New Delhi: Indian companies, nudged by the Securities and Exchange Board of India, have started reporting on their environmental and sustainability performance, but their submissions lack details and relevant information – finds a survey and assessment done by the Centre for Science and Environment.

In May 2021, SEBI, in a welcome move, launched an initiative called ‘Business Responsibility and Sustainability Reporting’. Under it, the Board wanted the top 1,000 listed companies in India – identified based on their worth in the stock market - to disclose their non-financial data from 2021 to 2023, including data on “environmental stewardship”. SEBI’s BRSR framework asks for this data for two financial years: the current and the previous.

CSE has reviewed 28 reports submitted by 14 of these top companies. Its assessment, titled ‘Strengthening Environmental Reporting under BRSR’, is largely focused on data provided by the companies on their actions and records on environmental stewardship.

“We have reviewed the reports for two consecutive years - 2021-22 and 2022-23 - and also analysed the data for three consecutive years, 2020-21 to 2022-23. The primary aim behind our assessment has been to find out how the format can be strengthened to get quality data out in the public domain, which can then be used by policymakers and investors for more informed decision-making,” says Nivit Yadav, programme director, industrial pollution at CSE.

The problem lies, says CSE, in the way the BRSR format and questionnaire have been designed, and the kind of questions that have been asked of the companies - it leaves room for the submission of information which is incomplete, thus defeating the purpose behind the entire exercise that of creating a reporting structure for Indian companies that would help investors make rational decisions.

Consolidated company data is not always useful. An average value which takes into account both good and bad units cannot represent the sustainability of a company, says the CSE assessment. Instead, sustainability can be judged effectively if poor or average-performing units are identified and a roadmap is prepared for them to improve their performance on various indicators.

The current BRSR format makes it difficult to understand the reasons behind the increase or decrease in values and numbers of the parameters.

Companies have often provided data selectively, as per their understanding, and added or deleted rows of information as per their convenience. It should not be left to them to decide how they wish to present the data.

Some key indicators such as water withdrawal, consumption and discharge have been placed under ‘Leadership Indicators’, where companies can share information voluntarily. These can be moved to the ‘Essential Indicators’ category, which lists mandatory data points that need to be provided mandatorily.

“The BRSR questionnaire has some problems. For example, the format does not seek information on the type of fuels used by a company, the sources of renewable and non-renewable energy, or how is the undischarged treated water being used. In the case of hazardous and non-hazardous wastes generated by a company, information on waste-wise management and disposal is critical – but the questionnaire does not ask for it,” says Yadav.