Introduction

The report presents a practical framework for valuing societal impact using the eQALY method, which converts diverse outcomes (e.g. CO₂, wages, health) into a single monetary measure of well-being. It aims to standardise impact statements, improve transparency, and enable comparability across organisations.

Definition and scope

An impact statement (IP&L) quantifies positive and negative societal impacts across natural, human, and social capital over a one-year period. It covers the full value chain (upstream to end-of-life) and focuses on societal materiality rather than financial control, supporting decision-making, risk management, and stakeholder communication.

Process to develop an impact statement

The framework follows a five-step process aligned to Assemble, Assess, Act: define scope and stakeholders; map impact drivers; collect data; model impacts; and translate insights into actions. A Bronze–Silver–Gold iteration approach prioritises key drivers (typically top 3–5) for refinement, enabling rapid initial assessments and progressive improvement.

Scope and impact framework

The framework defines organisational boundaries, value-chain segmentation, and mapping from activities to outcomes and valuation pathways. It includes upstream, operations, use-phase, and end-of-life drivers, with optional CSR activities. Guardrails ensure comparability, avoid double-counting, and enforce consistent assumptions across reporting periods.

Data and modeling

The eQALY model applies seven valuation pathways spanning health, income, education, taxes, social costs, environmental externalities, and ecosystem services. Impacts follow a structured chain (output → outcome → additionality → valuation factor). Data combines primary company data with LCA and input–output models, supported by global datasets and regionalised value factors across 190+ countries.

Minimum viable datasets enable early adoption, with increasing precision achieved through iteration. Key assumptions (baseline, attribution, drop-off) must be transparent to maintain credibility.

Reporting, transparency, and governance

The impact statement is presented as a one-page matrix aligning value-chain stages with capitals. Supporting value notes document assumptions, sensitivity analysis (top five drivers), and data sources. Transparency is aligned with Capitals Coalition governance standards, with unified reporting of valuation factors. Early engagement with assurance providers is recommended to avoid rework.

Integration with existing reporting

The framework complements financial P&L and ESG KPIs rather than replacing them. It aggregates ESG data into a single monetary unit, enabling comparison of societal and financial performance. Alignment with the GHG Protocol allows reuse of emissions data, reducing implementation effort and supporting integrated decision-making.

Illustrative case studies

Case studies (e.g. Natura, Oda, EA Technology) demonstrate application across sectors and maturity levels. They show that actionable insights can be generated without perfect data, with outputs used to identify material drivers and inform strategic priorities.

How to get started

A first impact statement can be produced within a week using 5–8 material drivers, existing data sources, and transparent assumptions. The process involves rapid data collection, modelling, and interpretation, followed by iterative improvement cycles that enhance decision relevance and robustness over time.