Video transcript
A UAE ESG report often reads as four frameworks stapled together. The cause is rarely the data, but the build. This is for teams preparing a UAE report. Here is how to present it as one document. Five reference points shape most UAE reports. On top, the exchange guides from DFM and ADX. Beneath them, GRI and IFRS S1 and S2. Exchanges set what to report. Frameworks set how.
The Dubai Financial Market publishes an ESG Reporting Guide. It benchmarks metrics across environmental, social and governance pillars. The count changes by edition, so confirm with DFM. For the report, that list is a layout opportunity. The Abu Dhabi Securities Exchange publishes ESG disclosure guidance. It asks for indicators and a materiality assessment. Above both sits the regulator: SCA, now CMA since 2025. Listed companies are generally expected to disclose.
The global frameworks read the world differently. GRI asks what we do to the world: impact materiality. IFRS S1 and S2, issued June 2023, ask what the world does to us. Report against both, and that is double materiality. Much UAE value sits in energy and real estate. So GRI Sector Standards matter, like GRI 11 for oil and gas. Its topics must be addressed, or the omission explained. That makes the content index load-bearing.
The fix sits under the design: one data architecture. Capture each figure once, then tag every framework. One Scope 2 number maps to DFM, GRI 305-2 and IFRS S2. That is the crosswalk: one source, several tags. Open with a content and framework index. Lead with the headline metric, then the tables. Design the charts. Do not just generate them. Hold every figure identical wherever it appears.
Many UAE reports are bilingual, and tables are hardest. Arabic reads right to left and runs a different length. Parallel layout for summaries, sequential for the GRI index. Plan the right-to-left tables before design begins. Most failures here are presentation, not compliance. A reference that drifts year to year seems ad hoc. The same figure with two different numbers erodes trust. And bilingual numbers that clash cost credibility.
See the two layers, and four frameworks stop competing. One architecture, one crosswalk, one clear document. That turns stapled frameworks into a report analysts trust. Plan yours with Walk Production.
When a UAE ESG report reads as four frameworks stapled together, the cause is rarely the data. It is that the report was built framework by framework instead of as one document. The frameworks themselves sit in two layers, and a reporting team that sees that structure can present disclosures far more clearly than one working through each guide in isolation. The exchange-level guides from the Dubai Financial Market and the Abu Dhabi Securities Exchange set prescriptive metric lists for listed companies, under the oversight of the UAE’s federal securities regulator. Beneath those exchange guides sit the global frameworks they reference: the GRI Standards for impact-focused disclosure and the ISSB’s IFRS S1 and S2 for investor-focused sustainability and climate reporting. Knowing how all five reference points connect is the first step to a report that reads as one coherent document rather than four frameworks stapled together.
This guide is written for company secretaries, investor relations teams, and communications leads preparing a UAE ESG or sustainability report. It covers each framework’s scope, how they compare at a glance, and the presentation craft that makes multi-framework disclosure readable. For the broader reporting context this article builds on, see our guide to annual reports and sustainability reports for UAE companies.
A note on scope. Walk Production is an integrated creative agency that designs and writes annual reports, sustainability reports, and integrated reports for listed companies across Malaysia and Singapore, and now serves the UAE market. We are a design and copywriting studio, and our own team writes and designs the report. Sustainability consulting is offered too, with the consultant on the project appointed by you or drawn from our partner panel. Audit, independent assurance, and legal advice are not on offer and stay with your appointed providers. This guide is about how to present framework disclosures clearly. Always confirm your reporting obligations against the current official sources cited below.
What are the main ESG reporting frameworks UAE companies present against?
ESG reporting frameworks in the UAE sit in two layers: the exchange guides from DFM and ADX, overseen by the UAE’s federal securities regulator, and the global standards they reference, mainly the GRI Standards and the ISSB’s IFRS S1 and S2. UAE listed companies generally present against a combination rather than a single framework. Understanding that distinction separates a well-structured report from one that lists frameworks without making their relationship clear.
The five reference points most UAE reporting teams work with are: the DFM ESG Reporting Guide, the ADX ESG disclosure guidance, the federal regulator’s corporate governance framework (the oversight layer above the exchanges), the GRI Standards (impact-materiality, stakeholder-facing), and IFRS S1 and S2 from the ISSB (financial-materiality, investor-facing). Exchange guides set what to report locally; global frameworks set the recognized basis for how to report it.
What does the DFM ESG Reporting Guide ask companies to disclose?
The Dubai Financial Market publishes an ESG Reporting Guide setting out a benchmark set of ESG metrics across environmental, social and governance pillars, so disclosure is consistent and comparable year to year. DFM-listed public joint stock companies are expected to prepare annual ESG disclosures under this guide; confirm the current mandatory or voluntary status, and any applicable financial year from which requirements apply, directly with DFM, as the guide is updated periodically.
The pillar breakdown runs across the familiar three headings: energy, emissions, water and waste under environmental; workforce, health and safety, and community under social; board oversight and ethics under governance. The guide sets out a benchmark metric list whose exact count is revised from edition to edition, so confirm the current number directly on the DFM website, where the downloadable PDF holds the full enumeration. Like the global frameworks it references, the guide reflects the wider move toward materiality lenses that weigh both impact and financial relevance; treat any specific characterization of a given edition as something to verify on the DFM guide itself rather than to assert in a disclosure document.
Frameworks set what to disclose. This guide is about communicating it clearly.
The DFM guide, ADX guidance, and the global standards are cited here as context for presenting information well, not as compliance instruction. Verify the applicable requirements with your advisers and the official exchange sources.
From a presentation perspective, a multi-metric benchmark list is a layout opportunity: an ESG performance dashboard or scorecard at the front of the sustainability section is far more readable than a dense table that asks the reader to find the data themselves. Headline metrics first, full tables behind them. Across the reports we design for Malaysian and Singaporean listed companies, the framework a client reports against is settled by their advisers long before the design brief lands. Our job starts after that: take the chosen metric set and make it readable as a sustainability report rather than a data dump. Which framework to follow is a compliance call for the company; how clearly it reads is a presentation decision.
How is ADX ESG disclosure guidance structured?
The Abu Dhabi Securities Exchange publishes ESG disclosure guidance covering a set of ESG indicators and asking companies to run a materiality assessment that identifies the ESG topics most relevant to their operations and stakeholders. Confirm the current indicator count, scope and any global framework cross-references on the ADX site directly, as the guidance is updated periodically and the full list lives in the downloadable ADX ESG guide.
What makes the ADX section worth understanding is its lineage rather than its indicator count. The United Nations Sustainable Stock Exchanges initiative publishes Model Guidance, a voluntary template that exchanges around the world adapt to develop their own issuer ESG guidance and to support listed entities in applying IFRS S1 and S2. That common starting point is why exchange-issued ESG guidance across markets tends to map onto the GRI Standards and the ISSB’s IFRS S1 and S2 rather than inventing a parallel vocabulary, and why a company already reporting to GRI usually arrives at a set of exchange indicators with most of the foundation in place. Whether ADX drew on that lineage, and how its current indicators cross-reference the global frameworks, is set out in the ADX ESG guide itself, so confirm the specifics there before relying on them.
For the report itself, the practical move is to name that recognized basis on the page. Stating which global framework a disclosure aligns with lets an analyst see that the indicators rest on an established lineage rather than a house-built list. For ADX indicators and any IFRS S1 and S2 alignment specifically, confirm the current ADX position on the ADX site before citing it in a disclosure document.
Where does the federal regulator fit, and is ESG reporting mandatory?
The UAE Capital Market Authority (CMA, formerly the Securities and Commodities Authority) sits above the exchange-level guides and publishes the corporate governance requirements that frame them. Onshore listed public joint stock companies are required to publish annual ESG or sustainability disclosures under the Corporate Governance Code. What differs by exchange is the guide used to structure that disclosure, not the obligation itself, and the current scope should still be confirmed for your filing. The CMA took its current form under federal decree-laws issued in 2025, and references to the older Securities and Commodities Authority name in existing rules are generally read as references to the CMA. Because the institutional framework is mid-transition, confirm the current remit and the live text of any rule on the CMA regulations page before publication. The detailed ESG disclosure metrics sit with the DFM and ADX guides below that federal layer, as set out in the sections above.
Timing is what most affects the production calendar. The expected filing window is tied to the financial year-end or the annual general meeting, and it sets the outer edge of the schedule you have to plan against. Both the window and the institutional transition above it are being refined, so treat any specific deadline as a planning assumption and confirm the current requirement with DFM, ADX, and the CMA for your filing rather than relying on a fixed figure here.
How do GRI and IFRS S1/S2 relate to the UAE exchange guides?
The DFM and ADX guides reference global frameworks rather than replacing them. The GRI Standards are the most widely used basis for impact-focused sustainability reporting, structured as Universal Standards (GRI 1: Foundation, GRI 2: General Disclosures, GRI 3: Material Topics) plus Topic Standards and Sector Standards. The 2021 revision of the Universal Standards took effect from 1 January 2023, and the impact-materiality lens asks organizations to disclose how their activities affect people, communities and the environment.
The ISSB’s IFRS S1 and S2, issued in June 2023, take a financial-materiality view: how sustainability and climate-related risks and opportunities affect the organization’s financial prospects and enterprise value. IFRS S2 covers climate specifically and fully integrates the TCFD recommendations. The critical distinction a reporting team must get right: impact materiality asks what we do to the world; financial materiality asks what the world does to us; double materiality combines both lenses.
The GRI layer that matters most in the UAE, and the one many guides gloss over, is the Sector Standards. A large part of UAE listed-market value sits in energy, utilities, real estate and industrials, so for many DFM and ADX issuers the relevant GRI document is not just the topic standards but a sector one. The GRI Sector Standards released to date cover oil and gas (GRI 11), coal (GRI 12), agriculture, aquaculture and fishing (GRI 13), and mining (GRI 14). For an oil-and-gas issuer, GRI 11 is the standard that sets out the sector’s likely material topics, from emissions and flaring to local communities and asset integrity.
This has a direct presentation consequence, which is why it belongs in a guide about how to build the report rather than how to comply. Where a GRI Sector Standard applies, GRI expects the sector-specific topics to be addressed, or any omission to be explained, in the content index. The content index is no longer a back-of-report formality; it has to carry the mapping that shows each sector topic was considered, reported or reasoned away. For a UAE energy issuer, that turns the index into a load-bearing part of the document, and designing it to be read rather than skimmed is part of the job.
A framework reference that drifts between “GRI-aligned” one year and “ISSB-informed” the next reads as less disciplined to an analyst or ratings agency. Naming the framework you report against, including the sector standard where one applies, and holding to it year to year, signals that the disclosure rests on a recognized basis.
How do the frameworks compare at a glance?
The frameworks differ by who sets them, what they cover, and which reader they serve. DFM and ADX guides are local and prescriptive; GRI and IFRS S1/S2 are global and principle-based. The table below sets out the comparison so a reporting team can see how they relate rather than compete.
| Framework | Set by | What it covers | Materiality lens | Primary reader |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DFM ESG Reporting Guide | Dubai Financial Market | Benchmark ESG metric set across E/S/G pillars (confirm current count on DFM website) | Materiality-based; confirm the current lens on the DFM guide | DFM-listed companies, regulators |
| ADX ESG disclosure guidance | Abu Dhabi Securities Exchange | ESG indicators with a materiality assessment; like other exchange guidance, tends to map onto global frameworks (confirm indicators and cross-references on the ADX site) | Materiality assessment required | ADX-listed companies, regulators |
| Federal regulator governance framework | UAE federal securities regulator: the CMA | Corporate governance requirements; ESG disclosure detail sits with the exchange guides below it (confirm current scope with the CMA) | Not a framework per se; oversees exchange-level requirements | All UAE listed companies |
| GRI Standards | Global Reporting Initiative | Universal, Sector and Topic Standards; full ESG disclosure | Impact materiality | Stakeholders: employees, communities, ratings agencies, ESG analysts |
| IFRS S1 and S2 | ISSB / IFRS Foundation | General sustainability and climate-related financial disclosure | Financial materiality | Investors, analysts, capital markets |
The exchange guidance in particular is revised from time to time, so confirm the current version of each framework on its official source before you lock the disclosure structure.
How do you present multiple frameworks in one report clearly?
This is the craft challenge that the rest of the post has been building toward: showing four frameworks in one document so the reader sees a single report, not a stack of overlapping ones. The fix sits underneath the design. A single data architecture feeds the DFM metrics, the ADX indicators, the GRI index and the ISSB disclosures, and the page presents them through one consistent set of charts and tables.
The principle is to govern each underlying figure once, then tag it to every framework that calls for it, rather than reporting the same number four times and risking four slightly different versions. This is usually called a crosswalk. The example below shows it for two ordinary figures: each is captured once, on one stated basis, and carries the references it answers.
| Underlying figure (governed once) | DFM metric | GRI disclosure | IFRS S2 reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Scope 2 emissions, market-based, tCO2e | Emissions metric, environmental pillar | GRI 305-2 (energy indirect emissions) | Climate metric, cross-industry GHG disclosure |
| Board independence ratio, % | Governance metric, board oversight | GRI 2-9 / 2-11 (governance structure) | Governance pillar input |
The figures here are illustrative; the point is the shape. One source row, several framework tags, so the same Scope 2 number that appears in the chairman’s narrative, the sustainability dashboard and the back-of-report index is the same value drawn from the same entry. Confirm the exact DFM metric, the current GRI disclosure numbering and the applicable IFRS S2 reference on each official source before fixing your own mapping. A few things turn this principle into a readable document:
- Open with a content and framework index. A mapping table at the front, or a reference appendix, tells the reader exactly where each framework’s disclosures sit. That is more useful to an analyst than a generic table of contents.
- Lead with the headline metric, then the detail. An ESG performance dashboard that puts the key environmental, social and governance numbers at a glance earns the full data tables behind it.
- Design the charts; don’t just generate them. A Scope 1 and 2 emissions trend, a board diversity ratio, a water-withdrawal series: each is a design problem, not a spreadsheet output.
- Hold figures identical wherever they appear. A Scope 2 figure, a workforce headcount or a community investment total should read the same under the DFM, GRI and ISSB sections. A mismatch between sections is among the fastest ways to lose an analyst’s trust.
What bilingual Arabic-English considerations apply to framework disclosures?
Many UAE reports are bilingual, and framework data tables are the hardest part to lay out across Arabic and English. Arabic reads right-to-left and runs to a different length, so the framework index, metric tables and chart labels must be planned for both directions from the start, not retrofitted into a layout built for English.
Our team in Malaysia produces annual and sustainability reports bilingually in Bahasa Malaysia and English, and that same layout discipline carries directly to Arabic and English work. A few decisions shape how the framework content lands across two scripts:
- Parallel layout suits shorter framework summaries: a materiality overview, the headline ESG metrics, the governance section. Both languages share a spread, and a reader can compare them directly.
- Sequential layout is the better fit for the full GRI content index and the extended data tables, where the sheer volume makes side-by-side layout unworkable.
- RTL behavior in tables and charts. Number alignment, axis direction and framework labels all behave differently in Arabic, so plan this before design begins rather than at proof stage.
- One typographic system across both versions. Heading hierarchy, page numbering and units stay consistent from page one, so neither language reads as the secondary one.
This is a design and layout discipline, not a translation service. The bilingual structure should be agreed as part of the initial brief so neither language version feels like an afterthought.
What mistakes weaken a multi-framework ESG report?
The common failures in multi-framework UAE ESG reports are presentation failures, not compliance ones. Each is fixable in design and editorial.
- Framework references that drift year to year. Calling the basis “GRI-aligned” one cycle and “ISSB-informed” the next signals a report assembled ad hoc rather than built on a settled framework choice.
- The same data point carrying two different numbers. When a Scope 2 emissions figure differs between the DFM metrics table and the GRI content index, it undermines the credibility of both.
- A content index that ignores the sector standard. For an oil-and-gas or industrial issuer, a GRI 11 topic left out of the index with no explanation reads as an omission rather than a choice. The index is where a sector standard is shown to have been applied.
- A materiality matrix where every topic sits in one quadrant. If impact and likelihood look indistinguishable across all topics, the matrix tells the reader nothing.
- Metrics without the governance behind them. Reporting a figure without showing how the board oversees the risk it tracks reads as data, not disclosure.
- Bilingual versions that drift apart in figures or layout. An Arabic version whose numbers do not match the English one is a credibility problem, not merely a design inconsistency.
How Walk Production can help
Walk Production is an integrated creative agency that designs and writes annual reports, sustainability reports, and integrated reports for listed companies across Malaysia and Singapore, and now serves the UAE market. With a track record across Malaysia and Singapore, we present DFM, ADX, GRI and ISSB disclosures clearly through structured sustainability report design that makes the data readable to the audiences who need it. We are a design and copywriting studio, and our own team writes and designs the report. Sustainability consulting is available alongside it, carried by a panel of partner sustainability consultants we bring to the engagement. Audit, independent assurance, and legal advice are not provided and sit with the company and its appointed providers.
Our in-house team covers concept development, report copywriting, layout and infographic design, data visualization, bilingual production (from our Bahasa Malaysia-English experience, carrying to Arabic-English engagements), and print and digital delivery. For the wider context on what UAE ESG and sustainability reports contain, see the guide linked above, and for the presentation layer behind clear ESG communication, our earlier post on how to communicate ESG disclosures clearly in the UAE covers the editorial side in more detail. To see how multi-framework disclosure reads when it is designed as one document, browse our reporting work, including our sustainability report for PT Halmahera Persada Lygend (HPL), a mining group, drawn from our reporting work in Malaysia and Singapore, or speak to our reporting team about your next reporting cycle.
