Assessment Structure & Scope
Understand the composition and reporting boundaries of each infrastructure assessment.
About the Assessments
The GRESB Infrastructure Assessments are the global standard for sustainability benchmarking and reporting for institutional investors, fund managers, infrastructure companies, and asset managers operating in the infrastructure sector. The methodology is consistent across different regions, investment vehicles, and asset types, aligning with international reporting frameworks such as the Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures (TCFD), the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), and the Principles for Responsible Investment (PRI).
There are three complementary GRESB Infrastructure Assessments:
Infrastructure Fund Assessment
Infrastructure Asset Assessment
Infrastructure Development Asset Assessment
GRESB also offers two SFDR Infrastructure Assessments (SFDR Asset & SFDR Fund) to support infrastructure participants in meeting their SFDR disclosure requirements.
All assessments cover the full breadth of infrastructure sectors, including but not limited to data infrastructure, energy and water resources, environmental services, network utilities, power generation except renewables (x‑renewables), renewable power, social infrastructure, and transport.
Which assessment should I complete?
Listed infrastructure companies and private infrastructure asset operators.
Management + Performance + NZIF Module
Greenfield/pre-operational infrastructure assets or infrastructure companies that invest in greenfield/pre-operational assets
Development
The Infrastructure Assessment output depends on a participant's component selection, which is entirely under their discretion.
Please refer to the "Who should participate" sections below for details on the scope of each assessment and its associated component(s).
Fund Assessment
What is the Fund Assessment, and how is it structured?
The Infrastructure Fund Assessment consists of only one Management Component, which includes 23 indicators across six aspects:
Leadership
Policies
Targets
Reporting
Risk Management
Stakeholder Engagement
Funds' underlying assets (portfolio companies) complete the Performance and/or Development Component(s) as part of the Infrastructure Asset or Development Asset Assessments.
The results of the underlying assets may contribute to the fund's overall GRESB Score.
Performance Component
Funds do not complete a Performance Component. Instead, the underlying assets of the fund complete it.
To earn a Fund Performance Score, at least 25% of the fund's underlying assets (based on equity invested) must participate in a GRESB Infrastructure Assessment. Within the 25%, at least one asset must complete the Asset Assessment and be connected to the fund on the GRESB Portal.
The fund's management and performance scores join together to create the premier measurement of sustainability performance: the GRESB Score — Infrastructure Fund.
Development Component
Funds do not complete a Development Component. Instead, the underlying development assets of the fund complete it.
To earn a Fund Development Score, at least 25% of the fund's underlying assets (based on equity invested) must participate in a GRESB Infrastructure Assessment. Within the 25%, at least one asset must complete the Development Asset Assessment and be connected to the fund on the GRESB Portal.
The fund's management and performance scores join together to create the premier measurement of sustainability performance: the GRESB Score — Infrastructure Fund.
Who should participate?
Infrastructure funds, portfolios, and companies can participate in the Fund Assessment. Common examples of infrastructure funds include:
A sector-focused fund with investments in renewable energy
A geographic-focused fund with investments in a specific region, such as North America or Oceania
A segregated account that is globally diversified, offering exposure to several sectors
How are E, S, and G represented in the assessment?
Each indicator is allocated to one of the three sustainability dimensions (E‑ environmental; S‑ social; G‑ governance):
E – indicators related to actions and efficiency measures undertaken to monitor and decrease the environmental footprint of the asset;
S – indicators related to the entity’s relationship with and impact on its stakeholders and the direct social impact of its activities
G – indicators related to the governance of sustainability, policies and procedures, and approach to sustainability at the entity or organization level.
4%
18%
78%
Asset Assessment
What is the Asset Assessment, and how is it structured?
Components
The Asset Assessment is made up of two components:
60 points
Energy
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Air Pollution
Water
Waste
Biodiversity & Habitat
Health & Safety
Employees
Customers
Certifications
Participants may choose to complete one or both Components. However, only entities that submit both Components will receive a GRESB Score and GRESB Rating.
GRESB Score = Management Score + Performance Score
Net Zero Investment Framework (NZIF) Module
The NZIF Module is available exclusively to GRESB Infrastructure Asset Assessment participants. This optional and complementary module can be enabled through the Component Selection page within the Assessment. See here for more details on how to enable it.
See the NZIF section below for more information about this module.
Who should participate?
Precisely what constitutes an infrastructure asset is typically defined by investors at the level of the investable entity.
These assets (investable entities) may comprise single or multiple facilities. Either type of asset may participate in the Asset Assessment; however, reporting as a single facility provides the best basis for benchmark comparisons and is, therefore, recommended.
Different approaches to participation are explained in the following sections. Note that these are only illustrative, and other scenarios are possible.
Single-Facility Assets
Single-facility assets undertake their activities at a single facility or across a single facility network. These entities may be large and complex or small and narrowly focused. The full description of the facility and business activities should be expressed in the Entity & Reporting Characteristics section of the asset assessment.
Examples of single‑facility assets include:
A provider of water and wastewater services in a single network
An airport
A telecommunications company with a single telecommunications network (e.g., in a single country)
Multi-Facility Assets
In some cases, the asset’s activities may be spread across several facilities—GRESB considers this to be a multi‑facility asset. A multi‑facility asset has the option to report:
Separately for each facility using multiple asset assessments
As a group using a single asset assessment
Completing multiple assessments allows comparisons between assets and is strongly encouraged, whilst a single assessment may take less time if the relevant data is more readily available at the aggregated asset level.
Examples of multi‑facility assets include:
An entity that operates several toll roads as one asset
An entity that owns a portfolio of small wind farms
An entity that operates a collection of distributed‑scale solar projects
If a participant elects to report on multiple facilities within a single asset assessment, GRESB strongly recommends aggregating facilities to a single sector and country combination; otherwise, peer group comparisons are likely to be less granular and less relevant.
Multi‑facility assets that participate as a single entity should have centralized management and aggregated performance data. See “Sector and Geography” (RC3) in the Entity and Reporting Characteristics Aspect for more details.
How are E, S, and G represented in the assessment?
Each indicator in the assessment is allocated to one of the three sustainability dimensions (E‑ environmental; S‑ social; G‑ governance):
E - indicators related to actions and efficiency measures undertaken to monitor and decrease the environmental footprint of the asset
S - indicators related to the entity’s relationship with and impact on its stakeholders and the direct social impact of its activities
G - indicators related to the governance of sustainability, policies and procedures, and approach to sustainability at the entity or organization level
Management
11%
28%
61%
Performance
Dependent upon materiality
Dependent upon materiality
Dependent upon materiality
Participants may use the GRESB Materiality & Scoring Tool to identify the weight of E, S, and G issues based on their specific asset characteristics and learn more about the role of materiality in the assessment.
[New in 2026] Net Zero Investment Framework Module
What is the NZIF module, and how is it structured?
The GRESB Infrastructure NZIF Module is a short, optional set of five additional indicators to be completed alongside the GRESB Infrastructure Asset Assessment.
NZ1: Separate Scope 3 Target
NZ2: Governance and Management Responsibility
NZ3: Decarbonization Plan
NZ4: Emissions Performance
NZ5: Achievement
It is designed to support a consistent view of how an infrastructure asset is positioned in relation to net zero, including whether it has appropriate targets, governance, plans and emissions performance in place, using the IIGCC’s Net Zero Investment Framework (NZIF) 2.0 for infrastructure as a reference.
Background
What Are the NZIF and the IIGCC?
The Net Zero Investment Framework (NZIF) was developed to help investors and managers assess whether assets and portfolios are aligned with a credible pathway to net- zero greenhouse gas emissions. It covers a range of asset classes, including infrastructure, and sets out clear expectations for net- zero alignment across ambition, targets, governance, decarbonization planning, emissions performance and achievement.
The NZIF is developed and maintained by the Institutional Investors Group on Climate Change (IIGCC), a membership body representing investors committed to addressing climate change and supporting the transition to a net-zero economy. IIGCC works with investors globally to provide guidance, frameworks, and tools that support credible, science-based climate action.
Why Does the Tool Exist and How Can it Help?
As the Net Zero Investment Framework (NZIF) has become a widely adopted reference point for net-zero alignment, investors and infrastructure managers have increasingly sought to use it to assess alignment across portfolios. In practice, however, different market participants have interpreted NZIF criteria in different ways, particularly when translating the framework into data requests, engaging with portfolio companies, and comparing alignment levels across assets. This has led to inconsistencies in implementation and has adversely affected impacts the investor confidence that investors have in the resulting analyses.
To address this challenge, GRESB and the IIGCC brought together a coalition of industry partners to develop a more consistent, practical approach to NZIF alignment. The GRESB NZIF Alignment tool builds on existing GRESB data points and combines them with new standardized NZIF Module questions, creating a shared, transparent methodology for alignment across all NZIF criteria.
This approach is intended to establish a common language for NZIF alignment, improve comparability across portfolios, and support clearer, more value-add conversations and decision-making between investors and infrastructure businesses.
How Net-Zero Alignment is Determined Using the GRESB NZIF Alignment Tool
Some NZIF requirements are already fully addressed by the GRESB Assessment. Others require additional confirmation through the NZIF Module. NZIF alignment is assessed using a combination of data from:
A selection of GRESB Infrastructure Asset Assessment indicators, and
Five additional NZIF Module questions
The methodology for the GRESB Assessment, scoring, and benchmarking remains completely unchanged by the additional NZIF Module, and that NZIF Module questions and data do not affect GRESB scores or benchmarks in any way.
Therefore, regardless of of whether or not you complete the NZIF Module participation, the your GRESB Assessments and Benchmark Reports will remain the same unaffected and continue to is based sole entirely on the GRESB Standards.
Who should participate?
The NZIF Module is available exclusively to GRESB Infrastructure Asset Assessment participants. GRESB encourages any participant with an interest (or that is connected to a fund or investor with an interest) in assessing their NZIF alignment to complete it.
Participants completing the NZIF Module will receive a dedicated NZIF Alignment report alongside their Infrastructure Asset Benchmark Report. This report provides actionable insights into net-zero alignment, decarbonization progress, and transition planning at the asset level.
Development Asset Assessment
What is the Development Asset Assessment, and how is it structured?
The Infrastructure Development Asset Assessment consists of an ‘Entity and Reporting Characteristics’ section and a Development Component that assesses management as well as performance information.
The Development Component consists of 40 indicators across 12 aspects (i.e., topics):
Leadership
Policies
Reporting
Risk Management
Stakeholder Engagement
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Materials
Site Selection
Employees
Contractors
Certifications
Who should participate?
Precisely what constitutes an infrastructure asset is typically defined by investors at the level of the investable entity.
These assets (investable entities) may comprise single or multiple facilities. Either type of asset may participate in the Development Asset Assessment; however, reporting as a single facility provides the best basis for benchmark comparisons and is, therefore, recommended.
Different approaches to participation are explained in the following sections. Please note that these are only illustrative examples, and other scenarios are also possible.
Single-Facility Assets
Single-facility assets undertake their activities at a single facility or across a single facility network. These entities may be large and complex or small and narrowly focused. The full description of the facility and business activities should be expressed in the Entity & Reporting Characteristics section of the asset assessment.
Examples of single‑facility assets include:
A provider of water and wastewater services in a single network is under development
An airport under development
An offshore wind farm under development
Multi-Facility Assets
In some cases, the asset’s activities may be spread across several facilities—GRESB considers this to be a multi‑facility asset. A multi‑facility asset has the option to report:
Separately for each facility using multiple development asset assessments
As a group using a single development asset assessment
Completing multiple assessments allows comparisons between assets and is strongly encouraged, whilst a single assessment may take less time if the relevant data is more readily available at the aggregated asset level.
Examples of multi‑facility assets include:
An entity that operates several toll roads under development simultaneously
An entity that owns a portfolio of small wind farms under development
An entity that is developing a collection of distributed-scale solar projects
If a participant elects to report on multiple facilities in a single development asset assessment, then it is strongly recommended that this aggregation be kept at a single sector and country combination; otherwise, peer group comparisons are likely to be far less specific and useful.
For example, a multi-facility asset that consists of on-shore wind farms under development in the UK can be compared to other UK wind farms under development. In contrast, an asset with wind and solar farms in various European countries will likely fall into a peer group of renewable energy in Europe, which is far less useful for comparisons. Multi-facility assets that operate as a single entity should have centralized management and aggregated performance data. See “Sector and Geography” (RC3) in the Entity and Reporting Characteristics Aspect for more details.
How are E, S, and G represented in the assessment?
Each indicator is allocated to one of the three sustainability dimensions (E‑ environmental; S‑ social; G‑ governance):
E – indicators related to actions and efficiency measures undertaken to monitor and decrease the environmental footprint of the asset;
S – indicators related to the entity’s relationship with and impact on its stakeholders and the direct social impact of its activities
G – indicators related to the governance of sustainability, policies and procedures, and approach to sustainability at the entity or organization level.
Participants may use the GRESB Materiality and Scoring Tool to identify the weight of E, S, and G issues based on their specific asset characteristics. See the ‘Materiality in the Asset Assessment’ section of the introduction for more information about materiality.
SFDR Assessments
What is SFDR (EU Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation)?
The EU’s Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (SFDR) is a transparency requirement for financial market participants related to key environmental, social and governance (ESG) criteria. The purpose is to increase market transparency and direct capital towards more sustainable activities.
SFDR imposes different disclosure obligations on financial market participants, depending on their size and the nature of their products. All financial market participants in the EU need to make general disclosures about sustainability practices at both the entity and product level.
They also need to report on their Principal Adverse Impacts (PAIs), which are a series of indicators covering a range of ESG issues, such as greenhouse gas emissions and waste management.
What is the SFDR Assessment?
The SFDR Infrastructure Asset and Fund Assessments are GRESB’s Infrastructure solution for the SFDR and its required PAI Reporting.
The assessment is based on the 6.4.2022 version of SFDR and provides financial market participants with a means to collect infrastructure asset data so that it can then be aggregated for funds or financial market participants ahead of their expected disclosure requirements in 2026.
The methodology is consistent across different regions, investment vehicles and infrastructure sectors and aligns with the principal adverse sustainability impacts statement template from Annex 1 of the Regulation.
The Infrastructure SFDR Assessment was adapted to provide a standardized and user-friendly way for infrastructure participants to report their sustainability data in a secure platform and help them meet their disclosure requirements. Assessment participants get a head start on disclosure requirements by receiving:
SFDR Data and Report that can be used to help meet their disclosure requirement under Article 7 of SFDR. .
Access to GRESB’s data exports tool so fund managers can conduct their own aggregation.
The assessment consists of 60 sustainability metrics, addressing the three tables related to PAIs in the Annex 1, which help to cover the Article 7 disclosure requirements for Article 8 and 9 products.
What is the structure?
Fund
The SFDR Infrastructure Asset Assessment consists of only the Entity & Reporting Characteristics sections.
Funds must participate with at least one of their underlying assets that also participates in the SFDR Infrastructure Asset Assessment, where Principal Adverse Impacts are reported.
The aggregation of asset data follows the calculation methods provided in Annex 1 of the Regulatory Technical Standards about the PAIs.
Aggregation is completed by an automatic system.
GRESB’s aggregation methodology will only be applicable at a fund level report, although fund of funds and financial market participants (FMPs) could theoretically connect to any of their underlying asset investments reporting on our platform. Like any methodology, where data gaps exist or coverage is limited, data download should help participants who wish to undertake the aggregation themselves.
Aggregation at the fund level is dependent on the following:
That any underlying asset accepts a connection request from a fund
That the underlying asset completes the assessment and submits their data
Asset-level information is aggregated only for those assets that were submitted before the connected fund.
Once all assets of the fund have been connected and submitted, the fund is in turn encouraged to submit.
Asset
The SFDR Infrastructure Asset Assessment consists of several aspects that a participant is required to report on, including:
Entity and Reporting Characteristics;
Climate and other environment-related indicators;
Social and employee, respect for human rights, anti-corruption, and anti-bribery matters.
*Note that the term table is used as a reference point to the mandatory and optional indicators as per the template provided by the EU but that the SFDR assessment portal itself is not composed of ’’tables’’. The SFDR report will however be in table format.
The SFDR Assessment is broken into three parts to reflect the different tables of PAIs as outlined by the EU documentation. These three tables are detailed as follows.
Table 1: Mandatory climate and other environment-related indicators, Social and employee, respect for human rights, anti-corruption and anti-bribery matters.
Table 1 focuses on environmental and social indicators applicable to investments in investee companies that have to be disclosed by financial market participants, these are considered as part of the mandatory indicators that have to be reported on.
Table 1 consists of 14 indicators across 5 aspects:
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Biodiversity;
Water;
Waste;
Social and Employee matters.
Table 2: Additional climate and other environment-related indicators.
These are considered to be optional although participants are encouraged to report on at least one of those indicators so financial market participants can abide by regulatory requirements.
Table 2 consists of 16 indicators across 4 aspects:
Emissions;
Energy Performance;
Water, waste and material emissions;
Green Securities.
Table 3: Additional indicators for social and employee, respect for human rights, anti-corruption and anti-bribery matters.
These are considered to be optional although participants are encouraged to report on at least one of those indicators so financial market participants can abide by regulatory requirements.
Table 3 consists of 17 indicators across 3 aspects:
Social and employee matters;
Human rights;
Anti-corruption and anti-bribery.
Last updated
Was this helpful?