Public methodology
How the benchmark is built
The methodology behind the GCC ESG Benchmark is published in full and kept separate from any paid service. Anyone should be able to reproduce a datapoint from the source document alone.
Sources used
Only public disclosure is used: annual reports, ESG and sustainability reports, integrated reports, climate disclosures, exchange filings and official corporate websites. Documents are captured as published, with the retrieval date recorded. No questionnaires are issued, no private submissions are accepted for the benchmark, and no company pays to be covered.
Extraction process
Documents are parsed page by page. Candidate values are extracted by machine, with the surrounding text and page anchor retained alongside each value. Extraction technology is provided under licence by Anthropogenic AI. Where a document presents a figure in more than one place, the value in the audited or primary statement takes precedence, and the divergence is noted.
Metric list and framework alignment
The metric set is deliberately small and stable, and each metric maps to at least one recognised framework.
| Metric | Definition | Alignment |
|---|---|---|
| Scope 1 emissions | Direct greenhouse gas emissions from owned or controlled sources, in tCO2e. | ISSB IFRS S2, GRI 305-1, SASB cross-industry |
| Scope 2 emissions | Indirect emissions from purchased energy, in tCO2e, location or market based as stated. | ISSB IFRS S2, GRI 305-2 |
| Scope 3 emissions | Value chain emissions, in tCO2e, with the reported categories recorded verbatim. | ISSB IFRS S2, GRI 305-3 |
| Board independence | Proportion of board members the company itself states are independent. | GRI 2-9, SASB governance |
| Female workforce | Proportion of total employees reported as female, at the stated reporting date. | GRI 405-1 |
The citation requirement
Any datapoint without a verbatim, page anchored quote is rejected. A value that cannot be traced to a specific sentence on a specific page of a specific public document does not enter the benchmark. Nothing is inferred, modelled, estimated or filled from a third party database.
Where an organisation does not disclose a metric, the cell reads “Not reported”. That is a statement about disclosure, not about performance.
Confidence levels
Each accepted datapoint carries a confidence level. High: the value and its units appear explicitly in a labelled table or statement. Medium: the value appears in prose, or units must be derived from an adjacent statement. Low: the value appears once, in a graphic or footnote, and is legible but not repeated elsewhere. Low confidence values are published with the flag visible.
Human review
Every extracted value is reviewed by a person against the cited page before publication. Reviewers can accept, downgrade the confidence level, or reject a value. Rejected values revert to “Not reported”. A sample of accepted values is re-checked independently at each release.
Corrections and right of reply
Any organisation, or any reader, may challenge a datapoint by writing to info@esgfoundation.org quoting the company, the metric and the page reference. Challenges are acknowledged within five working days. Where a datapoint is found to be wrong it is corrected and the correction is logged in the version history below with the date. An organisation may also submit a short statement of reply, which is published alongside the affected row unmodified.
Separation from commercial activity
Benchmark methodology and scoring criteria are published in full and kept separate from any paid service. Sponsorship of the Foundation, participation in the podcast, and entry to the awards confer no influence over coverage, extraction or review. The Foundation does not rate, score or certify organisations.
Version history
- 0.1 (draft)To be confirmedInitial public methodology for review.