losses in the context of managing business continuity risks, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 58: Software & IT Services?",
    "options": {
      "B": "To ensure transparency by quantifying possible impacts based on insurance or third-party evaluations.",
      "A": "To comply with mandatory international financial reporting requirements for all disruptions.",
      "C": "To demonstrate the effectiveness of redundancies and resilience measures already in place.",
      "D": "To provide a basis for internal assessments that could inform future risk mitigation strategies.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "10-11",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol58.pdf",
    "source_text": "1.1 Examples of disruptions may include those caused by technical failures, programming errors, cyber-attacks, weather events or natural disasters at hosting facilities. 2 The entity shall discuss measures implemented to manage business continuity risks, such as technologies or processes that reduce the effects of disruptions, enhance the resilience of systems, insure against loss, or provide redundancies to critical business operations. 3 The entity shall identify which critical business operations support cloud-based services, and the entity shall further note whether those operations are owned or outsourced. 4 The entity may discuss estimated amount of potential loss, probability of that loss and the associated time frame. These estimates may be based on insurance figures or other third-party or internal assessments of potential loss.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 9\n\n[Page 11]\n10 © IFRS Foundation Columbus Building 7 Westferry Circus Canary Wharf London E14 4HD, UK Tel +44 (0) 20 7246 6410 Email sustainability_licensing@ifrs.org ifrs.org International Financial Reporting Standards®, IFRS Foundation®, IFRS®, IAS®, IFRIC®, SIC®, IASB®, ISSBTM, IFRS for SMEs®",
    "new_id": 1110
  },
  {
    "id": 82491,
    "question": "Which of the following most accurately reflects an implicit relationship or logical consequence drawn from the interplay between the industry's characteristics and its sustainability disclosure requirements, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 58: Software & IT Services?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The competitive nature of the industry, combined with its focus on innovation, necessitates detailed disclosures about business continuity risks to address potential operational vulnerabilities.",
      "A": "The emphasis on innovation in the Software & IT Services industry directly reduces the need for disclosures related to energy consumption.",
      "B": "High reliance on human and intellectual capital in the industry implies that managing systemic risks from technology disruptions is less critical than environmental considerations.",
      "D": "Entities prioritizing cloud-based services are exempt from reporting on water consumption due to their reduced dependency on physical infrastructure.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "3-4",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol58.pdf",
    "source_text": "Introduction This volume is part of the Industry-based Guidance on Implementing IFRS S2 Climate-related Disclosures . This guidance suggests possible ways to apply some of the disclosure requirements in IFRS S2 but does not create additional requirements. This volume suggests possible ways to identify, measure and disclose information about climate-related risks and opportunities that are associated with particular business models, economic activities and other common features that characterise participation in this industry. This industry-based guidance has been derived from Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) Standards, which are maintained by the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB). The metric codes used in SASB Standards have been included for ease of reference. For additional context regarding the industry-based guidance contained in this volume, including structure and terminology, application and illustrative examples, refer to Section III of the Accompanying Guidance to IFRS S2.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 2 © IFRS Foundation\n\n[Page 4]\nVolume 58 —Software & IT Services Industry Description The Software & Information Technology (IT) Services industry offers products and services globally to retail, business and government customers, and includes entities that develop and sell applications software, infrastructure software and middleware. The industry generally is competitive but with dominant players in some segments. Although relatively immature, the industry is characterised by high-growth entities that place a heavy emphasis on innovation and depend on human and intellectual capital. The industry also includes IT services entities delivering specialised IT functions, such as consulting and outsourced services. New industry business models include cloud computing, software as a service, virtualisation, machine-to-machine communication, big data analysis and machine learning. Additionally, brand value is important for entities in the industry to scale and achieve network effects, whereby wide adoption of a particular software product may result in self-perpetuating growth in sales. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Environmental Footprint of Hardware Infrastructure(1) Total energy consumed, (2) percentage grid electricity and (3) percentage renewableQuantitative Gigajoules (GJ), Percentage (%)TC-SI-130a.1 (1) Total water withdrawn, (2) total water consumed; percentage of each in regions with High or Extremely High Baseline Water StressQuantitative Thousand cubic metres (m³), Percentage (%)TC-SI-130a.2 Discussion of the integration of environmental considerations into strategic planning for data centre needsDiscussion and Analysisn/a TC-SI-130a.3 Managing Systemic Risks from Technology DisruptionsNumber of (1) performance issues and (2) service disruptions; (3) total customer downtime 102Quantitative Number, Days TC-SI-550a.1 Description of business continuity risks related to disruptions of operationsDiscussion and Analysisn/a TC-SI-550a.2 Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE (1) Number of licences or subscriptions, (2) percentage cloud-basedQuantitative Number, Percentage (%)TC-SI-000.A continued... 102Note to TC-SI-550a.1 – Disclosure shall include a description of each significant performance issue or service disruption and any corrective actions taken to prevent future disruptions.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 3",
    "new_id": 1111
  },
  {
    "id": 82498,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the entity's obligations regarding the disclosure of environmental considerations and product take-back programmes, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 31: Medical Equipment & Supplies?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The entity is required to disclose the total weight of products recovered and reused, recycled, or donated, broken down by devices/equipment and supplies, while excluding products ultimately discarded as waste.",
      "A": "The entity must disclose the percentage of products, by revenue, for which environmental considerations were integrated into design and also report on all products accepted for take-back, regardless of their final disposition.",
      "B": "The entity should describe its product take-back programmes but is not obligated to disclose any quantitative data related to the reuse, recycling, or donation of products.",
      "C": "The entity must focus exclusively on disclosing the total weight of high-value machines and advanced devices recovered, without separately addressing low-cost equipment or supplies.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "6-7",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol31.pdf",
    "source_text": "7 For efforts related to the end-of-life of product management, the entity shall discuss only design-related considerations. 8 The entity shall disclose the percentage of products, by revenue, for which it has integrated environmental considerations into the design. HC-MS-410a.2. Total amount of products accepted for take-back and reused, recycled or donated, broken down by: (1) devices and equipment and (2) supplies 1 The entity shall disclose the amount, in metric tons, of its products that it recovered and reused (refurbished), recycled or donated. 1.1 This figure shall be broken down into: (1) devices and equipment and (2) supplies. 1.1.1 Devices and equipment include high-value machines and advanced devices. 1.1.2 Supplies include simple supplies and low-cost equipment (for example, scalpels, gloves and thermometers). 1.2 This figure shall exclude products accepted for take-back but ultimately discarded as waste. 1.2.1 The entity may disclose if it reclaimed any products it was unable to reuse or recycle because proper, safe disposal was necessary. 2 The entity shall describe programmes and initiatives it implements, funds or participates in that are related to product take-back for end-of-life management of its products.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 5\n\n[Page 7]\n6 © IFRS Foundation Columbus Building 7 Westferry Circus Canary Wharf London E14 4HD, UK Tel +44 (0) 20 7246 6410 Email sustainability_licensing@ifrs.org ifrs.org International Financial Reporting Standards®, IFRS Foundation®, IFRS®, IAS®, IFRIC®, SIC®, IASB®, ISSBTM, IFRS for SMEs®",
    "new_id": 1112
  },
  {
    "id": 82503,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes a situation where an entity's disclosure about product take-back excludes certain recovered products, and why, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 31: Medical Equipment & Supplies?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Products reclaimed for safe disposal are excluded because they were not ultimately reused or recycled.",
      "B": "Products that were refurbished and reused are excluded because they do not meet the definition of 'devices and equipment'.",
      "C": "Supplies such as scalpels and gloves are excluded because they fall under the category of low-cost equipment.",
      "D": "Devices and equipment are excluded when they cannot be donated due to regulatory restrictions on advanced devices.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "6-7",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol31.pdf",
    "source_text": "7 For efforts related to the end-of-life of product management, the entity shall discuss only design-related considerations. 8 The entity shall disclose the percentage of products, by revenue, for which it has integrated environmental considerations into the design. HC-MS-410a.2. Total amount of products accepted for take-back and reused, recycled or donated, broken down by: (1) devices and equipment and (2) supplies 1 The entity shall disclose the amount, in metric tons, of its products that it recovered and reused (refurbished), recycled or donated. 1.1 This figure shall be broken down into: (1) devices and equipment and (2) supplies. 1.1.1 Devices and equipment include high-value machines and advanced devices. 1.1.2 Supplies include simple supplies and low-cost equipment (for example, scalpels, gloves and thermometers). 1.2 This figure shall exclude products accepted for take-back but ultimately discarded as waste. 1.2.1 The entity may disclose if it reclaimed any products it was unable to reuse or recycle because proper, safe disposal was necessary. 2 The entity shall describe programmes and initiatives it implements, funds or participates in that are related to product take-back for end-of-life management of its products.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 5\n\n[Page 7]\n6 © IFRS Foundation Columbus Building 7 Westferry Circus Canary Wharf London E14 4HD, UK Tel +44 (0) 20 7246 6410 Email sustainability_licensing@ifrs.org ifrs.org International Financial Reporting Standards®, IFRS Foundation®, IFRS®, IAS®, IFRIC®, SIC®, IASB®, ISSBTM, IFRS for SMEs®",
    "new_id": 1113
  },
  {
    "id": 82514,
    "question": "Which scenario would most likely result in a restaurant entity *not* being able to claim compliance with the renewable energy disclosure requirements outlined in the text, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 26: Restaurants?",
    "options": {
      "B": "The entity reports total energy consumption inclusive of self-generated energy but excludes purchased grid electricity from its calculations.",
      "A": "The entity calculates its renewable energy percentage using only energy from wind and solar sources, excluding geothermal and biomass.",
      "C": "The entity uses higher heating values (HHV) for calculating fuel-based energy consumption but estimates renewable energy usage based on assumed average regional rates.",
      "D": "The entity includes both direct fuel usage and purchased electricity in its total energy consumption but does not differentiate between renewable and non-renewable sources.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "4-5",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol26.pdf",
    "source_text": "Volume 26 —Restaurants Industry Description Entities in the Restaurants industry prepare meals, snacks and beverages to customers ’ orders for immediate on- and off-premises consumption. Broadly divided into three sub- categories, the restaurant industry includes limited-service eating places, casual full- service eating places and upscale full-service eating places. Limited-service restaurants provide services to customers who order and pay before eating. Fast-food restaurants represent the largest share of the limited-service restaurants segment. Full-service restaurants offer more service, food for consumption primarily on-premises, and typically reflect higher quality food and prices. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Energy Management(1) Total energy consumed, (2) percentage grid electricity and (3) percentage renewableQuantitative Gigajoules (GJ), Percentage (%)FB-RN-130a.1 Water Management(1) Total water withdrawn, (2) total water consumed; percentage of each in regions with High or Extremely High Baseline Water StressQuantitative Thousand cubic metres (m³), Percentage (%)FB-RN-140a.1 Supply Chain Management & Food SourcingPercentage of food purchased that (1) meets environmental and social sourcing standards, and (2) is certified to third-party environmental or social standardsQuantitative Percentage (%) by costFB-RN-430a.1 Discussion of strategy to manage environmental and social risks within the supply chain, including animal welfareDiscussion and Analysisn/a FB-RN-430a.3 Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Number of (1) entity-owned and (2) franchise restaurants Quantitative Number FB-RN-000.A Number of employees at (1) entity-owned and (2) franchise locationsQuantitative Number FB-RN-000.BIFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 3\n\n[Page 5]\nEnergy Management Topic Summary Restaurant operations have high energy intensity compared with other commercial building operations. Commercial kitchen appliances are energy intensive, and dining areas typically are temperature-controlled for customers. Fossil fuel-based energy production and consumption contribute to significant environmental impacts, including climate change and air pollution, which have the potential indirectly, yet materially, to affect restaurant operations. Regulations on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions pricing or regulatory incentives for energy efficiency improvements and renewable energy affect conventional and renewable energy prices. Entities that manage energy consumption at entity-owned and franchise locations can decrease operational costs through energy efficiency upgrades and limit exposure to GHG emissions regulations by using renewable energy resources. Metrics FB-RN-130a.1. (1) Total energy consumed, (2) percentage grid electricity and (3) percentage renewable 1 The entity shall disclose (1) the total amount of energy it consumed as an aggregate figure, in gigajoules (GJ). 1.1 The scope of energy consumption includes energy from all sources, including energy purchased from external sources and energy produced by the entity itself (self-generated). For example, direct fuel usage, purchased electricity and heating, cooling and steam energy are all included within the scope of energy consumption. 1.2 The scope of energy consumption includes only energy directly consumed by the entity during the reporting period. 1.3 In calculating energy consumption from fuels and biofuels, the entity shall use higher heating values (HHV), also known as gross calorific values (GCV), which are measured directly or taken from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2 The entity shall disclose (2) the percentage of energy it consumed that was supplied from grid electricity. 2.1 The percentage shall be calculated as purchased grid electricity consumption divided by total energy consumption. 3 The entity shall disclose (3) the percentage of energy it consumed that is renewable energy. 3.1 Renewable energy is defined as energy from sources that are replenished at a rate greater than or equal to their rate of depletion, such as geothermal, wind, solar, hydro and biomass. 3.2 The percentage shall be calculated as renewable energy consumption divided by total energy consumption.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 4 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 1114
  },
  {
    "id": 82523,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between environmental and social standards in food sourcing and their implications for restaurant operators, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 26: Restaurants?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Sourcing food that aligns with environmental and social standards can mitigate risks related to food safety, reputation, and long-term market competitiveness.",
      "A": "Adopting environmental and social sourcing standards primarily serves to reduce operational costs by streamlining supply chain logistics.",
      "B": "The use of third-party certifications for environmental and social standards is discouraged as it undermines the development of internal guidelines.",
      "D": "Meeting environmental and social standards is considered optional for restaurants since these metrics are not directly tied to regulatory compliance.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "8",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol26.pdf",
    "source_text": "Supply Chain Management & Food Sourcing Topic Summary Restaurants source ingredients and products from a wide range of suppliers. Supply chain management is crucial for restaurants to ensure food safety, to protect their reputations and increase revenue. Sourcing quality ingredients to maintain a consistent level of quality across different locations can be operationally challenging and exacerbated by the global nature of the industry. Demand from the food and beverage industry, including restaurants, drives and shapes agricultural production, indicating that actions by industry players have a larger impact on society. Therefore, sustainable and ethical sourcing by industry entities may be necessary to ensure future supply and to minimise lifecycle impacts of entity operations. Sourcing from suppliers that have high quality standards, employ environmentally sustainable farming methods, and honour labour rights may better create value over the long-term. By increasing the amount of food supply sourced in conformance with environmental and social standards, as well as conformance with animal welfare standards and best practices, restaurant operators may be able to maintain food quality, manage food safety issues, enhance their reputation and expand their market share. Metrics FB-RN-430a.1. Percentage of food purchased that (1) meets environmental and social sourcing standards, and (2) is certified to third-party environmental or social standards 1 The entity shall disclose (1) the percentage of food purchased that meets both environmental and social sourcing standards. 1.1 Environmental standards are defined as standards that address environmental impacts related to food production, such as protection of natural resources and improvements in resource efficiency. 1.2 Social standards are defined as standards that address social impacts related to food production, such as treatment of workers and community, animal health and welfare, and food quality and safety. 1.3 The percentage shall be calculated as the cost of food (and food products) purchased that meets environmental and social standards divided by the total cost of food (and food products) purchased. 1.4 The scope of environmental or social standards includes programmes, guidelines, best practices, criteria, codes of conduct and certifications developed internally, through industry initiatives or by third-parties. 1.5 Examples of environmental and social sourcing standards include: 1.5.1 Global Roundtable for Sustainable Beef Principles & Criteria for Defining Global Sustainable Beef 1.5.2 IDH Sustainability Initiative Fruits and Vegetables (SIFAV)IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 7",
    "new_id": 1115
  },
  {
    "id": 82524,
    "question": "Which implication regarding the relationship between sourcing standards and operational challenges is most directly supported by the text, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 26: Restaurants?",
    "options": {
      "D": "While sustainable and ethical sourcing can mitigate some operational challenges, it may also introduce complexity due to the need for compliance with multiple standards.",
      "A": "Sourcing exclusively from suppliers with third-party certifications guarantees the elimination of all operational challenges in maintaining food quality.",
      "B": "The global nature of the restaurant industry inherently ensures that adherence to environmental and social standards will reduce operational complexity.",
      "C": "Operational challenges in supply chain management are unrelated to the adoption of environmental and social sourcing standards.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "8",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol26.pdf",
    "source_text": "Supply Chain Management & Food Sourcing Topic Summary Restaurants source ingredients and products from a wide range of suppliers. Supply chain management is crucial for restaurants to ensure food safety, to protect their reputations and increase revenue. Sourcing quality ingredients to maintain a consistent level of quality across different locations can be operationally challenging and exacerbated by the global nature of the industry. Demand from the food and beverage industry, including restaurants, drives and shapes agricultural production, indicating that actions by industry players have a larger impact on society. Therefore, sustainable and ethical sourcing by industry entities may be necessary to ensure future supply and to minimise lifecycle impacts of entity operations. Sourcing from suppliers that have high quality standards, employ environmentally sustainable farming methods, and honour labour rights may better create value over the long-term. By increasing the amount of food supply sourced in conformance with environmental and social standards, as well as conformance with animal welfare standards and best practices, restaurant operators may be able to maintain food quality, manage food safety issues, enhance their reputation and expand their market share. Metrics FB-RN-430a.1. Percentage of food purchased that (1) meets environmental and social sourcing standards, and (2) is certified to third-party environmental or social standards 1 The entity shall disclose (1) the percentage of food purchased that meets both environmental and social sourcing standards. 1.1 Environmental standards are defined as standards that address environmental impacts related to food production, such as protection of natural resources and improvements in resource efficiency. 1.2 Social standards are defined as standards that address social impacts related to food production, such as treatment of workers and community, animal health and welfare, and food quality and safety. 1.3 The percentage shall be calculated as the cost of food (and food products) purchased that meets environmental and social standards divided by the total cost of food (and food products) purchased. 1.4 The scope of environmental or social standards includes programmes, guidelines, best practices, criteria, codes of conduct and certifications developed internally, through industry initiatives or by third-parties. 1.5 Examples of environmental and social sourcing standards include: 1.5.1 Global Roundtable for Sustainable Beef Principles & Criteria for Defining Global Sustainable Beef 1.5.2 IDH Sustainability Initiative Fruits and Vegetables (SIFAV)IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 7",
    "new_id": 1116
  },
  {
    "id": 82547,
    "question": "Which scenario would result in the exclusion of materials from the scope of 'end-of-life material recovered' as defined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 54: Electronic Manufacturing Services & Original Design Manufacturing?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Materials collected for repair that are under warranty and subject to recall.",
      "B": "Materials collected by a third party for refurbishment purposes, where the entity did not take physical possession.",
      "C": "Products physically handled by the entity and subsequently recycled into new components.",
      "D": "Electronic waste transferred to a certified recycler adhering to the e-Stewards® Standard.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "6-7",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol54.pdf",
    "source_text": "6 The entity shall disclose water consumed in locations with High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress as a percentage of the total water consumed. Product Lifecycle Management Topic Summary Entities in the Electronic Manufacturing Services (EMS) & Original Design Manufacturing (ODM) industry, along with the industry ’s customers such as hardware entities, face increasing challenges associated with environmental externalities attributed to product manufacturing, transport, use and disposal. Rapid obsolescence of hardware products may worsen such externalities. The industry ’s products commonly contain hazardous materials, making safe end-of-life disposal a critical aspect to manage. Entities unable to minimise the environmental externalities of their products may face increased regulatory costs as jurisdictional environmental laws or regulations place more emphasis on resource conservation and waste management. Through product innovation that facilitates end-of-life product recovery and the use of less impactful materials, EMS & ODM manufacturers can achieve improvements in lifecycle impacts, reduce regulatory risks and realise cost savings. Metrics TC-ES-410a.1. Weight of end-of-life products and e-waste recovered; percentage recycled 1 The entity shall disclose the weight, in metric tons, of end-of-life material recovered, including through reverse logistics services, recycling services, product take-back programmes and refurbishment services. 1.1 End-of-life material recovered is defined as products, materials and parts, including electronic waste material (e-waste), that at the end of their useful life would have otherwise been discarded as waste or used for energy recovery, but have instead been collected. 1.2 The scope of end-of-life material recovered includes materials physically handled by the entity. 1.3 The scope of end-of-life material recovered includes materials of which the entity did not take physical possession, but were collected by a third party for the expressed purpose of reuse, recycling or refurbishment. 1.4 The scope of end-of-life material recovered excludes materials collected for repair or that are under warranty and subject to recall. 2 The entity shall disclose the percentage of end-of-life material recovered and subsequently recycled. 2.1 The percentage shall be calculated as the weight of end-of-life material recovered and subsequently recycled divided by the total weight of end-of- life material recovered.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 5\n\n[Page 7]\n2.2 Recycled material (including remanufactured material) is defined as waste material reprocessed or treated by means of production or manufacturing processes and made into a final product or a component for incorporation into a product. 2.3 The scope of recycled material includes material reused or reclaimed. 2.3.1 Reused material is defined as recovered products or components of products used for the same purpose for which they were conceived, including products donated or refurbished by the entity or by third parties. 2.3.2 Reclaimed material is defined as material processed to recover or regenerate a usable product. 2.4 The scope of recycled material includes primary recycled material, co- products (outputs of equal value to primary recycled materials), by- products (outputs of lesser value to primary recycled materials) and material sent externally for further recycling. 2.5 The scope of recycled material excludes portions of products and materials that are disposed of in landfills. 3 Electronic waste material (e-waste) shall be considered recycled only if the entity can demonstrate that this material was transferred to entities with third-party certification to a standard for e-waste recycling such as the e-Stewards® Standard for Responsible Recycling and Reuse of Electronic Equipment or the Responsible Recycling Practices (R2) Standard for Electronic Recyclers. 3.1 The entity shall disclose the standard(s) complied with by the entities to which it has transferred e-waste.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 6 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 1117
  },
  {
    "id": 82674,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes why the entity’s voting approach may differ among markets, according to the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 15: Asset Management & Custody Activities?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Differences in regulatory or other local requirements necessitate variations in the entity’s voting strategy.",
      "A": "The entity adopts a uniform voting approach across all markets to ensure consistency in its investment strategies.",
      "C": "The entity exclusively votes in favor of management proposals to align with market-specific expectations.",
      "D": "Variations in voting approaches are driven solely by differences in asset classes and investment styles.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "8",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol15.pdf",
    "source_text": "10.1.3 Criteria used in assessing the quality of ESG incorporation 11 The scope of disclosure shall include investment or wealth management services in which the entity maintains decision-making power, regardless of strategy and asset class. 12 The scope of disclosure shall exclude execution or advisory services in which investment decision-making power remains with clients. 13 When relevant, the description of the entity ’s approach to incorporation of ESG factors in its investment or wealth management activities shall be broken down by asset class or by style employed. 13.1 The discussion shall include the differences in the entity ’s approaches to incorporation of ESG factors in: 13.1.1 Public equity, fixed income, private equity or alternative asset classes 13.1.2 Passive versus active investment strategies 13.1.3 Fundamental, quantitative and technical analyses of investments FN-AC-410a.3. Description of proxy voting and investee engagement policies and procedures 1 The entity shall describe its approach to proxy voting, which may include its process for making proxy voting decisions, including its approach to defining materiality. 1.1 The discussion shall include, but is not limited to, elements highlighted in PRI Reporting Framework 2019 Direct —Listed Equity Active Ownership : 1.1.1 The scope of the entity ’s voting activities 1.1.2 The objectives of the entity ’s voting activities 1.1.3 How, if at all, the entity ’s voting approach differs among markets 1.1.4 Whether the entity has a default position of voting in favour of management in particular markets or on particular issues 1.1.5 Whether and how local regulatory or other requirements influence the entity ’s approach to voting 1.1.6 Whether the entity votes by proxy or in person by attending annual general meetings (AGMs) (or a combination of both) 1.2 The entity shall describe its approach to determining support for proposals, including its approach to defining materiality. 1.2.1 The scope of disclosure includes proposals addressing environmental and social (ES) issues. 1.3 The entity shall describe how it communicates its proxy voting policy to clients and to the public. 1.3.1 The entity may provide the link to its formal proxy voting policy.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 7",
    "new_id": 1118
  },
  {
    "id": 82675,
    "question": "Which scenario would most likely require an entity to disclose its approach to ESG incorporation but not its proxy voting policy, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 15: Asset Management & Custody Activities?",
    "options": {
      "C": "An entity managing a private equity fund where it retains full decision-making power over investments.",
      "A": "An entity providing advisory services for clients who retain full control over their passive investment strategies.",
      "B": "An entity overseeing a public equity portfolio using fundamental analysis while attending annual general meetings in person.",
      "D": "An entity executing trades on behalf of clients who have predefined their voting preferences for environmental proposals.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "8",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol15.pdf",
    "source_text": "10.1.3 Criteria used in assessing the quality of ESG incorporation 11 The scope of disclosure shall include investment or wealth management services in which the entity maintains decision-making power, regardless of strategy and asset class. 12 The scope of disclosure shall exclude execution or advisory services in which investment decision-making power remains with clients. 13 When relevant, the description of the entity ’s approach to incorporation of ESG factors in its investment or wealth management activities shall be broken down by asset class or by style employed. 13.1 The discussion shall include the differences in the entity ’s approaches to incorporation of ESG factors in: 13.1.1 Public equity, fixed income, private equity or alternative asset classes 13.1.2 Passive versus active investment strategies 13.1.3 Fundamental, quantitative and technical analyses of investments FN-AC-410a.3. Description of proxy voting and investee engagement policies and procedures 1 The entity shall describe its approach to proxy voting, which may include its process for making proxy voting decisions, including its approach to defining materiality. 1.1 The discussion shall include, but is not limited to, elements highlighted in PRI Reporting Framework 2019 Direct —Listed Equity Active Ownership : 1.1.1 The scope of the entity ’s voting activities 1.1.2 The objectives of the entity ’s voting activities 1.1.3 How, if at all, the entity ’s voting approach differs among markets 1.1.4 Whether the entity has a default position of voting in favour of management in particular markets or on particular issues 1.1.5 Whether and how local regulatory or other requirements influence the entity ’s approach to voting 1.1.6 Whether the entity votes by proxy or in person by attending annual general meetings (AGMs) (or a combination of both) 1.2 The entity shall describe its approach to determining support for proposals, including its approach to defining materiality. 1.2.1 The scope of disclosure includes proposals addressing environmental and social (ES) issues. 1.3 The entity shall describe how it communicates its proxy voting policy to clients and to the public. 1.3.1 The entity may provide the link to its formal proxy voting policy.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 7",
    "new_id": 1119
  },
  {
    "id": 82676,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the relationship between ESG incorporation practices and the roles described for their implementation, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 15: Asset Management & Custody Activities?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Roles and responsibilities of employees include executing research on ESG factors but not determining overarching ESG policies.",
      "A": "The entity’s proxy voting policies are integral to defining the day-to-day responsibilities for ESG incorporation.",
      "B": "Implementation details exclude specific methodologies such as screening or sustainability-themed investment approaches.",
      "C": "Day-to-day incorporation of ESG factors is managed by parties whose roles encompass both policy development and execution.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "6",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol15.pdf",
    "source_text": "2 The entity shall disaggregate its disclosure by asset class: (a) equities, (b) fixed income, (c) cash equivalents/money market instruments and (d) other (for example, real estate and commodities). 3 The entity shall identify and disclose the amount of any AUM managed using more than one ESG integration strategy (for example, screening and integration). FN-AC-410a.2. Description of approach to incorporation of environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors in investment or wealth management processes and strategies 1 The entity shall describe its approach to the incorporation of environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors in its investment or wealth management processes and strategies. 1.1 The definition of incorporation of ESG factors is aligned with that of the Global Sustainable Investment Alliance (GSIA) and includes the use of ESG information in investment decision-making processes. 1.2 Examples of ESG factors and issues are provided in the PRI Reporting Framework —Main definitions 2018 , section ‘ESG issues ’. 1.3 Incorporation of ESG factors includes the following approaches, consistent with the PRI Reporting Framework —Main definitions 2018 : 1.3.1 Screening, including (a) negative/exclusionary, (b) positive/best-in- class and (c) norms-based 1.3.2 Sustainability themed investment, defined as investment in themes or assets specifically related to sustainability (for example, clean energy, green technology or sustainable agriculture) 1.3.3 Integration of ESG, defined as the systematic and explicit inclusion of material ESG factors into investment analysis and investment decisions 1.3.4 A combination of the above 2 The entity shall describe the policies that determine its approach to the incorporation of ESG factors in its investment or wealth management processes and strategies. 3 The scope of disclosure shall exclude discussion of the entity ’s proxy voting and investee engagement policies and procedures, which is included in metric FN- AC-410a.3, ‘Description of proxy voting and investee engagement policies and procedures ’. 4 The entity shall describe its approach to implementation of the aspects of the entity’s ESG incorporation practices. 4.1 The discussion shall include, but is not limited to: 4.1.1 Parties responsible for the day-to-day incorporation of ESG factors 4.1.2 Roles and responsibilities of employees involved 4.1.3 Approach to conducting ESG-related researchIFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 5",
    "new_id": 1120
  },
  {
    "id": 82677,
    "question": "Which of the following best represents a necessary condition for an entity to escalate its engagement process when dialogue is failing, as inferred from the described tactics in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 15: Asset Management & Custody Activities?",
    "options": {
      "A": "The entity is required to express concerns directly to corporate representatives or non-executive directors as a precursor to any public statement.",
      "B": "The entity must first attempt to resolve issues through legal remedies or arbitration before escalating further.",
      "C": "Escalation can only occur after the entity has sought governance improvements through submitting shareholder resolutions.",
      "D": "The entity must ensure that engagements are primarily proactive rather than reactive before considering escalation.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "9-10",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol15.pdf",
    "source_text": "2 The entity shall describe its process of making proxy voting decisions. 2.1 The discussion shall include the elements highlighted in PRI Reporting Framework 2019 Direct —Listed Equity Active Ownership , which include: 2.1.1 Use of internal research team or third-party service providers 2.1.2 Review and monitoring process for service provider recommendations 3 The entity shall describe its approach to communicating voting decisions to entity management, including the rationale for voting for/against management ’s recommendations. 4 The entity shall describe its approach to engagement on ES issues. 4.1 The discussion shall include: 4.1.1 The entity ’s objectives for undertaking engagement activities 4.1.2 Whether the entity ’s engagements related to ES issues are primarily proactive to ensure that ES issues are well-managed in a preventive manner or reactive to address issues that may have already occurred 4.1.3 The outcomes the entity seeks from engaging with entities on ES issues (for example, influencing corporate practice; improving the quality of ES disclosure) 4.1.4 The entity ’s staff that carries out the engagement (for example, specialised in-house engagement teams, fund managers or equity/ credit analysts, more senior-level roles) 4.1.5 The roles of individuals at the portfolio entities the entity seeks to engage with (for example, board members, board chair, CEO, corporate secretary, investor relations managers) 4.2 The entity shall describe how it communicates its engagement policy to clients and to the public. 4.2.1 The entity may provide the link to its formal engagement policy. 4.3 The scope of disclosure includes all asset classes, portfolios or strategies in which the entity engages on ES issues. 5 The entity shall describe how the outcomes of its proxy voting and engagement activities inform its investment decision-making process. 5.1 The discussion shall include: 5.1.1 How the entity decides what information to pass on to investment decision-makers 5.1.2 How the entity monitors the use of the information passed on in investment decision-making 6 The entity shall describe its escalation process for engagements when entity dialogue is failing.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 8 © IFRS Foundation\n\n[Page 10]\n6.1 The escalation process may include tactics highlighted in the International Corporate Governance Network (ICGN) Global Stewardship Principles : 6.1.1 Expressing concerns to corporate representatives or non-executive directors, either directly or in a shareholder meeting 6.1.2 Expressing the entity ’s concerns collectively with other investors 6.1.3 Making a public statement 6.1.4 Submitting shareholder resolutions 6.1.5 Speaking at general meetings 6.1.6 Submitting one or more nominations for election to the board as appropriate and convening a shareholder meeting 6.1.7 Seeking governance improvements or damages through legal remedies or arbitration 6.1.8 Exit or threat to exit from the investment 7 The entity shall describe how its ES engagement strategy fits into its overall engagement strategy. 8 The entity may disclose additional quantitative measures related to its proxy voting and engagement activities, such as: 8.1 Number of engagements and percentage of those in-person 8.2 Number of staff involved in proxy voting and engagement activitiesIFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 9",
    "new_id": 1121
  },
  {
    "id": 82751,
    "question": "Under which condition would an entity be able to claim renewable energy credits (RECs) or Guarantees of Origin (GOs) for on-site renewable electricity generation while adhering to the disclosure requirements, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 53: Leisure Facilities?",
    "options": {
      "B": "If the RECs and GOs are retained, retired, or cancelled explicitly on behalf of the entity.",
      "A": "If the RECs and GOs are sold to another party within the same fiscal year.",
      "C": "If the renewable electricity is generated using uncertified biomass materials.",
      "D": "If the entity relies solely on the renewable portion of the local electricity grid mix.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "5-6",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol53.pdf",
    "source_text": "Metrics SV-LF-130a.1. (1) Total energy consumed, (2) percentage grid electricity and (3) percentage renewable 1 The entity shall disclose (1) the total amount of energy it consumed as an aggregate figure, in gigajoules (GJ). 1.1 The scope of energy consumption includes energy from all sources, including energy purchased from external sources and energy produced by the entity itself (self-generated). For example, direct fuel usage, purchased electricity, and heating, cooling and steam energy are all included within the scope of energy consumption. 1.2 The scope of energy consumption includes only energy directly consumed by the entity during the reporting period. 1.3 In calculating energy consumption from fuels and biofuels, the entity shall use higher heating values (HHV), also known as gross calorific values (GCV), which are measured directly or taken from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2 The entity shall disclose (2) the percentage of energy it consumed that was supplied from grid electricity. 2.1 The percentage shall be calculated as purchased grid electricity consumption divided by total energy consumption. 3 The entity shall disclose (3) the percentage of energy it consumed that was renewable energy. 3.1 Renewable energy is defined as energy from sources that are replenished at a rate greater than or equal to their rate of depletion, such as geothermal, wind, solar, hydro and biomass. 3.2 The percentage shall be calculated as renewable energy consumption divided by total energy consumption. 3.3 The scope of renewable energy includes renewable fuel the entity consumed, renewable energy the entity directly produced and renewable energy the entity purchased, if purchased through a renewable power purchase agreement (PPA) that explicitly includes renewable energy certificates (RECs) or Guarantees of Origin (GOs), a Green ‐e Energy Certified utility or supplier programme, or other green power products that explicitly include RECs or GOs, or for which Green ‐e Energy Certified RECs are paired with grid electricity. 3.3.1 For any renewable electricity generated on-site, any RECs and GOs shall be retained (not sold) and retired or cancelled on behalf of the entity for the entity to claim them as renewable energy. 3.3.2 For renewable PPAs and green power products, the agreement shall explicitly include and convey that RECs and GOs be retained or replaced and retired or cancelled on behalf of the entity for the entity to claim them as renewable energy.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 4 © IFRS Foundation\n\n[Page 6]\n3.3.3 The renewable portion of the electricity grid mix outside the control or influence of the entity is excluded from the scope of renewable energy. 3.4 For the purposes of this disclosure, the scope of renewable energy from biomass sources is limited to materials certified to a third-party standard (for example, Forest Stewardship Council, Sustainable Forest Initiative, Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification or American Tree Farm System), materials considered eligible sources of supply according to the Green-e Framework for Renewable Energy Certification, Version 1.0 (2017) or Green-e regional standards, or materials eligible for an applicable jurisdictional renewable portfolio standard. 4 The entity shall apply conversion factors consistently for all data reported under this disclosure, such as the use of HHVs for fuel use (including biofuels) and conversion of kilowatt hours (kWh) to GJ (for energy data including electricity from solar or wind energy).IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 5",
    "new_id": 1122
  },
  {
    "id": 82824,
    "question": "Which scenario would invalidate an entity's claim to renewable energy usage under the described framework, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 49: Electrical & Electronic Equipment?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The entity relies on the renewable portion of the electricity grid mix that falls outside its direct control or influence.",
      "A": "The entity purchases renewable electricity through a PPA that explicitly includes and conveys RECs and GOs but fails to retire or cancel them on its behalf.",
      "B": "The entity generates renewable electricity on-site, retains the associated RECs and GOs, and retires them on its behalf.",
      "D": "The entity uses grid electricity paired with Green-e Energy Certified RECs, ensuring the RECs are retired on its behalf.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "6",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol49.pdf",
    "source_text": "Certified utility or supplier programme, or other green power products that explicitly include RECs or GOs, or for which Green ‐e Energy Certified RECs are paired with grid electricity. 3.3.1 For any renewable electricity generated on site, any RECs and GOs shall be retained (not sold) and retired or cancelled on behalf of the entity for the entity to claim them as renewable energy. 3.3.2 For renewable PPAs and green power products, the agreement shall explicitly include and convey that RECs and GOs be retained or replaced and retired or cancelled on behalf of the entity for the entity to claim them as renewable energy. 3.3.3 The renewable portion of the electricity grid mix outside of the control or influence of the entity is excluded from the scope of renewable energy. 3.4 For the purposes of this disclosure, the scope of renewable energy from biomass sources is limited to materials certified to a third-party standard (for example, Forest Stewardship Council, Sustainable Forest Initiative, Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification or American Tree Farm System), materials considered eligible sources of supply according to the Green-e Framework for Renewable Energy Certification , Version 1.0 (2017) or Green-e regional standards, or materials eligible for an applicable jurisdictional renewable portfolio standard. 4 The entity shall apply conversion factors consistently for all data reported under this disclosure, such as the use of HHVs for fuel usage (including biofuels) and conversion of kilowatt hours (kWh) to GJ (for energy data including electricity from solar or wind energy). Product Lifecycle Management Topic Summary Electrical and electronic equipment entities face increasing challenges and opportunities associated with environmental and social externalities that may stem from the use of their products. Regulations are incentivising entities to reduce or eliminate the use of harmful chemicals in their products. To a lesser extent, regulations and customers are encouraging entities to reduce the environmental footprint of their products in the use- phase, primarily in terms of energy intensity. Electrical and electronic equipment entities that develop cost-effective products and energy efficiency solutions may benefit from increased revenue and market share, stronger competitive positioning and enhanced brand value. Similarly, products with reduced chemical safety concerns may provide opportunities for increased market share.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 5",
    "new_id": 1123
  },
  {
    "id": 82826,
    "question": "Which of the following best describes why a product would be excluded from the scope of disclosure under the criteria provided, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 49: Electrical & Electronic Equipment?",
    "options": {
      "D": "The product demonstrates an ancillary improvement in resource efficiency that is not directly aligned with the milestones set forth in Section 5 of the European Commission’s Road Map.",
      "A": "The product contributes to energy efficiency but fails to meet any recognized international standards, such as IEC's IE2 or higher.",
      "B": "The product achieves meaningful improvements in energy efficiency by conforming to EU Directive 2012/27/EU and is verified through independent third-party testing.",
      "C": "The product provides incremental enhancements to energy efficiency but does not align with any specific regulatory framework or directive.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "9-10",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol49.pdf",
    "source_text": "3.1.1 Smart grid is defined as a modernisation of the electricity delivery systems to monitor, protect and automatically optimise the operation of its interconnected elements —from the central and distributed generation through the transmission network and the distribution system, to industrial users and building automation systems, and to energy storage installations and to end-use consumers. 3.2 The scope of disclosure includes products that impart an incremental improvement to energy efficiency, insofar as the entity can demonstrate that the improvement is meaningful, such as through alignment with the milestones set forth in Section 5, ‘Key Sectors ’ of the European Commission ’s Road Map to a Resource Efficient Europe or with EU Directive 2012/27/EU, or through conformance with energy efficiency standards such as the International Electrotechnical Commission ’s (IEC) IE2 High Efficiency, IE3 Premium Efficiency and IE4 Super Premium Efficiency. 3.3 The scope of disclosure excludes products that impart improved resource efficiency in an ancillary, indirect or minimal way (for example, a conventional product that is slightly lighter than the previous generation of the product).IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 8 © IFRS Foundation\n\n[Page 10]\n© IFRS Foundation 9 Columbus Building 7 Westferry Circus Canary Wharf London E14 4HD, UK Tel +44 (0) 20 7246 6410 Email sustainability_licensing@ifrs.org ifrs.org International Financial Reporting Standards®, IFRS Foundation®, IFRS®, IAS®, IFRIC®, SIC®, IASB®, ISSBTM, IFRS for SMEs®",
    "new_id": 1124
  },
  {
    "id": 83027,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the implications of the GSSB's responsibility and limitations, as described in GRI 203: Indirect Economic Impacts 2016?",
    "options": {
      "A": "While the GSSB develops the Standards, organizations preparing reports bear sole responsibility for their content and any resulting consequences.",
      "B": "The GSSB assumes full legal liability for any consequences arising from the use of the GRI Standards, as it is the issuing body.",
      "C": "Organizations using the GRI Standards are relieved of responsibility for their reports because the Standards were developed through a multi-stakeholder process.",
      "D": "The GSSB’s role is to ensure compliance with international laws, thereby mitigating risks associated with sustainability reporting.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "2-3",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 203_ Indirect Economic Impacts 2016.pdf",
    "source_text": "GRI 203: Indirect Economic Impacts 2016 Topic Standard Effective Date This Standard is effective for reports or other materials published on or after 1 July 2018 Responsibility This Standard is issued by the Global Sustainability Standards Board (GSSB) . Any feedback on the GRI Standards can be submitted to gssbsecretariat@globalreporting.org for the consideration of the GSSB. Due Process This Standard was developed in the public interest and in accordance with the requirements of the GSSB Due Process Protocol. It has been developed using multi-stakeholder expertise, and with regard to authoritative intergovernmental instruments and widely held expectations of organizations relating to social, environmental, and economic responsibilities. Legal Liability This document, designed to promote sustainability reporting, has been developed by the Global Sustainability Standards Board (GSSB) through a unique multi-stakeholder consultative process involving representatives from organizations and report information users from around the world. While the GRI Supervisory Board, Management Board, and GSSB encourage the use of the GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards (GRI Standards) and related Interpretations by all organizations, the preparation and publication of reports based fully or partially on the GRI Standards and related Interpretations are the full responsibility of those producing them. Neither the GRI Supervisory Board, Management Board, GSSB, nor Stichting Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) can assume responsibility for any consequences or damages resulting directly or indirectly from the use of the GRI Standards and related Interpretations in the preparation of reports, or the use of reports based on the GRI Standards and related Interpretations. Copyright and trademark notice This document is copyright-protected by Stichting Global Reporting Initiative (GRI). The reproduction and distribution of this document for information and/or use in preparing a sustainability report is permitted without prior permission from GRI. However, neither this document nor any extract from it may be reproduced, stored, translated, or transferred in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photocopied, recorded, or otherwise) for any other purpose without prior written permission from GRI. Global Reporting Initiative, GRI and logo, GSSB and logo, and GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards (GRI Standards) and logo are trademarks of Stichting Global Reporting Initiative. © 2024 GRI. All rights reserved. ISBN 978-90-8866-100-6\n\n[Page 3]\nContent Introduction 4 1. Topic management disclosures 7 2. Topic disclosures 8 Disclosure 203-1 Infrastructure investments and services supported 8 Disclosure 203-2 Significant indirect economic impacts 9 Glossary 10 GRI 203: Indirect Economic Impacts 2016 3",
    "new_id": 1125
  },
  {
    "id": 83028,
    "question": "Which statement accurately captures the relationship between an organization's infrastructure investments, as described in the text, and its indirect economic impacts, according to GRI 203: Indirect Economic Impacts 2016?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Infrastructure investments contribute to indirect economic impacts by generating additional consequences beyond the immediate financial transactions.",
      "A": "Infrastructure investments are considered direct economic impacts because they involve financial transactions with stakeholders.",
      "C": "Indirect economic impacts of infrastructure investments are limited to monetary consequences that affect only regional economies.",
      "D": "The text explicitly states that infrastructure investments have no significant connection to indirect economic impacts.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "3-4",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 203_ Indirect Economic Impacts 2016.pdf",
    "source_text": "Content Introduction 4 1. Topic management disclosures 7 2. Topic disclosures 8 Disclosure 203-1 Infrastructure investments and services supported 8 Disclosure 203-2 Significant indirect economic impacts 9 Glossary 10 GRI 203: Indirect Economic Impacts 2016 3\n\n[Page 4]\nIntroduction GRI 203: Indirect Economic Impacts 2016 contains disclosures for organizations to report information about their indirect economic impacts , and how they manage these impacts. The Standard is structured as follows: The rest of the Introduction section provides a background on the topic, an overview of the system of GRI Standards and further information on using this Standard. Background on the topic This Standard addresses an organization’s indirect economic impacts, including impacts of an organization’s infrastructure investments and services supported . An economic impact can be defined as a change in the productive potential of the economy that has an influence on a community’s or stakeholder’s well-being and longer-term prospects for development. Indirect economic impacts are the additional consequences of the direct impact of financial transactions and the flow of money between an organization and its stakeholders. Indirect economic impacts can be monetary or non-monetary, and are particularly important to assess in relation to local communities and regional economies. System of GRI Standards This Standard is part of the GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards (GRI Standards). The GRI Standards enable an organization to report information about its most significant impacts on the economy, environment, and people, including impacts on their human rights , and how it manages these impacts. The GRI Standards are structured as a system of interrelated standards that are organized into three series: GRI Universal Standards, GRI Sector Standards, and GRI Topic Standards (see Figure 1 in this Standard). Universal Standards: GRI 1, GRI 2 and GRI 3 GRI 1: Foundation 2021 specifies the requirements that the organization must comply with to report in accordance with the GRI Standards. The organization begins using the GRI Standards by consulting GRI 1 . GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021 contains disclosures that the organization uses to provide information about its reporting practices and other organizational details, such as its activities, governance, and policies. GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 provides guidance on how to determine material topics . It also contains disclosures that the organization uses to report information about its process of determining material topics, its list of material topics, and how it manages each topic. Sector Standards The Sector Standards provide information for organizations about their likely material topics. The organization uses the Sector Standards that apply to its sectors when determining its material topics and when determining what to report for each material topic. Topic Standards The Topic Standards contain disclosures that the organization uses to report information about its impacts in relation to particular topics. The organization uses the Topic Standards according to the list of material topics it has determined using GRI 3 . Section 1 contains a requirement, which provides information about how the organization manages its indirect economic impacts.• Section 2 contains two disclosures, which provide information about the organization’s indirect economic impacts. • The Glossary contains defined terms with a specific meaning when used in the GRI Standards. The terms are underlined in the text of the GRI Standards and linked to the definitions.• GRI 203: Indirect Economic Impacts 2016 4",
    "new_id": 1126
  },
  {
    "id": 83029,
    "question": "When an organization determines that indirect economic impacts are a material topic, which of the following best describes the conditions under which it can omit specific disclosures without violating reporting requirements, according to GRI 203: Indirect Economic Impacts 2016?",
    "options": {
      "C": "The organization must provide a reason for omission and explain in the GRI content index when confidentiality or legal prohibitions prevent compliance.",
      "A": "The organization may omit any disclosure if it believes the information is not relevant to its stakeholders.",
      "B": "The organization is required to create the missing policy or process before publishing its report to ensure full compliance.",
      "D": "The organization can omit disclosures only if it has published similar information in another public document, such as its annual report.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "5-6",
    "ref_doc": "GRI 203_ Indirect Economic Impacts 2016.pdf",
    "source_text": "Figure 1. GRI Standards: Universal, Sector and Topic Standards Apply all three Universal Standards to your reportingUse the Sector Standards that apply to your sectorsSelect Topic Standards to report specific information on your material topicsSector Standards Universal Standards Topic StandardsGRI Standards Requirements and principles for using the GRI Standards Disclosures about the reporting organization Disclosures and guidance about the organization's material topics Using this Standard This Standard can be used by any organization – regardless of size, type, sector, geographic location, or reporting experience – to report information about its indirect economic impacts . An organization reporting in accordance with the GRI Standards is required to report the following disclosures if it has determined indirect economic impacts to be a material topic : See Requirements 4 and 5 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 . Reasons for omission are permitted for these disclosures. If the organization cannot comply with a disclosure or with a requirement in a disclosure (e.g., because the required information is confidential or subject to legal prohibitions), the organization is required to specify the disclosure or the requirement it cannot comply with, and provide a reason for omission together with an explanation in the GRI content index. See Requirement 6 in GRI 1: Foundation 2021 for more information on reasons for omission. If the organization cannot report the required information about an item specified in a disclosure because the item (e.g., committee, policy, practice, process) does not exist, it can comply with the requirement by reporting this to be the case. The organization can explain the reasons for not having this item, or describe any plans to develop it. The disclosure does not require the organization to implement the item (e.g., developing a policy), but to report that the item does not exist. If the organization intends to publish a standalone sustainability report, it does not need to repeat information that it has already reported publicly elsewhere, such as on web pages or in its annual report. In such a case, the organization can report a required disclosure by providing a reference in the GRI content index as to where this information can be found (e.g., by providing a link to the web page or citing the page in the annual report where the information has been published). Disclosure 3-3 in GRI 3: Material Topics 2021 (see clause 1.1 in this Standard); • Any disclosures from this Topic Standard that are relevant to the organization’s indirect economic impacts (Disclosure 203-1 through Disclosure 203-2).• GRI 203: Indirect Economic Impacts 2016 5\n\n[Page 6]\nRequirements, guidance and defined terms The following apply throughout this Standard: Requirements are presented in bold font and indicated by the word 'shall'. An organization must comply with requirements to report in accordance with the GRI Standards. Requirements may be accompanied by guidance. Guidance includes background information, explanations, and examples to help the organization better understand the requirements. The organization is not required to comply with guidance. The Standards may also include recommendations. These are cases where a particular course of action is encouraged but not required. The word ‘should’ indicates a recommendation, and the word ‘can’ indicates a possibility or option. Defined terms are underlined in the text of the GRI Standards and linked to their definitions in the Glossary . The organization is required to apply the definitions in the Glossary. GRI 203: Indirect Economic Impacts 2016 6",
    "new_id": 1127
  },
  {
    "id": 83146,
    "question": "Under which condition can an entity categorically exclude a specific energy source from its renewable energy scope while still adhering to the outlined standards for disclosure, as described in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 52: Hotels & Lodging?",
    "options": {
      "D": "When the energy comes from the renewable portion of the electricity grid mix, irrespective of whether the entity has control or influence over its procurement.",
      "A": "When the energy source involves biomass materials that are uncertified by any third-party standard but align with internal sustainability goals.",
      "B": "When renewable energy certificates (RECs) or Guarantees of Origin (GOs) tied to on-site renewable electricity generation are sold rather than retained and retired.",
      "C": "When the entity participates in a renewable power purchase agreement (PPA) that explicitly excludes the retention of RECs or GOs.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "6",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol52.pdf",
    "source_text": "3.2 The percentage shall be calculated as renewable energy consumption divided by total energy consumption. 3.3 The scope of renewable energy includes renewable fuel the entity consumed, renewable energy the entity directly produced and renewable energy the entity purchased, if purchased through a renewable power purchase agreement (PPA) that explicitly includes renewable energy certificates (RECs) or Guarantees of Origin (GOs), a Green ‐e Energy Certified utility or supplier programme, or other green power products that explicitly include RECs or GOs, or for which Green ‐e Energy Certified RECs are paired with grid electricity. 3.3.1 For any renewable electricity generated on-site, any RECs and GOs shall be retained (not sold) and retired or cancelled on behalf of the entity for the entity to claim them as renewable energy. 3.3.2 For renewable PPAs and green power products, the agreement shall explicitly include and convey that RECs and GOs be retained or replaced and retired or cancelled on behalf of the entity for the entity to claim them as renewable energy. 3.3.3 The renewable portion of the electricity grid mix outside the control or influence of the entity is excluded from the scope of renewable energy. 3.4 For the purposes of this disclosure, the scope of renewable energy from biomass sources is limited to materials certified to a third-party standard (for example, Forest Stewardship Council, Sustainable Forest Initiative, Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification or American Tree Farm System), materials considered eligible sources of supply according to the Green-e Framework for Renewable Energy Certification, Version 1.0 (2017) or Green-e regional standards, or materials eligible for an applicable jurisdictional renewable portfolio standard. 4 The entity shall apply conversion factors consistently for all data reported under this disclosure, such as the use of HHVs for fuel use (including biofuels) and conversion of kilowatt hours (kWh) to GJ (for energy data, including electricity from solar or wind energy). Water Management Topic Summary Hotel buildings require a relatively large amount of water resources to operate. Although water is not the industry ’s greatest operating cost, reduced water availability or significant price increases could affect financial results. This effect may be particularly acute in water-stressed regions because of supply constraints. Entities in the industry are implementing water management best practices to reduce operating expenses and environmental impacts and to improve their brand value with guests, who increasingly are concerned about environmental sustainability.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 5",
    "new_id": 1128
  },
  {
    "id": 83147,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why the guidance excludes disclosures on food safety, waste, and sourcing for entities in the Hotels & Lodging industry, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 52: Hotels & Lodging?",
    "options": {
      "A": "Because the guidance presumes hotel and lodging entities do not provide food and beverage services as part of their operations.",
      "B": "Because these topics are universally irrelevant to all entities within the Hotels & Lodging industry.",
      "C": "Because the guidance assumes that such disclosures are covered under separate standards unrelated to climate-related risks.",
      "D": "Because food safety, waste, and sourcing are considered less material than energy and water management in this industry.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "3-4",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol52.pdf",
    "source_text": "Introduction This volume is part of the Industry-based Guidance on Implementing IFRS S2 Climate-related Disclosures . This guidance suggests possible ways to apply some of the disclosure requirements in IFRS S2 but does not create additional requirements. This volume suggests possible ways to identify, measure and disclose information about climate-related risks and opportunities that are associated with particular business models, economic activities and other common features that characterise participation in this industry. This industry-based guidance has been derived from Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) Standards, which are maintained by the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB). The metric codes used in SASB Standards have been included for ease of reference. For additional context regarding the industry-based guidance contained in this volume, including structure and terminology, application and illustrative examples, refer to Section III of the Accompanying Guidance to IFRS S2.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 2 © IFRS Foundation\n\n[Page 4]\nVolume 52 —Hotels & Lodging Industry Description Hotels and lodging industry entities provide overnight accommodation, including hotels, motels and inns. This competitive industry is comprised primarily of large hotel chains in which customers base purchase decisions on a wide range of factors including quality and consistency of services, availability of locations, price, and loyalty programme offers. Entities often are structured in one or more of the following ways: direct revenue from hotel services, including room rental and food and beverage sales; management and franchise services with fee revenue from property management; and vacation residential ownership with revenue from sales of residential units. Note: Some entities in the Hotels & Lodging industry also are engaged in activities of the Restaurants (FB-RN) industry. This Standard assumes hotel and lodging entities do not provide food and beverage services. Therefore, disclosures regarding food safety, waste and sourcing, which may be material for entities that also offer food and beverages, are not covered by this industry. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics Table 1. Sustainability Disclosure Topics & Metrics TOPIC METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Energy Management(1) Total energy consumed, (2) percentage grid electricity and (3) percentage renewableQuantitative Gigajoules (GJ), Percentage (%)SV-HL-130a.1 Water Management(1) Total water withdrawn, (2) total water consumed; percentage of each in regions with High or Extremely High Baseline Water StressQuantitative Thousand cubic metres (m³), Percentage (%)SV-HL-140a.1 Climate Change AdaptationNumber of lodging facilities located in 100-year flood zonesQuantitative Number SV-HL-450a.1 Table 2. Activity Metrics ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Number of available room-nights Quantitative Number SV-HL-000.A Average occupancy rate 89Quantitative Rate SV-HL-000.B Total area of lodging facilities 90Quantitative Square metres (m²)SV-HL-000.C continued... 89Note to SV-HL-000.B – Measured as number of (1) occupied room-nights divided by (2) available room-nights across all properties. 90Note to SV-HL-000.C – The scope includes facilities that were owned, operated, leased, or franchised during any portion of the reporting period.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 3",
    "new_id": 1129
  },
  {
    "id": 83148,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why an entity must disclose all lodging facilities located in 100-year flood zones, irrespective of their geographic location, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 52: Hotels & Lodging?",
    "options": {
      "B": "To provide a comprehensive assessment of potential financial risks associated with properties exposed to significant flood hazards globally.",
      "A": "Because hotels in such zones are guaranteed to face operational disruptions due to flooding every year.",
      "C": "To ensure compliance with insurance regulations that mandate disclosure for properties prone to any annual flooding risk greater than one percent.",
      "D": "Because disclosing these facilities helps entities avoid higher insurance premiums by identifying low-risk areas within flood zones.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "8-9",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol52.pdf",
    "source_text": "Climate Change Adaptation Topic Summary Hotels operating in climate change-exposed areas may be impacted by physical climate risks including inclement weather and flooding. Inclement weather may damage property and disrupt operations, thereby reducing asset values and revenues. In addition, hotels may face higher insurance premiums for buildings located in coastal regions or may be unable to insure their properties. Hotel operators will likely need to adapt to shifting climate trends such as rising sea levels, hurricanes, and flooding in order to maintain their climate-exposed revenue-generating properties. Metrics SV-HL-450a.1. Number of lodging facilities located in 100-year flood zones 1 The entity shall disclose the number of its lodging facilities that are located in 100-year flood zones. 1.1 100-year flood zones are defined as land areas subject to a one-percent or greater chance of flooding in any given year. Such areas may also be referred to as being subject to the one-percent annual chance flood, the one-percent annual exceedance probability flood, or the 100-year flood. 1.1.1 Examples of 100-year flood zones may include, but are not limited to, coastal flood plains, flood plains along major rivers, and areas subject to flooding from ponding in low-lying areas. 2 The scope of disclosure shall include all of the entity ’s lodging facilities that are located in 100-year flood zones, regardless of the country of their location.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 7\n\n[Page 9]\n8 © IFRS Foundation Columbus Building 7 Westferry Circus Canary Wharf London E14 4HD, UK Tel +44 (0) 20 7246 6410 Email sustainability_licensing@ifrs.org ifrs.org International Financial Reporting Standards®, IFRS Foundation®, IFRS®, IAS®, IFRIC®, SIC®, IASB®, ISSBTM, IFRS for SMEs®",
    "new_id": 1130
  },
  {
    "id": 83149,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why an entity's calculation of total energy consumption would exclude energy not directly consumed by the entity during the reporting period, even if such energy was produced or purchased by the entity, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 52: Hotels & Lodging?",
    "options": {
      "C": "Because energy not directly consumed does not contribute to the entity’s greenhouse gas emissions or operating expenses during that period.",
      "A": "Because only energy from renewable sources is relevant for sustainability reporting.",
      "B": "Because purchased electricity is indirectly responsible for all greenhouse gas emissions reported by the entity.",
      "D": "Because the higher heating values method cannot be applied to energy not directly consumed.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "5",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol52.pdf",
    "source_text": "...continued ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Number of lodging facilities and the percentage that are: (1) managed, (2) owned and leased, (3) franchisedQuantitative Number, Percentage (%)SV-HL-000.D Energy Management Topic Summary Hotel buildings require a significant amount of energy to operate, which is a substantial portion of hotel operating expenses. The industry purchases the majority of its electricity commercially. This purchased electricity indirectly results in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, which is a significant contributor to climate change. Entities in the industry are implementing energy management best practices to reduce operating expenses and environmental impacts and to improve their brand value with guests, who increasingly are concerned about environmental sustainability. Metrics SV-HL-130a.1. (1) Total energy consumed, (2) percentage grid electricity and (3) percentage renewable 1 The entity shall disclose (1) the total amount of energy it consumed as an aggregate figure, in gigajoules (GJ). 1.1 The scope of energy consumption includes energy from all sources, including energy purchased from external sources and energy produced by the entity itself (self-generated). For example, direct fuel usage, purchased electricity, and heating, cooling and steam energy are all included within the scope of energy consumption. 1.2 The scope of energy consumption includes only energy directly consumed by the entity during the reporting period. 1.3 In calculating energy consumption from fuels and biofuels, the entity shall use higher heating values (HHV), also known as gross calorific values (GCV), which are measured directly or taken from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2 The entity shall disclose (2) the percentage of energy it consumed that was supplied from grid electricity. 2.1 The percentage shall be calculated as purchased grid electricity consumption divided by total energy consumption. 3 The entity shall disclose (3) the percentage of energy it consumed that was renewable energy. 3.1 Renewable energy is defined as energy from sources that are replenished at a rate greater than or equal to their rate of depletion, such as geothermal, wind, solar, hydro and biomass.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 4 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 1131
  },
  {
    "id": 83341,
    "question": "Which scenario would require an entity to exclude a product's revenue from disclosure under TR-AP-410a.1 despite its potential to improve fuel efficiency or reduce emissions, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 62: Auto Parts?",
    "options": {
      "D": "A product that reduces nitrogen oxide emissions during its use phase but indirectly contributes to overall emission reductions through ancillary mechanisms.",
      "A": "A product that achieves meaningful improvement in fuel efficiency by aligning with EU Directive 2012/27/EU but is sold exclusively for testing purposes.",
      "B": "A product that demonstrates incremental improvements in combustion efficiency, validated against the milestones in the European Commission’s Road Map to a Resource Efficient Europe.",
      "C": "A product that enhances aerodynamics and is certified as part of a state renewable portfolio standard.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "6-7",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol62.pdf",
    "source_text": "3.3.3 The renewable portion of the electricity grid mix outside the control or influence of the entity is excluded from the scope of renewable energy. 3.4 For the purposes of this disclosure, the scope of renewable energy from biomass sources is limited to materials certified to a third-party standard (for example, Forest Stewardship Council, Sustainable Forest Initiative, Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification or American Tree Farm System), materials considered eligible sources of supply according to the Green-e Framework for Renewable Energy Certification, Version 1.0 (2017) or Green-e regional standards or materials that are eligible for an applicable state renewable portfolio standard. 4 The entity shall apply conversion factors consistently for all data reported under this disclosure, such as the use of HHVs for fuel use (including biofuels) and conversion of kilowatt hours (kWh) to GJ (for energy data including electricity from solar or wind energy). Design for Fuel Efficiency Topic Summary Automobile manufacturers increasingly are demanding motor parts and components that reduce vehicle fuel consumption. Fuel-efficient components and parts are critical in reducing automobile tailpipe emissions through energy efficiency gains and weight reductions, among other factors. Auto parts entities that design and manufacture such parts may increase sales to auto manufacturers that increasingly are facing stricter environmental regulations and customer preferences for more environmentally friendly cars. Metrics TR-AP-410a.1. Revenue from products designed to increase fuel efficiency or reduce emissions 1 The entity shall disclose total revenue from products designed to increase fuel efficiency or reduce emissions during their use phase. 1.1 Products designed to increase fuel efficiency or reduce emissions are defined as products the entity has tested, modelled or otherwise shown to improve fuel efficiency or eliminate or lower emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG), nitrogen oxide (NO x), particulate matter (PM), sulphur oxides (SOx) and other air pollutants during their use phase. 1.2 The use phase is defined as the course over which the product is used by a customer or consumer as a final product or to generate a final product (for example, in a manufacturing or production process). 1.3 The disclosure scope includes products that provide incremental improvement to fuel efficiency or emission reduction, if the entity can demonstrate the improvement is meaningful, such as through alignment with the milestones set forth in Section 5, ‘Key Sectors/Ensuring efficientIFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 5\n\n[Page 7]\nmobility ’, of the European Commission ‘s Road Map to a Resource Efficient Europe or with EU Directive 2012/27/EU (Energy Efficiency Directive). 1.4 The scope of disclosure excludes products that offer improved fuel efficiency or reduced emissions in an ancillary or indirect way (for example, a conventional product that is slightly lighter than the previous generation of the product). 2 Examples of products that may increase fuel efficiency or reduce emissions may include those relating to: electrification of auxiliary systems such as oil and water pumps, waste heat recovery, improved aerodynamics, hybrid and advanced fuel technologies, improvements to combustion efficiency, idle reduction, alternative cooling systems, electric power steering, hybrid-enabled braking technologies, low rolling resistance (LRR), new and retread tyre technologies, and engine management systems/products. 3 For products designed to both increase fuel efficiency and reduce emissions, the entity shall account only for the products ’ revenue once.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 6 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 1132
  },
  {
    "id": 83342,
    "question": "Which scenario would require an entity to account for a product's revenue only once under the described framework, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 62: Auto Parts?",
    "options": {
      "A": "A product designed to both increase fuel efficiency and reduce emissions through hybrid braking technologies.",
      "B": "A product that indirectly enhances fuel efficiency by being marginally lighter than its predecessor.",
      "C": "A product improving aerodynamics as part of a suite of features contributing to ancillary emission reductions.",
      "D": "A product focused exclusively on waste heat recovery without impacting emissions.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "A",
    "ref_page": "7-8",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol62.pdf",
    "source_text": "mobility ’, of the European Commission ‘s Road Map to a Resource Efficient Europe or with EU Directive 2012/27/EU (Energy Efficiency Directive). 1.4 The scope of disclosure excludes products that offer improved fuel efficiency or reduced emissions in an ancillary or indirect way (for example, a conventional product that is slightly lighter than the previous generation of the product). 2 Examples of products that may increase fuel efficiency or reduce emissions may include those relating to: electrification of auxiliary systems such as oil and water pumps, waste heat recovery, improved aerodynamics, hybrid and advanced fuel technologies, improvements to combustion efficiency, idle reduction, alternative cooling systems, electric power steering, hybrid-enabled braking technologies, low rolling resistance (LRR), new and retread tyre technologies, and engine management systems/products. 3 For products designed to both increase fuel efficiency and reduce emissions, the entity shall account only for the products ’ revenue once.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 6 © IFRS Foundation\n\n[Page 8]\n© IFRS Foundation 7 Columbus Building 7 Westferry Circus Canary Wharf London E14 4HD, UK Tel +44 (0) 20 7246 6410 Email sustainability_licensing@ifrs.org ifrs.org International Financial Reporting Standards®, IFRS Foundation®, IFRS®, IAS®, IFRIC®, SIC®, IASB®, ISSBTM, IFRS for SMEs®",
    "new_id": 1133
  },
  {
    "id": 83343,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the conditions under which revenue from products designed to increase fuel efficiency or reduce emissions must be disclosed, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 62: Auto Parts?",
    "options": {
      "B": "Revenue is reported for products that provide meaningful improvements in fuel efficiency or emission reductions, including those validated by testing, modeling, or alignment with recognized frameworks.",
      "A": "Revenue is disclosed only if the product’s impact on fuel efficiency or emissions reduction aligns with milestones in Section 5 of the European Commission’s Road Map, regardless of whether improvements are incremental.",
      "C": "Products offering indirect or ancillary improvements to fuel efficiency are included in the disclosure scope if they demonstrate alignment with EU Directive 2012/27/EU.",
      "D": "All products slightly lighter than previous versions qualify for revenue disclosure as long as they contribute indirectly to reduced emissions.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "B",
    "ref_page": "6-7",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol62.pdf",
    "source_text": "3.3.3 The renewable portion of the electricity grid mix outside the control or influence of the entity is excluded from the scope of renewable energy. 3.4 For the purposes of this disclosure, the scope of renewable energy from biomass sources is limited to materials certified to a third-party standard (for example, Forest Stewardship Council, Sustainable Forest Initiative, Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification or American Tree Farm System), materials considered eligible sources of supply according to the Green-e Framework for Renewable Energy Certification, Version 1.0 (2017) or Green-e regional standards or materials that are eligible for an applicable state renewable portfolio standard. 4 The entity shall apply conversion factors consistently for all data reported under this disclosure, such as the use of HHVs for fuel use (including biofuels) and conversion of kilowatt hours (kWh) to GJ (for energy data including electricity from solar or wind energy). Design for Fuel Efficiency Topic Summary Automobile manufacturers increasingly are demanding motor parts and components that reduce vehicle fuel consumption. Fuel-efficient components and parts are critical in reducing automobile tailpipe emissions through energy efficiency gains and weight reductions, among other factors. Auto parts entities that design and manufacture such parts may increase sales to auto manufacturers that increasingly are facing stricter environmental regulations and customer preferences for more environmentally friendly cars. Metrics TR-AP-410a.1. Revenue from products designed to increase fuel efficiency or reduce emissions 1 The entity shall disclose total revenue from products designed to increase fuel efficiency or reduce emissions during their use phase. 1.1 Products designed to increase fuel efficiency or reduce emissions are defined as products the entity has tested, modelled or otherwise shown to improve fuel efficiency or eliminate or lower emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG), nitrogen oxide (NO x), particulate matter (PM), sulphur oxides (SOx) and other air pollutants during their use phase. 1.2 The use phase is defined as the course over which the product is used by a customer or consumer as a final product or to generate a final product (for example, in a manufacturing or production process). 1.3 The disclosure scope includes products that provide incremental improvement to fuel efficiency or emission reduction, if the entity can demonstrate the improvement is meaningful, such as through alignment with the milestones set forth in Section 5, ‘Key Sectors/Ensuring efficientIFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 5\n\n[Page 7]\nmobility ’, of the European Commission ‘s Road Map to a Resource Efficient Europe or with EU Directive 2012/27/EU (Energy Efficiency Directive). 1.4 The scope of disclosure excludes products that offer improved fuel efficiency or reduced emissions in an ancillary or indirect way (for example, a conventional product that is slightly lighter than the previous generation of the product). 2 Examples of products that may increase fuel efficiency or reduce emissions may include those relating to: electrification of auxiliary systems such as oil and water pumps, waste heat recovery, improved aerodynamics, hybrid and advanced fuel technologies, improvements to combustion efficiency, idle reduction, alternative cooling systems, electric power steering, hybrid-enabled braking technologies, low rolling resistance (LRR), new and retread tyre technologies, and engine management systems/products. 3 For products designed to both increase fuel efficiency and reduce emissions, the entity shall account only for the products ’ revenue once.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 6 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 1134
  },
  {
    "id": 83406,
    "question": "Which statement accurately reflects the implications of the text regarding the consolidation and disclosure of GHG emissions data, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 66: Marine Transportation?",
    "options": {
      "C": "GHG emissions data must be consolidated in alignment with the financial control approach, even if alternative methods are used for other disclosures.",
      "A": "An entity may choose to consolidate GHG emissions data using an approach that aligns with its operational control rather than financial reporting data.",
      "B": "Entities are required to adjust their financial reporting data to match the organizational boundary defined by the CDSB Framework exclusively.",
      "D": "The Climate Disclosure Standards Board (CDSB) allows entities flexibility to define new organizational boundaries outside of the financial control approach.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "C",
    "ref_page": "6",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol66.pdf",
    "source_text": "2 Scope 1 emissions are defined and shall be calculated according to the methodology contained in The Greenhouse Gas Protocol: A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard (GHG Protocol), Revised Edition, March 2004, published by the World Resources Institute and the World Business Council on Sustainable Development (WRI/WBCSD). 2.1 Acceptable calculation methodologies include those that conform to the GHG Protocol as the base reference, but provide additional guidance, such as industry- or region-specific guidance. Examples may include: 2.1.1 GHG Reporting Guidance for the Aerospace Industry published by the International Aerospace Environmental Group (IAEG) 2.1.2 Greenhouse Gas Inventory Guidance: Direct Emissions from Stationary Combustion Sources published by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 2.1.3 India GHG Inventory Program 2.1.4 ISO 14064-1 2.1.5 Petroleum Industry Guidelines for reporting GHG emissions , 2nd edition, 2011, published by IPIECA 2.1.6 Protocol for the quantification of greenhouse gas emissions from waste management activities published by Entreprises pour l’Environnement (EpE) 2.2 GHG emissions data shall be consolidated and disclosed according to the approach with which the entity consolidates its financial reporting data, which is generally aligned with the 'financial control' approach defined by the GHG Protocol , and the approach published by the Climate Disclosure Standards Board (CDSB) described in REQ-07, 'Organisational boundary,' of the CDSB Framework for reporting environmental and social information . 3 The entity may discuss any change in emissions from the previous reporting period, including whether the change was because of emissions reductions, divestment, acquisition, mergers, changes in output or changes in calculation methodology. 4 In the case that current reporting of GHG emissions to the CDP or other entity (for example, a national regulatory disclosure programme) differs in terms of the scope and consolidation approach used, the entity may disclose those emissions. However, primary disclosure shall be according to the guidelines described above. 5 The entity may discuss the calculation methodology for its emissions disclosure, such as if data are from continuous emissions monitoring systems (CEMS), engineering calculations or mass balance calculations. TR-MT -110a.2. Discussion of long- and short-term strategy or plan to manage Scope 1 emissions, emissions reduction targets, and an analysis of performance against those targets 1 The entity shall discuss its long- and short-term strategy or plan to manage its Scope 1 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.IFRS S2 CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES –JUNE 2023 © IFRS Foundation 5",
    "new_id": 1135
  },
  {
    "id": 83407,
    "question": "Which of the following best explains why marine transportation entities might prioritize investments in fuel-efficient engines despite already being among the most fuel-efficient modes of transportation, as outlined in the IFRS S2 Industry-based Guidance on Implementing Climate-related Disclosures – Volume 66: Marine Transportation?",
    "options": {
      "D": "Fuel costs represent a significant operational expense, and improving efficiency offsets rising prices while complying with stricter environmental regulations.",
      "A": "The industry seeks to further reduce its already minimal greenhouse gas emissions per ton shipped to achieve carbon neutrality.",
      "B": "Entities are required by law to adopt cleaner-burning fuels regardless of their current fuel efficiency levels.",
      "C": "Heavy reliance on bunker fuel has made the industry immune to regulatory pressures, prompting voluntary upgrades for competitive advantage.",
      "Z": "Not sure"
    },
    "correct_answer": "D",
    "ref_page": "5",
    "ref_doc": "IFRS S2 Vol66.pdf",
    "source_text": "...continued ACTIVITY METRIC CATEGORY UNIT OF MEASURECODE Deadweight tonnage 123Quantitative Thousand deadweight tonsTR-MT -000.D Number of vessels in total shipping fleet Quantitative Number TR-MT -000.E Number of vessel port calls Quantitative Number TR-MT -000.F Twenty-foot equivalent unit (TEU) capacity Quantitative TEU TR-MT -000.G Greenhouse Gas Emissions Topic Summary Marine transportation entities generate emissions mainly from the combustion of diesel in ship engines. The industry ’s reliance on heavy fuel oil ( ‘bunker fuel ’) is of material concern because of rising fuel costs and intensifying greenhouse gas (GHG) regulations. The industry is among the most fuel efficient of the major transportation modes in terms of fuel use per ton shipped. However, because of the industry ’s size, its contribution to the global GHG emissions is still significant. Recent environmental regulations are encouraging the adoption of more fuel-efficient engines and the use of cleaner-burning fuels. Fuel constitutes a major expense for industry players, providing a further incentive for investing in upgrades or retrofits to boost fuel efficiency. Metrics TR-MT -110a.1. Gross global Scope 1 emissions 1 The entity shall disclose its gross global Scope 1 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to the atmosphere of the seven GHGs covered under the Kyoto Protocol —carbon dioxide (CO 2), methane (CH 4), nitrous oxide (N 2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), sulphur hexafluoride (SF 6), and nitrogen trifluoride (NF 3). 1.1 Emissions of all GHGs shall be consolidated and disclosed in metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents (CO 2-e) and calculated in accordance with published 100-year time horizon global warming potential (GWP) values. To date, the preferred source for GWP values is the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fifth Assessment Report (2014). 1.2 Gross emissions are GHGs emitted into the atmosphere before accounting for offsets, credits or other similar mechanisms that have reduced or compensated for emissions. 123Note to TR-MT-000.D – Deadweight tonnage is the sum, for all of the entity ’s vessels, of the difference in displacement in deadweight tons between the light displacement and the actual loaded displacement.IFRS S2 INDUSTRY-BASED GUIDANCE 4 © IFRS Foundation",
    "new_id": 1136
  }
]