A corporate water footprint is a quantitative measure of the total volume of water used by a company in its operations and throughout its value chain. It includes both direct and indirect water use, separated into water quantity and water quality impacts. Taking a life cycle approach, it comprises a company’s and its suppliers’ entire water use during the production and delivery of goods and services. It also includes the water used by customers during the use or disposal of those goods and services. As and where needed, water footprints can also be conducted for distinct sections of the value chain, e.g., for a company’s upstream value chain only.

The two leading and widely recognized tools to perform water footprinting are listed below, with the main difference between these two methods being their focus:

• The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 14046:2014 method is focused on inventory and impact assessment and is designed to be compatible with other ISO standards. A water footprint according to ISO 14046 is a “metric(s) that quantifies the potential environmental impacts related to water.” Therefore, an ISO water footprint considers first the inventory and then the impacts associated with water use, both in terms of quantity (i.e. how much water is withdrawn, or consumed) and in terms of quality (i.e. water pollution, through e.g. substances emitted to water bodies). This water footprint assessment also includes a contextual element, i.e. it takes into consideration water scarcity levels in those countries where water is withdrawn. Companies wishing to undertake a water footprint according to ISO 14046 will require external specialist support as the framework is not open source.
• The Water Footprint Network (WFN) method considers volumetric estimations of water consumption through blue and green water footprints, while water pollution is expressed through the grey water footprint. This method is less complex and easier to apply but will not yield the same granularity of results as it relies on global datasets. It can be helpful for companies wishing to gain a high-level picture of their water footprint impact along their value chain.

The Water Footprint Network’s method is open source, while the ISO method is not. The output from both methods allows companies to map water impacts and dependencies across the value chain and to identify hotspots for which water-related risks should be assessed in detail (see water risk assessment tools). More broadly, a corporate water footprint assessment allows companies to identify ways to reduce the environmental impacts of a company’s water use, and to identify areas for improvement.

When to use
A water footprint is the initial recommended step on the ACT-D journey. The assessment should be performed when the company has at a minimum an understanding of its value chain, and more specifically its water use in direct operations and sourcing volumes of raw materials. This assessment should be an iterative process, performed at least every three years. As companies improve the visibility of their value chain, the assessment will be more granular and will provide more detailed insights for subsequent steps of the company’s water journey.

Data requirements
For both methods, the assessment requires water use information of a company’s entire value chain.
This information can be obtained through primary or secondary data, as described below:

Primary data: water use information on the volume of water withdrawals and wastewater discharge, and their source and destination. Impact from wastewater quality can be modelled with primary or secondary data. Primary data on water use is usually obtainable for the company’s direct operations as part of the company’s internal environmental reporting.

Secondary data: Inventory of all products and activities in weight, volume, or spend (tons, m3, USD, kWh, etc.), matched with water use information data from external sources.

• ISO 14046: Inventory of all products and activities information is then matched with datasets from globally recognized life cycle assessment (LCA) datasets (see Annex A). The datasets provide the water inventory of material and energy inputs, emissions, and waste, as well as water withdrawal, evaporation, and discharge linked with every product/activity.
• WFN:  Inventory of all products and activities information is matched with the WFN’s WaterPub databases. These give the water inventory for green, blue, and grey water, linked to each activity/product.

All data must be complemented by geographical location data: water impacts are location dependent, therefore this parameter is considered in the analysis. Outside of direct operations, or where location data is not available, global averages can be used.

What to watch out for when performing a corporate water footprint assessment

Ultimately, ISO 14046 provides a comprehensive understanding of water inventory flows and related impacts, while the WFN provides a simplified method to assess some specific water uses in an easily communicable way. Even though conducting a water footprint with ISO 14046 will be a more complex and resource-intensive process, it will allow companies to have a more granular picture of how/why/where their water-related hotspots lie. Although one method is open source while the other is not, both are complex assessments which might require the company to be supported by an external or specialized sustainability advisor.

The Aqueduct Water Risk Atlas is a free, publicly available web-based tool developed by the World Resources Institute (WRI) that provides comprehensive, high-resolution mapping of basin water risks at the global, regional, and local levels. It uses a variety of indicators, including water scarcity, water stress, and flood risk.

In addition to the Aqueduct Water Risk Atlas, the WRI Aqueduct platform also contains:

• Aqueduct Country Rankings: shows average exposure to three water risk indicators: water stress, riverine flood risk, and drought risk at a country and province level - helping users analyze and compare national water risk exposure.
• Aqueduct Food: helps users understand and identify current and future water risks to agriculture and food security. It combines water risk data with explicit global crop area and data on food production, demand, trade, prices, and hunger levels for every country in the world. By providing users with a better understanding of how population growth and climate change will affect global food systems, Aqueduct Food aims to enable proactive management of water related risks to food security.
• Aqueduct Floods: enables users to analyze current and future riverine and coastal flood risks worldwide by measuring flood impacts by urban damage, affected GDP, and affected population at the country, state, and river basin scale across the globe.

The Water Footprint Network’s water footprinting methodology measures the total volume of direct and indirect freshwater used to produce a product or service. The assessment takes into account the water consumed (i.e., withdrawn from a water source and not returned) and the extent of water pollution during the production process. The water footprint is calculated using a life cycle assessment approach, which considers the entire value chain of a product or service, from the extraction of raw materials to the end-of-life (disposal or recycling).

The Water Risk Filter is a free, publicly available web-based tool developed by the World Wildlife Fund (WWF). It enables companies to assess their basin risks (linked to the nature and conditions of the basins in which the sites operate) and operational water risks (linked to sites dependance and impacts on water). In a future development of the tool, users will be able to identify potential mitigation measures. To complement its environmental risk tool offering, in 2022 WWF launched a Biodiversity Risk Filter. This tool uses data from 50 organizations including NASA, the World Bank, and IUCN to help investors and companies understand the risks they face from biodiversity loss.

The WASH Pledge Self-assessment Tool sets out the requirements for companies to comply with the UN Human Rights to Water and Sanitation by compiling international best practice on access to water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) provision in workplaces. It allows companies to identify gaps on WASH provision in their sites through self-assessments undertaken by sites. Companies can commit publicly to the WASH Pledge, meaning that they implement access to WASH at the workplace at an appropriate level of standard for all employees in all premises under their control, within three years of committing (with a signature). Under the Pledge, companies also commit to acting on WASH across their value chain, including with their suppliers, as well as in the communities that surround their workplaces and/or where their employees live.

The WASH Pledge is housed and supported by the WASH4Work coalition. It is a multi-stakeholder initiative hosted by The United Nations Global Compact’s CEO Water Mandate with a goal to mobilize company action on WASH. The Pledge was originally developed by WBCSD, as part of the organization’s efforts to advance the SDGs among its member companies. Since then, WBCSD transitioned the WASH Pledge resources and engagement to the WASH4Work initiative.

Advancements have been made in leading practices related to WASH, The Climate Resilient WASH Business Framework can be used alongside the WASH Pledge self-assessment tool to assess the risks of climate impacts on the continuation and resilience of WASH services. Additionally, the WASH Benefits Accounting Framework can be used alongside the WASH Pledge guiding principles related to accountability and reporting.

The Natural Capital Protocol, developed by the Capitals Coalition, is a decision-making framework that allows companies to identify, measure, and value their direct and indirect impacts and dependencies on natural capital. "Natural capital" is here defined as the stock of renewable and non-renewable natural resources (e.g., plants, animals, air, water, soils, minerals) that combine to yield a flow of benefits to people. The value of natural capital is not typically included in the price companies: buy or sell products, in their financial valuation or cash flows. By putting a value on natural capital, companies are able to improve their internal decision-making by including their impacts and dependencies on nature. The Natural Capital Protocol recommends that the information generated from using the Protocol be integrated into existing business processes, such as risk assessments, procurement, or financial planning - in short, it should be used to influence business decisions. Its use is not mandatory nor is it a formal reporting framework since the results are not required to be reported or disclosed externally. However, some companies have used it in external reporting. The Natural Capital Management Accounting (NCMA) methodology can be used to support further integration of natural capital accounting in business decision making.

Water-related impacts can be negative, for example: through water pollution owing to insufficient treatment prior to discharge, for example, or excessive withdrawal of freshwater in water-scarce areas. Impacts can also be positive, such as improved groundwater quality due to filtration and treatment processes that release water at a higher quality to the environment than the water that was extracted in the first place.

The Wastewater Impact Assessment Tool (WIAT) goes beyond wastewater and also helps companies understand the water use (water quantity). WIAT allows for a site-level assessment of the pressures/changes on the state of nature and the impacts on climate, biodiversity, and water security, resulting from industrial wastewater and water use. It does so by taking the data at a site level and calculating impact and levers of action for three key indicators: water quality, water availability and GHG emissions from wastewater treatment. Additionally, WIAT pulls in contextual data, from credible and widely used global data sources such as World Resource Institute’s Aqueduct tool, to further understand the change in the state of nature within a local context. The result is a visualization of the impacts at a site level, with the ability to view and compare multiple sites side by side - allowing for prioritization of where action is most needed to have the greatest positive impact.

The output of the tool is aligned with the SBTs for nature methodology (e.g. includes water quality and quantity indicators) and therefore can inform the setting of SBTs for nature (Step 3). WIAT aids with Step 1 (Mapping value chain and assessing level of pressure) and Step 2 (Interpret and Prioritize) of SBTs for Nature’s freshwater methodology. WIAT enables users to have all data and analysis in one place and to understand where they may be lacking data to apply SBTs for nature. WIAT goes beyond SBTs for nature, as it includes GHG emissions associated with wastewater management, taking into consideration the fuel input to run wastewater treatment plants (GHG Protocol Scope 2 category) and sludge disposal pathways (GHG Protocol Scope 3 category) – the breakdown between Scope 2 and Scope 3 emissions is given in the tool.

WIAT is also aligned with two key reporting frameworks, CDP and GRI, and provides ready-to-use data points (answers), allowing users to simply copy and paste from WIAT into corresponding CDP or GRI frameworks.

The Aqueduct Water Risk Atlas is a free, publicly available web-based tool developed by the World Resources Institute (WRI) that provides comprehensive, high-resolution mapping of basin water risks at the global, regional, and local levels. It uses a variety of indicators, including water scarcity, water stress, and flood risk.

In addition to the Aqueduct Water Risk Atlas, the WRI Aqueduct platform also contains:

• Aqueduct Country Rankings: shows average exposure to three water risk indicators: water stress, riverine flood risk, and drought risk at a country and province level - helping users analyze and compare national water risk exposure.
• Aqueduct Food: helps users understand and identify current and future water risks to agriculture and food security. It combines water risk data with explicit global crop area and data on food production, demand, trade, prices, and hunger levels for every country in the world. By providing users with a better understanding of how population growth and climate change will affect global food systems, Aqueduct Food aims to enable proactive management of water related risks to food security.
• Aqueduct Floods: enables users to analyze current and future riverine and coastal flood risks worldwide by measuring flood impacts by urban damage, affected GDP, and affected population at the country, state, and river basin scale across the globe.

The ISO 14046 framework is a standard developed by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) for water footprint assessment. A water footprint according to ISO 14046 is a life cycle assessment (LCA) which includes a water inventory analysis and water-related impacts. It considers all value chain stages (cradle to grave). When applied at the corporate level, it quantifies water use (water consumption and water pollution) and related impacts along a company’s entire value chain.

The Water Footprint Network’s water footprinting methodology measures the total volume of direct and indirect freshwater used to produce a product or service. The assessment takes into account the water consumed (i.e., withdrawn from a water source and not returned) and the extent of water pollution during the production process. The water footprint is calculated using a life cycle assessment approach, which considers the entire value chain of a product or service, from the extraction of raw materials to the end-of-life (disposal or recycling).

The Water Risk Filter is a free, publicly available web-based tool developed by the World Wildlife Fund (WWF). It enables companies to assess their basin risks (linked to the nature and conditions of the basins in which the sites operate) and operational water risks (linked to sites dependance and impacts on water). In a future development of the tool, users will be able to identify potential mitigation measures. To complement its environmental risk tool offering, in 2022 WWF launched a Biodiversity Risk Filter. This tool uses data from 50 organizations including NASA, the World Bank, and IUCN to help investors and companies understand the risks they face from biodiversity loss.

The WASH Pledge Self-assessment Tool sets out the requirements for companies to comply with the UN Human Rights to Water and Sanitation by compiling international best practice on access to water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) provision in workplaces. It allows companies to identify gaps on WASH provision in their sites through self-assessments undertaken by sites. Companies can commit publicly to the WASH Pledge, meaning that they implement access to WASH at the workplace at an appropriate level of standard for all employees in all premises under their control, within three years of committing (with a signature). Under the Pledge, companies also commit to acting on WASH across their value chain, including with their suppliers, as well as in the communities that surround their workplaces and/or where their employees live.

The WASH Pledge is housed and supported by the WASH4Work coalition. It is a multi-stakeholder initiative hosted by The United Nations Global Compact’s CEO Water Mandate with a goal to mobilize company action on WASH. The Pledge was originally developed by WBCSD, as part of the organization’s efforts to advance the SDGs among its member companies. Since then, WBCSD transitioned the WASH Pledge resources and engagement to the WASH4Work initiative.

Advancements have been made in leading practices related to WASH, The Climate Resilient WASH Business Framework can be used alongside the WASH Pledge self-assessment tool to assess the risks of climate impacts on the continuation and resilience of WASH services. Additionally, the WASH Benefits Accounting Framework can be used alongside the WASH Pledge guiding principles related to accountability and reporting.

The Natural Capital Protocol, developed by the Capitals Coalition, is a decision-making framework that allows companies to identify, measure, and value their direct and indirect impacts and dependencies on natural capital. "Natural capital" is here defined as the stock of renewable and non-renewable natural resources (e.g., plants, animals, air, water, soils, minerals) that combine to yield a flow of benefits to people. The value of natural capital is not typically included in the price companies: buy or sell products, in their financial valuation or cash flows. By putting a value on natural capital, companies are able to improve their internal decision-making by including their impacts and dependencies on nature. The Natural Capital Protocol recommends that the information generated from using the Protocol be integrated into existing business processes, such as risk assessments, procurement, or financial planning - in short, it should be used to influence business decisions. Its use is not mandatory nor is it a formal reporting framework since the results are not required to be reported or disclosed externally. However, some companies have used it in external reporting. The Natural Capital Management Accounting (NCMA) methodology can be used to support further integration of natural capital accounting in business decision making.

Water-related impacts can be negative, for example: through water pollution owing to insufficient treatment prior to discharge, for example, or excessive withdrawal of freshwater in water-scarce areas. Impacts can also be positive, such as improved groundwater quality due to filtration and treatment processes that release water at a higher quality to the environment than the water that was extracted in the first place.

The science-based targets (SBTs) for nature framework allows companies to set integrated SBTs for all aspects of nature: biodiversity, climate, freshwater, land, and oceans. The methodology for climate o already been widely adopted by companies. Compared to climate, targets for biodiversity, freshwater, land, and oceans will depend on the local context. They will therefore require a detailed assessment of how a company depends on these natural resources locally and how it impacts the local state of nature (in the case of water, how a company impacts the conditions of a local water basin). 

SBTs for nature cover companies’ entire value chain and comprise of a five-step process (similar steps to the ACT-D framework). The first two steps are the focus of this section:

• Assess (Step 1): identify which nature areas to set targets for and for which parts of the business; and
• Prioritize (Step 2): prioritize which places and parts of the business to get started on first.

Applying these two steps will give companies a picture of where in their value chain they have a material impact on water (or other nature areas), and which places should be prioritized for action. In addition, undertaking these outlined steps will lay the basis for setting SBTs for nature at a later stage (see Science-based targets for nature by SBTN Step 3). Currently, the methodology allows the assessment of companies’ own operations and upstream value chains; future iterations of the guidance will expand to cover downstream impacts.

In terms of water pressures, the framework currently covers:

• Under Resource use: water use (m3)
• Under Pollution: Water pollution (nitrogen and phosphorous pollution in discharged water)

SBTN plans to add additional freshwater pollution indicators to its scope in future iterations.

The Smart Water Navigator is a publicly available online tool that allows companies to assess water risks, set site-specific and context-based water targets, and develop water action plans.
It consists of two modules: the Water Risk Monetizer and the Water Action Assessment.

• The Water Risk Monetizer quantifies in monetary terms the risks related to water availability and water quantity, based off local water basin datasets and user inputs, and benchmarks facilities in terms of water use efficiency.
• The Water Action Assessment is based on a simple, 13-question assessment that ranks facilities on its Water Maturity Curve and offers a practical guide to smart, sustainable water practices, providing a roadmap that can help facilities improve the way they use water.

These two modules can help a company understand the value of water to its direct operations and identify ways to improve water management practices at site level. The combination of the Smart Water Navigator and other relevant tools can be a valuable resource for managing water quality risks and achieving sustainable water management practices.

The tool is free to use. Users need to create an account on the Smart Water Navigator platform, which allows them to manage one or a portfolio of facilities.

The Smart Water Navigator is a publicly available online tool that allows companies to assess water risks, set site-specific and context-based water targets, and develop water action plans.
It consists of two modules: the Water Risk Monetizer and the Water Action Assessment.

• The Water Risk Monetizer quantifies in monetary terms the risks related to water availability and water quantity, based off local water basin datasets and user inputs, and benchmarks facilities in terms of water use efficiency.
• The Water Action Assessment is based on a simple, 13-question assessment that ranks facilities on its Water Maturity Curve and offers a practical guide to smart, sustainable water practices, providing a roadmap that can help facilities improve the way they use water.

These two modules can help a company understand the value of water to its direct operations and identify ways to improve water management practices at site level. The combination of the Smart Water Navigator and other relevant tools can be a valuable resource for managing water quality risks and achieving sustainable water management practices.

The tool is free to use. Users need to create an account on the Smart Water Navigator platform, which allows them to manage one or a portfolio of facilities.

The Wastewater Impact Assessment Tool (WIAT) goes beyond wastewater and also helps companies understand the water use (water quantity). WIAT allows for a site-level assessment of the pressures/changes on the state of nature and the impacts on climate, biodiversity, and water security, resulting from industrial wastewater and water use. It does so by taking the data at a site level and calculating impact and levers of action for three key indicators: water quality, water availability and GHG emissions from wastewater treatment. Additionally, WIAT pulls in contextual data, from credible and widely used global data sources such as World Resource Institute’s Aqueduct tool, to further understand the change in the state of nature within a local context. The result is a visualization of the impacts at a site level, with the ability to view and compare multiple sites side by side - allowing for prioritization of where action is most needed to have the greatest positive impact.

The output of the tool is aligned with the SBTs for nature methodology (e.g. includes water quality and quantity indicators) and therefore can inform the setting of SBTs for nature (Step 3). WIAT aids with Step 1 (Mapping value chain and assessing level of pressure) and Step 2 (Interpret and Prioritize) of SBTs for Nature’s freshwater methodology. WIAT enables users to have all data and analysis in one place and to understand where they may be lacking data to apply SBTs for nature. WIAT goes beyond SBTs for nature, as it includes GHG emissions associated with wastewater management, taking into consideration the fuel input to run wastewater treatment plants (GHG Protocol Scope 2 category) and sludge disposal pathways (GHG Protocol Scope 3 category) – the breakdown between Scope 2 and Scope 3 emissions is given in the tool.

WIAT is also aligned with two key reporting frameworks, CDP and GRI, and provides ready-to-use data points (answers), allowing users to simply copy and paste from WIAT into corresponding CDP or GRI frameworks.

A corporate water footprint is a quantitative measure of the total volume of water used by a company in its operations and throughout its value chain. It includes both direct and indirect water use, separated into water quantity and water quality impacts. Taking a life cycle approach, it comprises a company’s and its suppliers’ entire water use during the production and delivery of goods and services. It also includes the water used by customers during the use or disposal of those goods and services. As and where needed, water footprints can also be conducted for distinct sections of the value chain, e.g., for a company’s upstream value chain only.

The two leading and widely recognized tools to perform water footprinting are listed below, with the main difference between these two methods being their focus:

• The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 14046:2014 method is focused on inventory and impact assessment and is designed to be compatible with other ISO standards. A water footprint according to ISO 14046 is a “metric(s) that quantifies the potential environmental impacts related to water.” Therefore, an ISO water footprint considers first the inventory and then the impacts associated with water use, both in terms of quantity (i.e. how much water is withdrawn, or consumed) and in terms of quality (i.e. water pollution, through e.g. substances emitted to water bodies). This water footprint assessment also includes a contextual element, i.e. it takes into consideration water scarcity levels in those countries where water is withdrawn. Companies wishing to undertake a water footprint according to ISO 14046 will require external specialist support as the framework is not open source.
• The Water Footprint Network (WFN) method considers volumetric estimations of water consumption through blue and green water footprints, while water pollution is expressed through the grey water footprint. This method is less complex and easier to apply but will not yield the same granularity of results as it relies on global datasets. It can be helpful for companies wishing to gain a high-level picture of their water footprint impact along their value chain.

The Water Footprint Network’s method is open source, while the ISO method is not. The output from both methods allows companies to map water impacts and dependencies across the value chain and to identify hotspots for which water-related risks should be assessed in detail (see water risk assessment tools). More broadly, a corporate water footprint assessment allows companies to identify ways to reduce the environmental impacts of a company’s water use, and to identify areas for improvement.

When to use
A water footprint is the initial recommended step on the ACT-D journey. The assessment should be performed when the company has at a minimum an understanding of its value chain, and more specifically its water use in direct operations and sourcing volumes of raw materials. This assessment should be an iterative process, performed at least every three years. As companies improve the visibility of their value chain, the assessment will be more granular and will provide more detailed insights for subsequent steps of the company’s water journey.

Data requirements
For both methods, the assessment requires water use information of a company’s entire value chain.
This information can be obtained through primary or secondary data, as described below:

Primary data: water use information on the volume of water withdrawals and wastewater discharge, and their source and destination. Impact from wastewater quality can be modelled with primary or secondary data. Primary data on water use is usually obtainable for the company’s direct operations as part of the company’s internal environmental reporting.

Secondary data: Inventory of all products and activities in weight, volume, or spend (tons, m3, USD, kWh, etc.), matched with water use information data from external sources.

• ISO 14046: Inventory of all products and activities information is then matched with datasets from globally recognized life cycle assessment (LCA) datasets (see Annex A). The datasets provide the water inventory of material and energy inputs, emissions, and waste, as well as water withdrawal, evaporation, and discharge linked with every product/activity.
• WFN:  Inventory of all products and activities information is matched with the WFN’s WaterPub databases. These give the water inventory for green, blue, and grey water, linked to each activity/product.

All data must be complemented by geographical location data: water impacts are location dependent, therefore this parameter is considered in the analysis. Outside of direct operations, or where location data is not available, global averages can be used.

What to watch out for when performing a corporate water footprint assessment

Ultimately, ISO 14046 provides a comprehensive understanding of water inventory flows and related impacts, while the WFN provides a simplified method to assess some specific water uses in an easily communicable way. Even though conducting a water footprint with ISO 14046 will be a more complex and resource-intensive process, it will allow companies to have a more granular picture of how/why/where their water-related hotspots lie. Although one method is open source while the other is not, both are complex assessments which might require the company to be supported by an external or specialized sustainability advisor.

The Aqueduct Water Risk Atlas is a free, publicly available web-based tool developed by the World Resources Institute (WRI) that provides comprehensive, high-resolution mapping of basin water risks at the global, regional, and local levels. It uses a variety of indicators, including water scarcity, water stress, and flood risk.

In addition to the Aqueduct Water Risk Atlas, the WRI Aqueduct platform also contains:

• Aqueduct Country Rankings: shows average exposure to three water risk indicators: water stress, riverine flood risk, and drought risk at a country and province level - helping users analyze and compare national water risk exposure.
• Aqueduct Food: helps users understand and identify current and future water risks to agriculture and food security. It combines water risk data with explicit global crop area and data on food production, demand, trade, prices, and hunger levels for every country in the world. By providing users with a better understanding of how population growth and climate change will affect global food systems, Aqueduct Food aims to enable proactive management of water related risks to food security.
• Aqueduct Floods: enables users to analyze current and future riverine and coastal flood risks worldwide by measuring flood impacts by urban damage, affected GDP, and affected population at the country, state, and river basin scale across the globe.

The Water Risk Filter is a free, publicly available web-based tool developed by the World Wildlife Fund (WWF). It enables companies to assess their basin risks (linked to the nature and conditions of the basins in which the sites operate) and operational water risks (linked to sites dependance and impacts on water). In a future development of the tool, users will be able to identify potential mitigation measures. To complement its environmental risk tool offering, in 2022 WWF launched a Biodiversity Risk Filter. This tool uses data from 50 organizations including NASA, the World Bank, and IUCN to help investors and companies understand the risks they face from biodiversity loss.

The WASH Pledge Self-assessment Tool sets out the requirements for companies to comply with the UN Human Rights to Water and Sanitation by compiling international best practice on access to water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) provision in workplaces. It allows companies to identify gaps on WASH provision in their sites through self-assessments undertaken by sites. Companies can commit publicly to the WASH Pledge, meaning that they implement access to WASH at the workplace at an appropriate level of standard for all employees in all premises under their control, within three years of committing (with a signature). Under the Pledge, companies also commit to acting on WASH across their value chain, including with their suppliers, as well as in the communities that surround their workplaces and/or where their employees live.

The WASH Pledge is housed and supported by the WASH4Work coalition. It is a multi-stakeholder initiative hosted by The United Nations Global Compact’s CEO Water Mandate with a goal to mobilize company action on WASH. The Pledge was originally developed by WBCSD, as part of the organization’s efforts to advance the SDGs among its member companies. Since then, WBCSD transitioned the WASH Pledge resources and engagement to the WASH4Work initiative.

Advancements have been made in leading practices related to WASH, The Climate Resilient WASH Business Framework can be used alongside the WASH Pledge self-assessment tool to assess the risks of climate impacts on the continuation and resilience of WASH services. Additionally, the WASH Benefits Accounting Framework can be used alongside the WASH Pledge guiding principles related to accountability and reporting.

The science-based targets (SBTs) for nature framework allows companies to set integrated SBTs for all aspects of nature: biodiversity, climate, freshwater, land, and oceans. The methodology for climate o already been widely adopted by companies. Compared to climate, targets for biodiversity, freshwater, land, and oceans will depend on the local context. They will therefore require a detailed assessment of how a company depends on these natural resources locally and how it impacts the local state of nature (in the case of water, how a company impacts the conditions of a local water basin). 

SBTs for nature cover companies’ entire value chain and comprise of a five-step process (similar steps to the ACT-D framework). The first two steps are the focus of this section:

• Assess (Step 1): identify which nature areas to set targets for and for which parts of the business; and
• Prioritize (Step 2): prioritize which places and parts of the business to get started on first.

Applying these two steps will give companies a picture of where in their value chain they have a material impact on water (or other nature areas), and which places should be prioritized for action. In addition, undertaking these outlined steps will lay the basis for setting SBTs for nature at a later stage (see Science-based targets for nature by SBTN Step 3). Currently, the methodology allows the assessment of companies’ own operations and upstream value chains; future iterations of the guidance will expand to cover downstream impacts.

In terms of water pressures, the framework currently covers:

• Under Resource use: water use (m3)
• Under Pollution: Water pollution (nitrogen and phosphorous pollution in discharged water)

SBTN plans to add additional freshwater pollution indicators to its scope in future iterations.

The Smart Water Navigator is a publicly available online tool that allows companies to assess water risks, set site-specific and context-based water targets, and develop water action plans.
It consists of two modules: the Water Risk Monetizer and the Water Action Assessment.

• The Water Risk Monetizer quantifies in monetary terms the risks related to water availability and water quantity, based off local water basin datasets and user inputs, and benchmarks facilities in terms of water use efficiency.
• The Water Action Assessment is based on a simple, 13-question assessment that ranks facilities on its Water Maturity Curve and offers a practical guide to smart, sustainable water practices, providing a roadmap that can help facilities improve the way they use water.

These two modules can help a company understand the value of water to its direct operations and identify ways to improve water management practices at site level. The combination of the Smart Water Navigator and other relevant tools can be a valuable resource for managing water quality risks and achieving sustainable water management practices.

The tool is free to use. Users need to create an account on the Smart Water Navigator platform, which allows them to manage one or a portfolio of facilities.

The Smart Water Navigator is a publicly available online tool that allows companies to assess water risks, set site-specific and context-based water targets, and develop water action plans.
It consists of two modules: the Water Risk Monetizer and the Water Action Assessment.

• The Water Risk Monetizer quantifies in monetary terms the risks related to water availability and water quantity, based off local water basin datasets and user inputs, and benchmarks facilities in terms of water use efficiency.
• The Water Action Assessment is based on a simple, 13-question assessment that ranks facilities on its Water Maturity Curve and offers a practical guide to smart, sustainable water practices, providing a roadmap that can help facilities improve the way they use water.

These two modules can help a company understand the value of water to its direct operations and identify ways to improve water management practices at site level. The combination of the Smart Water Navigator and other relevant tools can be a valuable resource for managing water quality risks and achieving sustainable water management practices.

The tool is free to use. Users need to create an account on the Smart Water Navigator platform, which allows them to manage one or a portfolio of facilities.

The Wastewater Impact Assessment Tool (WIAT) goes beyond wastewater and also helps companies understand the water use (water quantity). WIAT allows for a site-level assessment of the pressures/changes on the state of nature and the impacts on climate, biodiversity, and water security, resulting from industrial wastewater and water use. It does so by taking the data at a site level and calculating impact and levers of action for three key indicators: water quality, water availability and GHG emissions from wastewater treatment. Additionally, WIAT pulls in contextual data, from credible and widely used global data sources such as World Resource Institute’s Aqueduct tool, to further understand the change in the state of nature within a local context. The result is a visualization of the impacts at a site level, with the ability to view and compare multiple sites side by side - allowing for prioritization of where action is most needed to have the greatest positive impact.

The output of the tool is aligned with the SBTs for nature methodology (e.g. includes water quality and quantity indicators) and therefore can inform the setting of SBTs for nature (Step 3). WIAT aids with Step 1 (Mapping value chain and assessing level of pressure) and Step 2 (Interpret and Prioritize) of SBTs for Nature’s freshwater methodology. WIAT enables users to have all data and analysis in one place and to understand where they may be lacking data to apply SBTs for nature. WIAT goes beyond SBTs for nature, as it includes GHG emissions associated with wastewater management, taking into consideration the fuel input to run wastewater treatment plants (GHG Protocol Scope 2 category) and sludge disposal pathways (GHG Protocol Scope 3 category) – the breakdown between Scope 2 and Scope 3 emissions is given in the tool.

WIAT is also aligned with two key reporting frameworks, CDP and GRI, and provides ready-to-use data points (answers), allowing users to simply copy and paste from WIAT into corresponding CDP or GRI frameworks.

The Water Footprint Network’s water footprinting methodology measures the total volume of direct and indirect freshwater used to produce a product or service. The assessment takes into account the water consumed (i.e., withdrawn from a water source and not returned) and the extent of water pollution during the production process. The water footprint is calculated using a life cycle assessment approach, which considers the entire value chain of a product or service, from the extraction of raw materials to the end-of-life (disposal or recycling).

A corporate water footprint is a quantitative measure of the total volume of water used by a company in its operations and throughout its value chain. It includes both direct and indirect water use, separated into water quantity and water quality impacts. Taking a life cycle approach, it comprises a company’s and its suppliers’ entire water use during the production and delivery of goods and services. It also includes the water used by customers during the use or disposal of those goods and services. As and where needed, water footprints can also be conducted for distinct sections of the value chain, e.g., for a company’s upstream value chain only.

The two leading and widely recognized tools to perform water footprinting are listed below, with the main difference between these two methods being their focus:

• The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 14046:2014 method is focused on inventory and impact assessment and is designed to be compatible with other ISO standards. A water footprint according to ISO 14046 is a “metric(s) that quantifies the potential environmental impacts related to water.” Therefore, an ISO water footprint considers first the inventory and then the impacts associated with water use, both in terms of quantity (i.e. how much water is withdrawn, or consumed) and in terms of quality (i.e. water pollution, through e.g. substances emitted to water bodies). This water footprint assessment also includes a contextual element, i.e. it takes into consideration water scarcity levels in those countries where water is withdrawn. Companies wishing to undertake a water footprint according to ISO 14046 will require external specialist support as the framework is not open source.
• The Water Footprint Network (WFN) method considers volumetric estimations of water consumption through blue and green water footprints, while water pollution is expressed through the grey water footprint. This method is less complex and easier to apply but will not yield the same granularity of results as it relies on global datasets. It can be helpful for companies wishing to gain a high-level picture of their water footprint impact along their value chain.

The Water Footprint Network’s method is open source, while the ISO method is not. The output from both methods allows companies to map water impacts and dependencies across the value chain and to identify hotspots for which water-related risks should be assessed in detail (see water risk assessment tools). More broadly, a corporate water footprint assessment allows companies to identify ways to reduce the environmental impacts of a company’s water use, and to identify areas for improvement.

When to use
A water footprint is the initial recommended step on the ACT-D journey. The assessment should be performed when the company has at a minimum an understanding of its value chain, and more specifically its water use in direct operations and sourcing volumes of raw materials. This assessment should be an iterative process, performed at least every three years. As companies improve the visibility of their value chain, the assessment will be more granular and will provide more detailed insights for subsequent steps of the company’s water journey.

Data requirements
For both methods, the assessment requires water use information of a company’s entire value chain.
This information can be obtained through primary or secondary data, as described below:

Primary data: water use information on the volume of water withdrawals and wastewater discharge, and their source and destination. Impact from wastewater quality can be modelled with primary or secondary data. Primary data on water use is usually obtainable for the company’s direct operations as part of the company’s internal environmental reporting.

Secondary data: Inventory of all products and activities in weight, volume, or spend (tons, m3, USD, kWh, etc.), matched with water use information data from external sources.

• ISO 14046: Inventory of all products and activities information is then matched with datasets from globally recognized life cycle assessment (LCA) datasets (see Annex A). The datasets provide the water inventory of material and energy inputs, emissions, and waste, as well as water withdrawal, evaporation, and discharge linked with every product/activity.
• WFN:  Inventory of all products and activities information is matched with the WFN’s WaterPub databases. These give the water inventory for green, blue, and grey water, linked to each activity/product.

All data must be complemented by geographical location data: water impacts are location dependent, therefore this parameter is considered in the analysis. Outside of direct operations, or where location data is not available, global averages can be used.

What to watch out for when performing a corporate water footprint assessment

Ultimately, ISO 14046 provides a comprehensive understanding of water inventory flows and related impacts, while the WFN provides a simplified method to assess some specific water uses in an easily communicable way. Even though conducting a water footprint with ISO 14046 will be a more complex and resource-intensive process, it will allow companies to have a more granular picture of how/why/where their water-related hotspots lie. Although one method is open source while the other is not, both are complex assessments which might require the company to be supported by an external or specialized sustainability advisor.

The Aqueduct Water Risk Atlas is a free, publicly available web-based tool developed by the World Resources Institute (WRI) that provides comprehensive, high-resolution mapping of basin water risks at the global, regional, and local levels. It uses a variety of indicators, including water scarcity, water stress, and flood risk.

In addition to the Aqueduct Water Risk Atlas, the WRI Aqueduct platform also contains:

• Aqueduct Country Rankings: shows average exposure to three water risk indicators: water stress, riverine flood risk, and drought risk at a country and province level - helping users analyze and compare national water risk exposure.
• Aqueduct Food: helps users understand and identify current and future water risks to agriculture and food security. It combines water risk data with explicit global crop area and data on food production, demand, trade, prices, and hunger levels for every country in the world. By providing users with a better understanding of how population growth and climate change will affect global food systems, Aqueduct Food aims to enable proactive management of water related risks to food security.
• Aqueduct Floods: enables users to analyze current and future riverine and coastal flood risks worldwide by measuring flood impacts by urban damage, affected GDP, and affected population at the country, state, and river basin scale across the globe.

The Water Risk Filter is a free, publicly available web-based tool developed by the World Wildlife Fund (WWF). It enables companies to assess their basin risks (linked to the nature and conditions of the basins in which the sites operate) and operational water risks (linked to sites dependance and impacts on water). In a future development of the tool, users will be able to identify potential mitigation measures. To complement its environmental risk tool offering, in 2022 WWF launched a Biodiversity Risk Filter. This tool uses data from 50 organizations including NASA, the World Bank, and IUCN to help investors and companies understand the risks they face from biodiversity loss.

The WASH Pledge Self-assessment Tool sets out the requirements for companies to comply with the UN Human Rights to Water and Sanitation by compiling international best practice on access to water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) provision in workplaces. It allows companies to identify gaps on WASH provision in their sites through self-assessments undertaken by sites. Companies can commit publicly to the WASH Pledge, meaning that they implement access to WASH at the workplace at an appropriate level of standard for all employees in all premises under their control, within three years of committing (with a signature). Under the Pledge, companies also commit to acting on WASH across their value chain, including with their suppliers, as well as in the communities that surround their workplaces and/or where their employees live.

The WASH Pledge is housed and supported by the WASH4Work coalition. It is a multi-stakeholder initiative hosted by The United Nations Global Compact’s CEO Water Mandate with a goal to mobilize company action on WASH. The Pledge was originally developed by WBCSD, as part of the organization’s efforts to advance the SDGs among its member companies. Since then, WBCSD transitioned the WASH Pledge resources and engagement to the WASH4Work initiative.

Advancements have been made in leading practices related to WASH, The Climate Resilient WASH Business Framework can be used alongside the WASH Pledge self-assessment tool to assess the risks of climate impacts on the continuation and resilience of WASH services. Additionally, the WASH Benefits Accounting Framework can be used alongside the WASH Pledge guiding principles related to accountability and reporting.

The science-based targets (SBTs) for nature framework allows companies to set integrated SBTs for all aspects of nature: biodiversity, climate, freshwater, land, and oceans. The methodology for climate o already been widely adopted by companies. Compared to climate, targets for biodiversity, freshwater, land, and oceans will depend on the local context. They will therefore require a detailed assessment of how a company depends on these natural resources locally and how it impacts the local state of nature (in the case of water, how a company impacts the conditions of a local water basin). 

SBTs for nature cover companies’ entire value chain and comprise of a five-step process (similar steps to the ACT-D framework). The first two steps are the focus of this section:

• Assess (Step 1): identify which nature areas to set targets for and for which parts of the business; and
• Prioritize (Step 2): prioritize which places and parts of the business to get started on first.

Applying these two steps will give companies a picture of where in their value chain they have a material impact on water (or other nature areas), and which places should be prioritized for action. In addition, undertaking these outlined steps will lay the basis for setting SBTs for nature at a later stage (see Science-based targets for nature by SBTN Step 3). Currently, the methodology allows the assessment of companies’ own operations and upstream value chains; future iterations of the guidance will expand to cover downstream impacts.

In terms of water pressures, the framework currently covers:

• Under Resource use: water use (m3)
• Under Pollution: Water pollution (nitrogen and phosphorous pollution in discharged water)

SBTN plans to add additional freshwater pollution indicators to its scope in future iterations.

The Smart Water Navigator is a publicly available online tool that allows companies to assess water risks, set site-specific and context-based water targets, and develop water action plans.
It consists of two modules: the Water Risk Monetizer and the Water Action Assessment.

• The Water Risk Monetizer quantifies in monetary terms the risks related to water availability and water quantity, based off local water basin datasets and user inputs, and benchmarks facilities in terms of water use efficiency.
• The Water Action Assessment is based on a simple, 13-question assessment that ranks facilities on its Water Maturity Curve and offers a practical guide to smart, sustainable water practices, providing a roadmap that can help facilities improve the way they use water.

These two modules can help a company understand the value of water to its direct operations and identify ways to improve water management practices at site level. The combination of the Smart Water Navigator and other relevant tools can be a valuable resource for managing water quality risks and achieving sustainable water management practices.

The tool is free to use. Users need to create an account on the Smart Water Navigator platform, which allows them to manage one or a portfolio of facilities.

The Smart Water Navigator is a publicly available online tool that allows companies to assess water risks, set site-specific and context-based water targets, and develop water action plans.
It consists of two modules: the Water Risk Monetizer and the Water Action Assessment.

• The Water Risk Monetizer quantifies in monetary terms the risks related to water availability and water quantity, based off local water basin datasets and user inputs, and benchmarks facilities in terms of water use efficiency.
• The Water Action Assessment is based on a simple, 13-question assessment that ranks facilities on its Water Maturity Curve and offers a practical guide to smart, sustainable water practices, providing a roadmap that can help facilities improve the way they use water.

These two modules can help a company understand the value of water to its direct operations and identify ways to improve water management practices at site level. The combination of the Smart Water Navigator and other relevant tools can be a valuable resource for managing water quality risks and achieving sustainable water management practices.

The tool is free to use. Users need to create an account on the Smart Water Navigator platform, which allows them to manage one or a portfolio of facilities.

The Wastewater Impact Assessment Tool (WIAT) goes beyond wastewater and also helps companies understand the water use (water quantity). WIAT allows for a site-level assessment of the pressures/changes on the state of nature and the impacts on climate, biodiversity, and water security, resulting from industrial wastewater and water use. It does so by taking the data at a site level and calculating impact and levers of action for three key indicators: water quality, water availability and GHG emissions from wastewater treatment. Additionally, WIAT pulls in contextual data, from credible and widely used global data sources such as World Resource Institute’s Aqueduct tool, to further understand the change in the state of nature within a local context. The result is a visualization of the impacts at a site level, with the ability to view and compare multiple sites side by side - allowing for prioritization of where action is most needed to have the greatest positive impact.

The output of the tool is aligned with the SBTs for nature methodology (e.g. includes water quality and quantity indicators) and therefore can inform the setting of SBTs for nature (Step 3). WIAT aids with Step 1 (Mapping value chain and assessing level of pressure) and Step 2 (Interpret and Prioritize) of SBTs for Nature’s freshwater methodology. WIAT enables users to have all data and analysis in one place and to understand where they may be lacking data to apply SBTs for nature. WIAT goes beyond SBTs for nature, as it includes GHG emissions associated with wastewater management, taking into consideration the fuel input to run wastewater treatment plants (GHG Protocol Scope 2 category) and sludge disposal pathways (GHG Protocol Scope 3 category) – the breakdown between Scope 2 and Scope 3 emissions is given in the tool.

WIAT is also aligned with two key reporting frameworks, CDP and GRI, and provides ready-to-use data points (answers), allowing users to simply copy and paste from WIAT into corresponding CDP or GRI frameworks.

The Water Footprint Network’s water footprinting methodology measures the total volume of direct and indirect freshwater used to produce a product or service. The assessment takes into account the water consumed (i.e., withdrawn from a water source and not returned) and the extent of water pollution during the production process. The water footprint is calculated using a life cycle assessment approach, which considers the entire value chain of a product or service, from the extraction of raw materials to the end-of-life (disposal or recycling).

The framework ‘Setting Enterprise Water Targets: a Guide for Companies’ describes the suggested process that companies need to undergo to set context-based water targets at enterprise / company level that respond to local water challenges, and that are in line with best practice and stakeholder expectations. Enterprise water targets cover a company’s entire value chain and require a company to do preliminary analysis on its water impacts and dependencies, as well as its risk exposure, prior to setting targets. While it is aligned in principle with the science-based targets for nature guidance, enterprise water targets only cover water-related impacts and do not require primary data at basin level. Where a company does not have internal water expertise, external support will be required to carry out some of the steps laid out in the guidance. A practical example of how to use this framework can be found in this case study conducted by Cargill in 2022.

'Setting Site Water Targets Informed By Catchment Context: a Guide for Companies' is a complementary resource, that outlines a suggested process for companies to set context-based water targets at site level. This non-prescriptive guidance can be used alongside an enterprise approach to craft targets at basin-level. A practical example on how to use this framework can be found in this case study conducted by H&M in 2021.

Practitioners should always aim to link enterprise water targets to site targets and action plans that respond to the shared water challenges and stakeholder priorities, engage stakeholders at all stages of setting targets, view target-setting as an iterative process, and use the best available information to guide the targets’ implementation.

For setting enterprise water targets, the suggested process includes the following steps:

1. Assess water materiality and prioritize sections of the value chain;
2. Assess water-related risks and prioritize locations; and
3. Set and disclose enterprise water targets.

The framework ‘Setting Enterprise Water Targets: a Guide for Companies’ describes the suggested process that companies need to undergo to set context-based water targets at enterprise / company level that respond to local water challenges, and that are in line with best practice and stakeholder expectations. Enterprise water targets cover a company’s entire value chain and require a company to do preliminary analysis on its water impacts and dependencies, as well as its risk exposure, prior to setting targets. While it is aligned in principle with the science-based targets for nature guidance, enterprise water targets only cover water-related impacts and do not require primary data at basin level. Where a company does not have internal water expertise, external support will be required to carry out some of the steps laid out in the guidance. A practical example of how to use this framework can be found in this case study conducted by Cargill in 2022.

'Setting Site Water Targets Informed By Catchment Context: a Guide for Companies' is a complementary resource, that outlines a suggested process for companies to set context-based water targets at site level. This non-prescriptive guidance can be used alongside an enterprise approach to craft targets at basin-level. A practical example on how to use this framework can be found in this case study conducted by H&M in 2021.

Practitioners should always aim to link enterprise water targets to site targets and action plans that respond to the shared water challenges and stakeholder priorities, engage stakeholders at all stages of setting targets, view target-setting as an iterative process, and use the best available information to guide the targets’ implementation.

For setting enterprise water targets, the suggested process includes the following steps:

1. Assess water materiality and prioritize sections of the value chain;
2. Assess water-related risks and prioritize locations; and
3. Set and disclose enterprise water targets.

Setting science-based targets for freshwater using the SBTN methodology is a new approach and will require intensive internal ownership and detailed data collection and assessment. Therefore, those companies that are mature enough to go through this process are encouraged to start the process for a section of their value chain or a select number of hotspots and then scale up.

SBTN has a five-step process to set SBTs for nature. Step 1: Assess and Step 2: Interpret & Prioritize, align best with Element 1: Assess. Step 3 refers to Measure, Set & Disclose, which is followed by Step 4: Act and then Step 5: Track. This chapter focuses on Step 3 and the technical guidance provides information on how to measure baselines for specific indicators and set science-based targets for freshwater. It focuses on two impacts (called ‘pressures’ in the SBTN vocabulary) on nature:

• Water quantity: freshwater withdrawals from surface water bodies and groundwater
• Freshwater quality: load of nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) to surface water bodies

These two impact areas have been selected because: they are the most relevant for the most common impacts that most companies have on water; and methods are available to define targets that link these impacts to a healthy state of nature. The scope of the technical guidance includes the companies’ direct operations and upstream activities, meaning that it does not provide guidance on how to set downstream freshwater targets at this stage.

The framework ‘Setting Enterprise Water Targets: a Guide for Companies’ describes the suggested process that companies need to undergo to set context-based water targets at enterprise / company level that respond to local water challenges, and that are in line with best practice and stakeholder expectations. Enterprise water targets cover a company’s entire value chain and require a company to do preliminary analysis on its water impacts and dependencies, as well as its risk exposure, prior to setting targets. While it is aligned in principle with the science-based targets for nature guidance, enterprise water targets only cover water-related impacts and do not require primary data at basin level. Where a company does not have internal water expertise, external support will be required to carry out some of the steps laid out in the guidance. A practical example of how to use this framework can be found in this case study conducted by Cargill in 2022.

'Setting Site Water Targets Informed By Catchment Context: a Guide for Companies' is a complementary resource, that outlines a suggested process for companies to set context-based water targets at site level. This non-prescriptive guidance can be used alongside an enterprise approach to craft targets at basin-level. A practical example on how to use this framework can be found in this case study conducted by H&M in 2021.

Practitioners should always aim to link enterprise water targets to site targets and action plans that respond to the shared water challenges and stakeholder priorities, engage stakeholders at all stages of setting targets, view target-setting as an iterative process, and use the best available information to guide the targets’ implementation.

For setting enterprise water targets, the suggested process includes the following steps:

1. Assess water materiality and prioritize sections of the value chain;
2. Assess water-related risks and prioritize locations; and
3. Set and disclose enterprise water targets.

Setting science-based targets for freshwater using the SBTN methodology is a new approach and will require intensive internal ownership and detailed data collection and assessment. Therefore, those companies that are mature enough to go through this process are encouraged to start the process for a section of their value chain or a select number of hotspots and then scale up.

SBTN has a five-step process to set SBTs for nature. Step 1: Assess and Step 2: Interpret & Prioritize, align best with Element 1: Assess. Step 3 refers to Measure, Set & Disclose, which is followed by Step 4: Act and then Step 5: Track. This chapter focuses on Step 3 and the technical guidance provides information on how to measure baselines for specific indicators and set science-based targets for freshwater. It focuses on two impacts (called ‘pressures’ in the SBTN vocabulary) on nature:

• Water quantity: freshwater withdrawals from surface water bodies and groundwater
• Freshwater quality: load of nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) to surface water bodies

These two impact areas have been selected because: they are the most relevant for the most common impacts that most companies have on water; and methods are available to define targets that link these impacts to a healthy state of nature. The scope of the technical guidance includes the companies’ direct operations and upstream activities, meaning that it does not provide guidance on how to set downstream freshwater targets at this stage.

The framework ‘Setting Enterprise Water Targets: a Guide for Companies’ describes the suggested process that companies need to undergo to set context-based water targets at enterprise / company level that respond to local water challenges, and that are in line with best practice and stakeholder expectations. Enterprise water targets cover a company’s entire value chain and require a company to do preliminary analysis on its water impacts and dependencies, as well as its risk exposure, prior to setting targets. While it is aligned in principle with the science-based targets for nature guidance, enterprise water targets only cover water-related impacts and do not require primary data at basin level. Where a company does not have internal water expertise, external support will be required to carry out some of the steps laid out in the guidance. A practical example of how to use this framework can be found in this case study conducted by Cargill in 2022.

'Setting Site Water Targets Informed By Catchment Context: a Guide for Companies' is a complementary resource, that outlines a suggested process for companies to set context-based water targets at site level. This non-prescriptive guidance can be used alongside an enterprise approach to craft targets at basin-level. A practical example on how to use this framework can be found in this case study conducted by H&M in 2021.

Practitioners should always aim to link enterprise water targets to site targets and action plans that respond to the shared water challenges and stakeholder priorities, engage stakeholders at all stages of setting targets, view target-setting as an iterative process, and use the best available information to guide the targets’ implementation.

For setting enterprise water targets, the suggested process includes the following steps:

1. Assess water materiality and prioritize sections of the value chain;
2. Assess water-related risks and prioritize locations; and
3. Set and disclose enterprise water targets.

Setting science-based targets for freshwater using the SBTN methodology is a new approach and will require intensive internal ownership and detailed data collection and assessment. Therefore, those companies that are mature enough to go through this process are encouraged to start the process for a section of their value chain or a select number of hotspots and then scale up.

SBTN has a five-step process to set SBTs for nature. Step 1: Assess and Step 2: Interpret & Prioritize, align best with Element 1: Assess. Step 3 refers to Measure, Set & Disclose, which is followed by Step 4: Act and then Step 5: Track. This chapter focuses on Step 3 and the technical guidance provides information on how to measure baselines for specific indicators and set science-based targets for freshwater. It focuses on two impacts (called ‘pressures’ in the SBTN vocabulary) on nature:

• Water quantity: freshwater withdrawals from surface water bodies and groundwater
• Freshwater quality: load of nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) to surface water bodies

These two impact areas have been selected because: they are the most relevant for the most common impacts that most companies have on water; and methods are available to define targets that link these impacts to a healthy state of nature. The scope of the technical guidance includes the companies’ direct operations and upstream activities, meaning that it does not provide guidance on how to set downstream freshwater targets at this stage.

The AWS Standard 2.0 is a site-level standard that certifies sound water stewardship practices. It is structured around five site-level water stewardship outcomes: good water governance, sustainable water balance, good water quality status, important water-related areas and WASH. The standard has been developed in a multi-stakeholder fashion, together with businesses, multilateral agencies, governments, and civil society. The standard can be implemented by any site, regardless of size, sector or basin location. The standard allows sites to understand the water-related challenges and address these through local collective action. It helps demonstrate to consumers, local communities, investors, and other stakeholders that the site is in line with the globally defined benchmark (i.e., the AWS standard) for responsible site-level water stewardship.

When undertaking the implementation of the standard, sites are encouraged to follow a five-step process:

1. Gather and understand data on shared water challenges;
2. Commit and plan: develop a water stewardship plan;
3. Implement the site’s water stewardship plan;
4. Evaluate performance against the plan; and
5. Communicate and disclose the site’s stewardship efforts.

Step 4 of SBTs for nature is laid out through the action framework AR3T. It formalizes five types of mitigation and conservation strategies designed to cover the ways companies can minimize, eliminate, or make up for their negative impacts.

In Step 4 of the target-setting process outlined by SBTN, companies take action to achieve their targets. Companies are expected to employ strategies that cover the whole range of categories in the AR3T Action Framework developed by SBTN to prevent, minimize, eliminate and remediate their impacts. Step 4 encourages companies to improve the conditions of sites in which they operate and drive positive change.

• Avoid: prevent impact from happening in the first place; eliminate the impact entirely.
• Reduce: minimize impacts, but without necessarily eliminating them.
• Regenerate: take actions within existing land uses to increase the biophysical function and / or ecological productivity of an ecosystem or its components, often with a focus on a few specific nature contributions to people (e.g., regenerative agriculture often focuses on carbon sequestration, food production, and nitrogen and phosphorus retention) (adapted from FOLU 2019).
• Restore: initiate or accelerate the recovery of an ecosystem with respect to its health, integrity, and sustainability, with a focus on permanent changes in state (adapted from Society of Ecological Restoration).
• Transform: take actions contributing to system-wide change, notably to alter the drivers of nature loss, e.g., through technological, economic, institutional, and social factors and changes in underlying values and behaviors (adapted from IPCC 2012 and IPBES 2019c).

The AWS Standard 2.0 is a site-level standard that certifies sound water stewardship practices. It is structured around five site-level water stewardship outcomes: good water governance, sustainable water balance, good water quality status, important water-related areas and WASH. The standard has been developed in a multi-stakeholder fashion, together with businesses, multilateral agencies, governments, and civil society. The standard can be implemented by any site, regardless of size, sector or basin location. The standard allows sites to understand the water-related challenges and address these through local collective action. It helps demonstrate to consumers, local communities, investors, and other stakeholders that the site is in line with the globally defined benchmark (i.e., the AWS standard) for responsible site-level water stewardship.

When undertaking the implementation of the standard, sites are encouraged to follow a five-step process:

1. Gather and understand data on shared water challenges;
2. Commit and plan: develop a water stewardship plan;
3. Implement the site’s water stewardship plan;
4. Evaluate performance against the plan; and
5. Communicate and disclose the site’s stewardship efforts.

Step 4 of SBTs for nature is laid out through the action framework AR3T. It formalizes five types of mitigation and conservation strategies designed to cover the ways companies can minimize, eliminate, or make up for their negative impacts.

In Step 4 of the target-setting process outlined by SBTN, companies take action to achieve their targets. Companies are expected to employ strategies that cover the whole range of categories in the AR3T Action Framework developed by SBTN to prevent, minimize, eliminate and remediate their impacts. Step 4 encourages companies to improve the conditions of sites in which they operate and drive positive change.

• Avoid: prevent impact from happening in the first place; eliminate the impact entirely.
• Reduce: minimize impacts, but without necessarily eliminating them.
• Regenerate: take actions within existing land uses to increase the biophysical function and / or ecological productivity of an ecosystem or its components, often with a focus on a few specific nature contributions to people (e.g., regenerative agriculture often focuses on carbon sequestration, food production, and nitrogen and phosphorus retention) (adapted from FOLU 2019).
• Restore: initiate or accelerate the recovery of an ecosystem with respect to its health, integrity, and sustainability, with a focus on permanent changes in state (adapted from Society of Ecological Restoration).
• Transform: take actions contributing to system-wide change, notably to alter the drivers of nature loss, e.g., through technological, economic, institutional, and social factors and changes in underlying values and behaviors (adapted from IPCC 2012 and IPBES 2019c).

VWBA is a methodology that allows companies and implementers of water stewardship projects to quantify the volumetric water benefits from water stewardship activities and communicate about them. As such, the methodology is quite technical, and its use is intended for on-the-ground practitioners who have a technical background in water.

Volumetric Water Benefits (VWBs) are the volumes of water resulting from water stewardship activities, relative to a unit of time, that improve the conditions of a local basin. Water stewardship activities can be understood as such activities that positively contribute to basin health, and / or contribute to addressing shared water challenges, and therefore contribute to the targets set out in Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 6. Examples include water reuse, which will reduce water withdrawals from a local basin; agricultural best management practices, which reduce runoff and thus positively affect water quality; or wetland protection and restoration, which contribute to maintained or increased water recharge.

The method includes recommended indicators and calculation methods for each water stewardship activity, as well as communication guidelines. External support may be required to implement the methodology and communicate about it, unless a company has local hydrological and project implementation expertise in-house. A Practical Guide to Implementing Water Replenishment Targets was developed in 2021 and can be used to complement the VWBA methodology as a practical resource to facilitate its application.

VWBA proposes a three-step process for implementation:

1. Identify shared water challenges and understand local context;
2. Define water stewardship project activities and partners; and
3. Gather data and calculate volumetric water benefits.

Note that at the time of developing this Freshwater Accountability Navigator, similar guidance is being developed for water quality projects and is expected to be available in 2024.

The AWS Standard 2.0 is a site-level standard that certifies sound water stewardship practices. It is structured around five site-level water stewardship outcomes: good water governance, sustainable water balance, good water quality status, important water-related areas and WASH. The standard has been developed in a multi-stakeholder fashion, together with businesses, multilateral agencies, governments, and civil society. The standard can be implemented by any site, regardless of size, sector or basin location. The standard allows sites to understand the water-related challenges and address these through local collective action. It helps demonstrate to consumers, local communities, investors, and other stakeholders that the site is in line with the globally defined benchmark (i.e., the AWS standard) for responsible site-level water stewardship.

When undertaking the implementation of the standard, sites are encouraged to follow a five-step process:

1. Gather and understand data on shared water challenges;
2. Commit and plan: develop a water stewardship plan;
3. Implement the site’s water stewardship plan;
4. Evaluate performance against the plan; and
5. Communicate and disclose the site’s stewardship efforts.

Step 4 of SBTs for nature is laid out through the action framework AR3T. It formalizes five types of mitigation and conservation strategies designed to cover the ways companies can minimize, eliminate, or make up for their negative impacts.

In Step 4 of the target-setting process outlined by SBTN, companies take action to achieve their targets. Companies are expected to employ strategies that cover the whole range of categories in the AR3T Action Framework developed by SBTN to prevent, minimize, eliminate and remediate their impacts. Step 4 encourages companies to improve the conditions of sites in which they operate and drive positive change.

• Avoid: prevent impact from happening in the first place; eliminate the impact entirely.
• Reduce: minimize impacts, but without necessarily eliminating them.
• Regenerate: take actions within existing land uses to increase the biophysical function and / or ecological productivity of an ecosystem or its components, often with a focus on a few specific nature contributions to people (e.g., regenerative agriculture often focuses on carbon sequestration, food production, and nitrogen and phosphorus retention) (adapted from FOLU 2019).
• Restore: initiate or accelerate the recovery of an ecosystem with respect to its health, integrity, and sustainability, with a focus on permanent changes in state (adapted from Society of Ecological Restoration).
• Transform: take actions contributing to system-wide change, notably to alter the drivers of nature loss, e.g., through technological, economic, institutional, and social factors and changes in underlying values and behaviors (adapted from IPCC 2012 and IPBES 2019c).

VWBA is a methodology that allows companies and implementers of water stewardship projects to quantify the volumetric water benefits from water stewardship activities and communicate about them. As such, the methodology is quite technical, and its use is intended for on-the-ground practitioners who have a technical background in water.

Volumetric Water Benefits (VWBs) are the volumes of water resulting from water stewardship activities, relative to a unit of time, that improve the conditions of a local basin. Water stewardship activities can be understood as such activities that positively contribute to basin health, and / or contribute to addressing shared water challenges, and therefore contribute to the targets set out in Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 6. Examples include water reuse, which will reduce water withdrawals from a local basin; agricultural best management practices, which reduce runoff and thus positively affect water quality; or wetland protection and restoration, which contribute to maintained or increased water recharge.

The method includes recommended indicators and calculation methods for each water stewardship activity, as well as communication guidelines. External support may be required to implement the methodology and communicate about it, unless a company has local hydrological and project implementation expertise in-house. A Practical Guide to Implementing Water Replenishment Targets was developed in 2021 and can be used to complement the VWBA methodology as a practical resource to facilitate its application.

VWBA proposes a three-step process for implementation:

1. Identify shared water challenges and understand local context;
2. Define water stewardship project activities and partners; and
3. Gather data and calculate volumetric water benefits.

Note that at the time of developing this Freshwater Accountability Navigator, similar guidance is being developed for water quality projects and is expected to be available in 2024.

The AWS Standard 2.0 is a site-level standard that certifies sound water stewardship practices. It is structured around five site-level water stewardship outcomes: good water governance, sustainable water balance, good water quality status, important water-related areas and WASH. The standard has been developed in a multi-stakeholder fashion, together with businesses, multilateral agencies, governments, and civil society. The standard can be implemented by any site, regardless of size, sector or basin location. The standard allows sites to understand the water-related challenges and address these through local collective action. It helps demonstrate to consumers, local communities, investors, and other stakeholders that the site is in line with the globally defined benchmark (i.e., the AWS standard) for responsible site-level water stewardship.

When undertaking the implementation of the standard, sites are encouraged to follow a five-step process:

1. Gather and understand data on shared water challenges;
2. Commit and plan: develop a water stewardship plan;
3. Implement the site’s water stewardship plan;
4. Evaluate performance against the plan; and
5. Communicate and disclose the site’s stewardship efforts.

Step 4 of SBTs for nature is laid out through the action framework AR3T. It formalizes five types of mitigation and conservation strategies designed to cover the ways companies can minimize, eliminate, or make up for their negative impacts.

In Step 4 of the target-setting process outlined by SBTN, companies take action to achieve their targets. Companies are expected to employ strategies that cover the whole range of categories in the AR3T Action Framework developed by SBTN to prevent, minimize, eliminate and remediate their impacts. Step 4 encourages companies to improve the conditions of sites in which they operate and drive positive change.

• Avoid: prevent impact from happening in the first place; eliminate the impact entirely.
• Reduce: minimize impacts, but without necessarily eliminating them.
• Regenerate: take actions within existing land uses to increase the biophysical function and / or ecological productivity of an ecosystem or its components, often with a focus on a few specific nature contributions to people (e.g., regenerative agriculture often focuses on carbon sequestration, food production, and nitrogen and phosphorus retention) (adapted from FOLU 2019).
• Restore: initiate or accelerate the recovery of an ecosystem with respect to its health, integrity, and sustainability, with a focus on permanent changes in state (adapted from Society of Ecological Restoration).
• Transform: take actions contributing to system-wide change, notably to alter the drivers of nature loss, e.g., through technological, economic, institutional, and social factors and changes in underlying values and behaviors (adapted from IPCC 2012 and IPBES 2019c).

VWBA is a methodology that allows companies and implementers of water stewardship projects to quantify the volumetric water benefits from water stewardship activities and communicate about them. As such, the methodology is quite technical, and its use is intended for on-the-ground practitioners who have a technical background in water.

Volumetric Water Benefits (VWBs) are the volumes of water resulting from water stewardship activities, relative to a unit of time, that improve the conditions of a local basin. Water stewardship activities can be understood as such activities that positively contribute to basin health, and / or contribute to addressing shared water challenges, and therefore contribute to the targets set out in Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 6. Examples include water reuse, which will reduce water withdrawals from a local basin; agricultural best management practices, which reduce runoff and thus positively affect water quality; or wetland protection and restoration, which contribute to maintained or increased water recharge.

The method includes recommended indicators and calculation methods for each water stewardship activity, as well as communication guidelines. External support may be required to implement the methodology and communicate about it, unless a company has local hydrological and project implementation expertise in-house. A Practical Guide to Implementing Water Replenishment Targets was developed in 2021 and can be used to complement the VWBA methodology as a practical resource to facilitate its application.

VWBA proposes a three-step process for implementation:

1. Identify shared water challenges and understand local context;
2. Define water stewardship project activities and partners; and
3. Gather data and calculate volumetric water benefits.

Note that at the time of developing this Freshwater Accountability Navigator, similar guidance is being developed for water quality projects and is expected to be available in 2024.

CDP is a global voluntary disclosure system mandated by a pool of 740+ signatory investors and 280+ large purchasers. CDP has collected corporate disclosures on water security since 2010, which until 2023 were collected through the water security questionnaire. In 2024, CDP rolled out a new multi-environmental issue format for the CDP full corporate questionnaire, combining all three existing questionnaires across water security, climate change, and forests, into one questionnaire.

The multi-environmental issue questionnaire covers much of the same content that was covered in the water security questionnaire, while now allowing for more holistic disclosure across climate and nature. In addition to the three core topics, the multi-environmental issue questionnaire includes introductory content on plastics and biodiversity.

Water security disclosure through CDP covers a company’s water strategy, and their actions related to water quantity, water quality, water risk, governance mechanisms and supply chains. Most questions are identical across industry sectors. Sectors that are considered high impact from a water perspective are presented with additional sector specific questions.

Through the disclosure process, companies can identify strengths and weaknesses in relation to their water accounting, target setting, water risk management processes and inform the development of a robust water strategy. With over 4800 companies reporting to CDP on water security in 2023, disclosure also enables for benchmarking against peers. Going through the disclosure process can help to engage internal company stakeholders and establish internal processes for enhanced data collection and action on water.

The GRI Standards enable organizations to publicly disclose its most significant impacts on the economy, environment, and people, including impacts on their human rights and how these are managed. Such disclosures enhance transparency and increase accountability.
The GRI Standards are a modular system of interconnected standards comprised of three groups of standards: the Universal Standards; the Sector Standards; and the Topic Standards. GRI 303: Water and Effluents 2018 is one of the Topic Standards and contains disclosures for companies to report information about their water-related impacts and how they manage these impacts. This Standard can be used by any organization regardless of size, type, sector, geographic location, or reporting experience. GRI 303 refers to a companies’ water withdrawal, consumption and wastewater discharge.

It is structured into two sections:
Topic management disclosures (to provide information on how the company manages its water-related impacts)

• Disclosure 303-1: Interactions with water as a shared resource
• Disclosure 303-2: Management of water discharge-related impacts

Topic disclosures (to provide information on the company’s water-related impacts) 

• Disclosure 303-3: Water withdrawal
• Disclosure 303-4: Water discharge
• Disclosure 303-5: Water consumption

CDP is a global voluntary disclosure system mandated by a pool of 740+ signatory investors and 280+ large purchasers. CDP has collected corporate disclosures on water security since 2010, which until 2023 were collected through the water security questionnaire. In 2024, CDP rolled out a new multi-environmental issue format for the CDP full corporate questionnaire, combining all three existing questionnaires across water security, climate change, and forests, into one questionnaire.

The multi-environmental issue questionnaire covers much of the same content that was covered in the water security questionnaire, while now allowing for more holistic disclosure across climate and nature. In addition to the three core topics, the multi-environmental issue questionnaire includes introductory content on plastics and biodiversity.

Water security disclosure through CDP covers a company’s water strategy, and their actions related to water quantity, water quality, water risk, governance mechanisms and supply chains. Most questions are identical across industry sectors. Sectors that are considered high impact from a water perspective are presented with additional sector specific questions.

Through the disclosure process, companies can identify strengths and weaknesses in relation to their water accounting, target setting, water risk management processes and inform the development of a robust water strategy. With over 4800 companies reporting to CDP on water security in 2023, disclosure also enables for benchmarking against peers. Going through the disclosure process can help to engage internal company stakeholders and establish internal processes for enhanced data collection and action on water.

The GRI Standards enable organizations to publicly disclose its most significant impacts on the economy, environment, and people, including impacts on their human rights and how these are managed. Such disclosures enhance transparency and increase accountability.
The GRI Standards are a modular system of interconnected standards comprised of three groups of standards: the Universal Standards; the Sector Standards; and the Topic Standards. GRI 303: Water and Effluents 2018 is one of the Topic Standards and contains disclosures for companies to report information about their water-related impacts and how they manage these impacts. This Standard can be used by any organization regardless of size, type, sector, geographic location, or reporting experience. GRI 303 refers to a companies’ water withdrawal, consumption and wastewater discharge.

It is structured into two sections:
Topic management disclosures (to provide information on how the company manages its water-related impacts)

• Disclosure 303-1: Interactions with water as a shared resource
• Disclosure 303-2: Management of water discharge-related impacts

Topic disclosures (to provide information on the company’s water-related impacts) 

• Disclosure 303-3: Water withdrawal
• Disclosure 303-4: Water discharge
• Disclosure 303-5: Water consumption

The SASB Standards are a set of 77 industry-specific sustainability accounting standards intended to help companies disclose information to investors about sustainability-related risks and opportunities that could reasonably be expected to affect the company's cash flows, its access to finance or its cost of capital over the short, medium or long term. The SASB Standards may be used to disclose water-related information in accordance with IFRS S1 General Requirements for Disclosure of Sustainability-related Financial Information or IFRS S2 Climate-related Disclosures.

SASB Standards reference measurement approaches already in use by industry, across more than 200 global and industry-specific standards and organizations, which helps streamline SASB reporting with global corporate transparency efforts.

CDP is a global voluntary disclosure system mandated by a pool of 740+ signatory investors and 280+ large purchasers. CDP has collected corporate disclosures on water security since 2010, which until 2023 were collected through the water security questionnaire. In 2024, CDP rolled out a new multi-environmental issue format for the CDP full corporate questionnaire, combining all three existing questionnaires across water security, climate change, and forests, into one questionnaire.

The multi-environmental issue questionnaire covers much of the same content that was covered in the water security questionnaire, while now allowing for more holistic disclosure across climate and nature. In addition to the three core topics, the multi-environmental issue questionnaire includes introductory content on plastics and biodiversity.

Water security disclosure through CDP covers a company’s water strategy, and their actions related to water quantity, water quality, water risk, governance mechanisms and supply chains. Most questions are identical across industry sectors. Sectors that are considered high impact from a water perspective are presented with additional sector specific questions.

Through the disclosure process, companies can identify strengths and weaknesses in relation to their water accounting, target setting, water risk management processes and inform the development of a robust water strategy. With over 4800 companies reporting to CDP on water security in 2023, disclosure also enables for benchmarking against peers. Going through the disclosure process can help to engage internal company stakeholders and establish internal processes for enhanced data collection and action on water.

The GRI Standards enable organizations to publicly disclose its most significant impacts on the economy, environment, and people, including impacts on their human rights and how these are managed. Such disclosures enhance transparency and increase accountability.
The GRI Standards are a modular system of interconnected standards comprised of three groups of standards: the Universal Standards; the Sector Standards; and the Topic Standards. GRI 303: Water and Effluents 2018 is one of the Topic Standards and contains disclosures for companies to report information about their water-related impacts and how they manage these impacts. This Standard can be used by any organization regardless of size, type, sector, geographic location, or reporting experience. GRI 303 refers to a companies’ water withdrawal, consumption and wastewater discharge.

It is structured into two sections:
Topic management disclosures (to provide information on how the company manages its water-related impacts)

• Disclosure 303-1: Interactions with water as a shared resource
• Disclosure 303-2: Management of water discharge-related impacts

Topic disclosures (to provide information on the company’s water-related impacts) 

• Disclosure 303-3: Water withdrawal
• Disclosure 303-4: Water discharge
• Disclosure 303-5: Water consumption

The SASB Standards are a set of 77 industry-specific sustainability accounting standards intended to help companies disclose information to investors about sustainability-related risks and opportunities that could reasonably be expected to affect the company's cash flows, its access to finance or its cost of capital over the short, medium or long term. The SASB Standards may be used to disclose water-related information in accordance with IFRS S1 General Requirements for Disclosure of Sustainability-related Financial Information or IFRS S2 Climate-related Disclosures.

SASB Standards reference measurement approaches already in use by industry, across more than 200 global and industry-specific standards and organizations, which helps streamline SASB reporting with global corporate transparency efforts.

The TCFD and TNFD recommendations help organizations disclose information on their climate and, more broadly, nature-related dependencies, impacts, risks and opportunities. Risks here covers both physical and transitional risks. The recommended disclosures are structured around four pillars: Governance, Strategy, Risk and impact management*, and Metrics and targets. Under these pillars are a set of 11 disclosures common to both TCFD and TNFD, and three TNFD-specific disclosures.

*TCFD refers only to Risk management here.

TCFD covers water to the extent that it relates to climate change, such as climate-induced droughts or flooding. TNFD additionally includes a wider set of dependencies, impacts, risks and opportunities related to water. Dependencies may relate to ecosystem services such as water supply, water purification, water flow regulation and flood mitigation, for example, or environmental assets such as a lake or a river. Impacts on nature could arise from an organisation’s use of water or release of pollution to water bodies, for example. These dependencies and impacts in turn give rise to water-related risks and opportunities.

TCFD
The Taskforce divided climate-related risks into two major categories: (1) risks related to the transition to a lower-carbon economy and (2) risks related to the physical impacts of climate change. This framework mostly looks at the cost of inaction and is built around four recommendations that represent core elements of how companies operate: governance, strategy, risk management and metrics and targets. The four recommendations are supported by 11 specific disclosures. Although mostly focused on climate, the framework encourages companies to report on water use and water efficiency.

In addition to the general recommendations, TCFD has developed sector-specific recommendations for banks, insurance companies, asset owners, asset managers, energy, transportation, materials and buildings, agriculture, food and forest products.

TNFD
TNFD is the counterpart of TCFD focusing on nature, namely land, freshwater, ocean, and atmosphere. The TNFD framework was published in September 2023 after a two-year development phase. It provides companies with a risk management and disclosure framework to identify, assess, respond to, and disclose their nature-related issues. The framework is built on four thematic blocks: nature-related dependencies, impacts, risks, and opportunities, which are collectively referred to as “nature-related issues.” Close alignment with the approach, structure, and language of TCFD was fostered throughout the development phase, leading to the following outcomes:

• The four pillars of the TCFD Recommendations – Governance, Strategy, Risk Management (including Impact Management), and Metrics and Targets – were retained.
• All 11 TCFD recommended disclosures were integrated into the TNFD recommended disclosures, providing maximum consistency of content and enabling report users to start reporting on nature-related issues alongside, or integrated with, climate-related issues.
• The approach taken to incorporate value chain impacts (Scope 3 climate reporting) was adapted to the nature context as direct operations, upstream, downstream and financed.

TNFD defines five main drivers of change on nature: climate change; resource exploitation; land and sea use change; pollution; and invasive alien species. The framework considers that nature is made of stocks, or “environmental assets,” such as forests, wetlands, coral reefs, etc. that can represent financial impacts, dependencies, risks and opportunities for a company.

Regarding water, companies will have to disclose the locations of their assets / activities in both direct operations and in upstream and downstream value chains, that are in areas of water stress. Companies should provide the key indicators and metrics used to measure and manage dependencies and impacts on water, including volumes and concentrations of key pollutants in the wastewater discharged, water withdrawals and consumption from areas of water stress.

CDP is a global voluntary disclosure system mandated by a pool of 740+ signatory investors and 280+ large purchasers. CDP has collected corporate disclosures on water security since 2010, which until 2023 were collected through the water security questionnaire. In 2024, CDP rolled out a new multi-environmental issue format for the CDP full corporate questionnaire, combining all three existing questionnaires across water security, climate change, and forests, into one questionnaire.

The multi-environmental issue questionnaire covers much of the same content that was covered in the water security questionnaire, while now allowing for more holistic disclosure across climate and nature. In addition to the three core topics, the multi-environmental issue questionnaire includes introductory content on plastics and biodiversity.

Water security disclosure through CDP covers a company’s water strategy, and their actions related to water quantity, water quality, water risk, governance mechanisms and supply chains. Most questions are identical across industry sectors. Sectors that are considered high impact from a water perspective are presented with additional sector specific questions.

Through the disclosure process, companies can identify strengths and weaknesses in relation to their water accounting, target setting, water risk management processes and inform the development of a robust water strategy. With over 4800 companies reporting to CDP on water security in 2023, disclosure also enables for benchmarking against peers. Going through the disclosure process can help to engage internal company stakeholders and establish internal processes for enhanced data collection and action on water.

The GRI Standards enable organizations to publicly disclose its most significant impacts on the economy, environment, and people, including impacts on their human rights and how these are managed. Such disclosures enhance transparency and increase accountability.
The GRI Standards are a modular system of interconnected standards comprised of three groups of standards: the Universal Standards; the Sector Standards; and the Topic Standards. GRI 303: Water and Effluents 2018 is one of the Topic Standards and contains disclosures for companies to report information about their water-related impacts and how they manage these impacts. This Standard can be used by any organization regardless of size, type, sector, geographic location, or reporting experience. GRI 303 refers to a companies’ water withdrawal, consumption and wastewater discharge.

It is structured into two sections:
Topic management disclosures (to provide information on how the company manages its water-related impacts)

• Disclosure 303-1: Interactions with water as a shared resource
• Disclosure 303-2: Management of water discharge-related impacts

Topic disclosures (to provide information on the company’s water-related impacts) 

• Disclosure 303-3: Water withdrawal
• Disclosure 303-4: Water discharge
• Disclosure 303-5: Water consumption

The SASB Standards are a set of 77 industry-specific sustainability accounting standards intended to help companies disclose information to investors about sustainability-related risks and opportunities that could reasonably be expected to affect the company's cash flows, its access to finance or its cost of capital over the short, medium or long term. The SASB Standards may be used to disclose water-related information in accordance with IFRS S1 General Requirements for Disclosure of Sustainability-related Financial Information or IFRS S2 Climate-related Disclosures.

SASB Standards reference measurement approaches already in use by industry, across more than 200 global and industry-specific standards and organizations, which helps streamline SASB reporting with global corporate transparency efforts.

The TCFD and TNFD recommendations help organizations disclose information on their climate and, more broadly, nature-related dependencies, impacts, risks and opportunities. Risks here covers both physical and transitional risks. The recommended disclosures are structured around four pillars: Governance, Strategy, Risk and impact management*, and Metrics and targets. Under these pillars are a set of 11 disclosures common to both TCFD and TNFD, and three TNFD-specific disclosures.

*TCFD refers only to Risk management here.

TCFD covers water to the extent that it relates to climate change, such as climate-induced droughts or flooding. TNFD additionally includes a wider set of dependencies, impacts, risks and opportunities related to water. Dependencies may relate to ecosystem services such as water supply, water purification, water flow regulation and flood mitigation, for example, or environmental assets such as a lake or a river. Impacts on nature could arise from an organisation’s use of water or release of pollution to water bodies, for example. These dependencies and impacts in turn give rise to water-related risks and opportunities.

TCFD
The Taskforce divided climate-related risks into two major categories: (1) risks related to the transition to a lower-carbon economy and (2) risks related to the physical impacts of climate change. This framework mostly looks at the cost of inaction and is built around four recommendations that represent core elements of how companies operate: governance, strategy, risk management and metrics and targets. The four recommendations are supported by 11 specific disclosures. Although mostly focused on climate, the framework encourages companies to report on water use and water efficiency.

In addition to the general recommendations, TCFD has developed sector-specific recommendations for banks, insurance companies, asset owners, asset managers, energy, transportation, materials and buildings, agriculture, food and forest products.

TNFD
TNFD is the counterpart of TCFD focusing on nature, namely land, freshwater, ocean, and atmosphere. The TNFD framework was published in September 2023 after a two-year development phase. It provides companies with a risk management and disclosure framework to identify, assess, respond to, and disclose their nature-related issues. The framework is built on four thematic blocks: nature-related dependencies, impacts, risks, and opportunities, which are collectively referred to as “nature-related issues.” Close alignment with the approach, structure, and language of TCFD was fostered throughout the development phase, leading to the following outcomes:

• The four pillars of the TCFD Recommendations – Governance, Strategy, Risk Management (including Impact Management), and Metrics and Targets – were retained.
• All 11 TCFD recommended disclosures were integrated into the TNFD recommended disclosures, providing maximum consistency of content and enabling report users to start reporting on nature-related issues alongside, or integrated with, climate-related issues.
• The approach taken to incorporate value chain impacts (Scope 3 climate reporting) was adapted to the nature context as direct operations, upstream, downstream and financed.

TNFD defines five main drivers of change on nature: climate change; resource exploitation; land and sea use change; pollution; and invasive alien species. The framework considers that nature is made of stocks, or “environmental assets,” such as forests, wetlands, coral reefs, etc. that can represent financial impacts, dependencies, risks and opportunities for a company.

Regarding water, companies will have to disclose the locations of their assets / activities in both direct operations and in upstream and downstream value chains, that are in areas of water stress. Companies should provide the key indicators and metrics used to measure and manage dependencies and impacts on water, including volumes and concentrations of key pollutants in the wastewater discharged, water withdrawals and consumption from areas of water stress.