Climate reporting timelines have been extended but progress remains on track
The extra time is not about lowering the bar, but allowing smaller listed companies build the needed capabilities at a more manageable pace
[SINGAPORE] Climate reporters just got a little breathing room.
Last month, the Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority and Singapore Exchange Regulation (SGX RegCo) extended the timelines for implementing climate reporting requirements. This comes amid global economic uncertainty and reservations about companies’ readiness.
Under the revised timeline, SGX-listed companies outside the Straits Times Index (STI) would now need to report only their Scope 1 and 2 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from FY2025.
Reporting of climate-related disclosures beyond Scope 1, 2 and 3 GHG emissions based on the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards (ISSB Standards) will come later – FY2028 or FY2030, depending on the market capitalisation of the company. For large non-listed companies, reporting has been pushed back to FY2030.
STI companies, however, are still on the fast track. Other than a two-year extension to assurance requirements, there is no change in requirements for them. In addition, they must report Scope 3 GHG emissions from FY2026, as they are expected to lead the way in implementing global standards.
Where we are now
According to ISSB, as at June 2025, 36 jurisdictions have adopted or otherwise used the ISSB Standards, or are finalising steps towards introducing them into their regulatory frameworks. These jurisdictions include five out of the 10 biggest economies in the world, as well as five Asean member states, including Singapore.
A NEWSLETTER FOR YOU
Friday, 12.30 pm
ESG Insights
An exclusive weekly report on the latest environmental, social and governance issues.
The adoption of the ISSB Standards by major economies will be felt throughout the world.
The standards require disclosures about the current and anticipated effects of sustainability-related risks and opportunities on the reporting entity’s value chain, which includes its supply and distribution channels.
Moreover, there are global initiatives by ISSB to enhance interoperability with major reporting standards that are adopted in other jurisdictions, such as the European Sustainability Reporting Standards.
SEE ALSO
Taken together, companies would likely face increasing requests from their suppliers or customers to provide sustainability information aligned with the ISSB Standards, even if they are not required to adopt those standards.
The ramifications are clear. To support Singapore’s ambitions to be a leading centre for sustainability solutions and a trusted hub for trade, capital and talent, we must speak the same business language as the rest of the world. This means keeping pace with global adoption of the ISSB Standards, at the very least.
Not a sign to pause
Therefore, companies should recognise that the goal stays the same, and the extended timelines do not represent a change in expectations. All listed companies are still required to provide climate-related disclosures.
In this regard, it is crucial for non-STI constituents to refer to SGX’s Practice Note 7.6. In addition to the requirements to disclose Scope 1 and 2 GHG emissions, they are expected to “build on their existing climate-related disclosures, and demonstrate progress towards incorporating the climate-relevant provisions in the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards according to the relevant timeline”.
In short, the extra time is not about lowering the bar, but allowing companies to build the needed capabilities at a more manageable pace.
What now
How do the extended timelines impact the climate reporting journey of Singapore companies?
First and foremost, listed companies should appreciate that the efforts they have put in are not wasted as there is no change in requirements apart from the timeline. Particularly for non-STI constituents, these efforts are still useful as a foundation to build upon to meet their revised timeline.
Non-STI constituents now have more flexibility to plan and implement their climate reporting, with the condition that they are able to demonstrate progress towards meeting the timeline. This translates to more time to think through how to grow their capabilities in a more deliberate manner, which would include improving data collection, making information systems fit for purpose and training employees to acquire adjacent skills.
These capabilities take a considerable amount of time to carefully cultivate. The additional time also avoids the situation of having to resort to haphazard and inefficient approaches just to comply with regulatory requirements.
To progress in a structured manner, companies should develop a multi-year road map, detailing building blocks of critical data points, information systems and employee training, and the planned improvement in disclosures year on year, to reach full alignment with the climate-relevant provisions in the ISSB Standards.
This would necessitate mapping their existing climate-related disclosures to the standards and setting out the various milestones to demonstrate progress. An effective road map should include plans towards quantification, as required by IFRS S2 Climate-related Disclosures, over time as skills and capabilities develop.
Benefits of progressing in climate reporting
Such planning is increasingly beneficial, even if there is no need to comply with regulations.
Climate impact to the business is important and forms part of business strategy. Amid increasing climate unpredictability, among other uncertainties, it is in every business’ interest to ensure that its business activities and operations including supply chains and logistics are resilient.
With extreme weather and climate events becoming more intense and frequent, leading to supply shortages and price increases, it is now a business imperative to safeguard against such disruptions.
Unsurprisingly, financial institutions, investors and customers share the same concerns, and companies which can clearly communicate its climate strategy gains a competitive advantage in the market.
Opportunities to leverage this competitive advantage are emerging in Asia.
Based on the Science Based Targets initiative, Asia is one of the regions with the fastest-growing number of companies committing to science-based climate targets, and this includes China. Businesses in these economies are actively encouraging suppliers and partners to follow suit. These Asian countries are also frontrunners in implementing the ISSB Standards.
By advancing climate reporting and aligning our reporting to the same business language of sustainability reporting, Singapore companies can demonstrate a shared commitment to sustainable practices and attract partnerships in these markets, thereby gaining a competitive advantage.
Support in the ecosystem
As part of a collaborative ecosystem, companies are not alone on this journey. Other than regulators, progress in sustainability reporting is driven by a whole suite of internal and external stakeholders, including the financial services sector, investors, customers, suppliers, industry peers, directors, management, employees, all working together to address challenges based on their respective roles.
For example, in light of the extended timelines, the application deadlines for the sustainability reporting grants administered by the Economic Development Board and Enterprise Singapore to support the development of a first sustainability report that is consistent with the ISSB Standards have been updated.
In addition to financial support, a growing number of resources are available from – among others – government initiatives, professional bodies and firms, trade associations and chambers in the market that companies can leverage to build capacity.
Training programmes aimed at supporting listed companies in implementing the ISSB Standards, such as the workshops by the Institute of Singapore Chartered Accountants (Isca) in partnership with SGX RegCo, are one example.
The extended timelines provide even more opportunity for collaboration and contribution by other stakeholders in the ecosystem. For example, with STI constituents leading the way forward, other companies would be able to learn from their experiences and progress their own climate reporting, especially in the more challenging areas of climate-related scenario analysis and anticipated financial effects.
In conclusion, sustainability reporting in Singapore has come a long way since it was introduced by SGX in 2016. In 2026, a decade after its introduction, all listed companies will be reporting their Scope 1 and 2 GHG emissions in addition to their climate-related disclosures.
The recalibration of regulatory timeline should not detract from the progress that we are making. If anything, if this recalibration is used earnestly by every company to advance capabilities in climate reporting as intended by the regulations, our momentum might even continue in the years ahead.
The writer is an associate director of the Professional Standards Department at Isca. This commentary was written in collaboration with the Sustainability Reporting Standards Sub-Committee under the Isca Sustainability and Climate Change Committee.
Copyright SPH Media. All rights reserved.
