Financial institutions state, per portfolio and environmental issue, whether they gauge the environmental impact that their portfolio has and the metrics used; give financed emissions (and insurance-associated emissions) for the reporting year and base year with the methodology (for example the PCAF standard), coverage, data quality and asset classes; disclose or restate financed emissions for previous years; detail other metrics tracking portfolio impact (carbon footprint, weighted average carbon intensity, exposure metrics, forests, water and biodiversity metrics); and break down financed emissions and other metrics by scope, by industry and by asset class. CDP's ambition is absolute gross financed emissions by scope with gross exposure by industry and asset class.
This control maps to 1 controls across 1 other frameworks. If you already hold one of them, the evidence you collected for it is the starting point here rather than new work.
Every mapping shown was judged rather than inferred from wording similarity, and the ones that failed review are published too. See the coverage reports and what was rejected.
The graph holds this control, the 1 it maps to, and the evidence behind each claim, over MCP and REST.