Let AMMO be your Partner - Advance with AMMO - ESG & More

Climate Disclosure Guides

Three Sign-Off Traps, where HKEX and Mainland packs break, and the 15-category Scope 3 funnel.

HKEX Appendix C2 Climate Disclosure

A Survival Guide and Step-by-Step Playbook for Hong Kong Listed Companies

Hong Kong listed companies are entering a new phase of climate disclosure under HKEX’s enhanced ESG Reporting Code, Appendix C2, Part D. These “New Climate Requirements” are grounded in IFRS S2 Climate-related Disclosures and make climate reporting a core part of listing compliance rather than a voluntary ESG add-on. From financial years starting on or after 1 January 2025, all Main Board and GEM issuers must disclose Scope 1 and Scope 2 greenhouse gas emissions, with broader climate requirements phasing in depending on issuer category.

This article is written from the perspective of a Hong Kong listed issuer, but with the practical view of a specialist ESG consultant. The first part explains why Appendix C2 climate rules matter and where issuers usually go wrong. The second part is a step-by-step playbook that teaches your organisation how to prepare HKEX-aligned climate disclosure, with special focus on climate scenario analysis and transition risks.

Why HKEX Appendix C2 Climate Rules Matter and Where Issuers Go Wrong

HKEX has renamed and upgraded its ESG framework into Appendix C2, the Environmental, Social and Governance Reporting Code. Appendix C2 now comprises mandatory disclosure requirements and “comply or explain” provisions and forms part of the Listing Rules for both the Main Board and GEM. Part D of Appendix C2 sets out climate-related disclosure requirements that follow the IFRS S2 architecture: governance, strategy, risk management, and metrics and targets.

Implementation is phased. All listed issuers must disclose Scope 1 and Scope 2 greenhouse gas emissions on a mandatory basis for financial years commencing on or after 1 January 2025. For other climate disclosures under Part D, all Main Board issuers report on a comply or explain basis from financial years commencing on or after 1 January 2025, while Hang Seng Composite LargeCap Index constituents move to mandatory reporting for financial years commencing on or after 1 January 2026. This means that climate disclosure is now part of Hong Kong listing compliance, not just voluntary branding.

  1. Common issue 01

    ESG messaging without real climate risk

    Market reviews and HKEX guidance show common weaknesses in current ESG reports. Many issuers focus on general ESG messaging and charity work without explaining how climate-related risks and opportunities could reasonably affect cash flows, access to finance or cost of capital. Yet Appendix C2 expects issuers to describe financially relevant climate risks and opportunities, not just reputational topics.

  2. Common issue 02

    Unclear climate governance

    Reports often state that “the board oversees ESG”, but do not identify which committee or directors are responsible for climate topics, how often climate is discussed or how decisions are made. HKEX expects disclosure of governance processes, controls and procedures for monitoring, managing and overseeing climate-related risks and opportunities.

  3. Common issue 03

    Scenario analysis mentioned, not explained

    Issuers may state that climate scenario analysis has been carried out, but they rarely describe which scenarios they used, what inputs and assumptions were applied or how the results changed strategy or risk appetite. Under Appendix C2 and the Implementation Guidance, issuers are expected to use climate-related scenario analysis that is “commensurate with the issuer’s circumstances” and to disclose information about scenarios, inputs, uncertainties and conclusions.

  4. Common issue 04

    Transition risks overlooked

    Many ESG reports focus on physical risks such as typhoons, flooding and heat waves, but pay little attention to transition risks such as tightening climate regulation, carbon pricing, technology changes and shifting investor and customer expectations, even though these factors frequently drive medium-term financial impacts. HKEX and ISSB materials emphasise that climate-related risks and opportunities which may affect cash flows, access to finance or cost of capital over short, medium and long term must be disclosed.

  5. Common issue 05

    Scope 3 emissions as a weak point

    Value-chain emissions are often omitted or briefly referenced, despite being material in many sectors. Appendix C2 and HKEX guidance expect issuers to identify relevant Scope 3 categories, explain which categories are included in measurement, set out the basis for selection and describe any significant changes in the value chain.

  6. Common issue 06

    Reliefs used without a capacity plan

    Finally, many issuers rely on HKEX implementation reliefs without explaining how they will build capacity over time. The New Climate Requirements include Reasonable Information Relief, Capabilities Relief, Commercial Sensitivity Relief and Financial Effects Relief to help issuers improve disclosure progressively. These reliefs are helpful, but using them without transparency or a clear roadmap can undermine investor confidence.

HKEX Appendix C2 Climate Disclosure

Step-by-Step Playbook for Hong Kong Listed Companies

  1. Confirm Your HKEX Climate Obligations

    Begin by confirming your issuer category and climate timeline. Check whether your company is a Hang Seng Composite LargeCap constituent, another Main Board issuer or a GEM issuer, since this determines which climate disclosures are mandatory and when they must be provided. LargeCap issuers are required to report fully on the Climate Requirements on a mandatory basis for financial years commencing on or after 1 January 2026, while other Main Board issuers report on a comply or explain basis from financial years commencing on or after 1 January 2025. GEM issuers must disclose Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions and are encouraged to adopt other climate disclosures voluntarily.

    Prepare a short internal note summarising your category, effective dates and which climate disclosures are mandatory, comply or explain or voluntary. Share this note with the board, CFO, company secretary and ESG lead to align expectations.

    Where HKEX and Mainland Packs Break

    Not a feature comparison. Most A+H and dual-listed groups already know HKEX Appendix C2 and the SSE/SZSE sustainability reporting guidelines are different regimes. What actually causes drafting errors is five specific handoff points where one team’s reasonable assumption becomes the other team’s mistake — usually invisible until an auditor or regulator asks a follow-up question.

    1. Break 1

      The materiality handoff

      Hong Kong runs a financial-materiality matrix for Part D: what could reasonably affect cash flows, access to finance or cost of capital. The Mainland pack runs a double-materiality matrix: financial importance plus impact on the economy, people and environment. Neither matrix answers the other market’s question. A topic material only under double materiality still needs a considered decision about whether it belongs in the HKEX pack, even if not as a Part D climate risk.

    2. Break 2

      The factor-library handoff

      The same kWh reading gets pulled once from the meter, then multiplied by two different emission factors: a Hong Kong utility factor (for example CLP or HK Electric) for the HKEX pack, and a Mainland provincial grid factor for the domestic pack. Mixed carelessly, the same activity produces two different, uncontrolled tCO2e figures inside one spreadsheet. The fix is not a second inventory — it is one activity ledger with two clearly labelled, documented factor maps.

    3. Break 3

      The calendar handoff

      Mainland sustainability reports are typically due within four months of financial year-end, often closing before the HKEX annual report cycle finalises its climate chapter. Without a reconciliation checkpoint, “final” Mainland numbers quietly become “final” HKEX numbers, even though reporting boundary, materiality lens and factor library may all differ between the two.

    4. Break 4

      The Scope 3 handoff

      A Scope 3 estimate built to satisfy SSE/SZSE’s encouraged, lighter-touch disclosure language gets pasted into the HKEX pack, where LargeCap issuers face mandatory category selection and explicit organisational-boundary rules. A Mainland estimate does not automatically satisfy HKEX’s method — each category needs to be re-screened against HKEX’s own boundary and relevance test.

    5. Break 5

      The language handoff

      Traditional Chinese HKEX listing-rule terminology and Simplified Chinese Mainland regulatory terminology get mixed inside one bilingual pack, producing inconsistent terms for the same concept across two audiences and, in some cases, two sets of external advisors reading past each other.

    Reference table: where the two regimes diverge

    Swipe sideways to see all columns

    Dimension HKEX (Appendix C2) SSE / SZSE (2024 Guidelines)
    Who is in scope All listed issuers; Scope 1 and 2 mandatory for all; full Part D mandatory for Hang Seng Composite LargeCap from FY2026, comply-or-explain for other Main Board. Designated index constituents and dual-listed companies under the 2024 sustainability reporting guidelines.
    Materiality lens Financial materiality: effect on cash flows, financing access, cost of capital. Double materiality: financial importance plus impact on economy, people, environment.
    Climate package Four IFRS S2-aligned pillars, including scenario analysis commensurate with the issuer. Climate sits within environmental topics of a four-pillar sustainability report; Scope 3 encouraged, not mandated.
    Report timing Published with the annual report. Due within four months of financial year-end.
    GHG methods GHG Protocol / ISO 14064, Hong Kong electricity factors where load sits in Hong Kong. National standards (for example GB/T 32150); provincial grid factors preferred for Mainland electricity.
    Scope 3 LargeCap: identify relevant categories, disclose what is measured, explain the rest. Encouraged under environmental topics; not a mandated category-by-category disclosure.

    If this year is your first SSE or SZSE sustainability report and an HKEX Part D climate chapter falls in the same cycle, treat this as one kickoff naming both packs, both calendars and both factor libraries — not two teams working from two undocumented assumptions.

  2. Put Basic Climate Governance in Place

    HKEX requires listed issuers to disclose their governance structure and processes for climate-related risks and opportunities. This includes board oversight, management’s role and the way climate topics are monitored and reviewed. Decide at board level whether climate oversight sits with the full board or with a specific committee such as an audit, risk or sustainability committee. Record this decision in board minutes and describe it in your ESG report.

    Nominate a senior executive as climate owner, often the chief financial officer or chief operating officer. This person should coordinate climate risk assessment, scenario analysis, emissions data and reporting. Set a minimum expectation that at least once a year, the board or relevant committee holds a dedicated climate discussion covering climate risks, emissions progress and scenario analysis results, and reference this practice in your disclosure.

  3. Map Your Climate Risks and Opportunities, With Priority on Transition Risks

    Appendix C2 requires issuers to disclose climate-related risks and opportunities that could reasonably be expected to affect cash flows, access to finance or cost of capital over short, medium and long term horizons. Start by identifying physical risks such as extreme weather events, sea level rise, flooding, heat stress and supply-chain disruption in your key locations.

    Then move to transition risks, which are often more relevant for financial planning. Consider policy and legal risks such as tighter emissions limits, efficiency standards or new reporting rules. Examine technology risks such as the emergence of low-carbon technologies and digital tools that may change asset economics. Assess market and reputational risks as customers, lenders and investors increasingly favour climate-aligned issuers.

    Document a clear set of climate risks and opportunities. For each one, note the affected business unit, the time horizon and a simple impact assessment such as high, medium or low. This mapping is the basis for your climate risk register.

  4. Build a Simple Climate Risk Register and Link It to Your ERM

    HKEX expects climate risks to be managed as part of your overall risk framework. Create a climate risk register, for instance in a spreadsheet, with columns for risk description, category (physical or transition), business area, time horizon, likelihood, impact, existing controls, planned actions and risk owner.

    Integrate this climate risk register into your enterprise risk management system by including climate risks in your risk taxonomy and regular risk reviews. Make sure climate risks are considered alongside strategic, operational and financial risks when the board and management review risk information.

  5. Design Three Practical Climate Scenarios

    Appendix C2 and the Implementation Guidance require listed issuers to use climate-related scenario analysis commensurate with their circumstances to assess climate resilience. You do not need complex modelling to begin; what you need are clear scenarios that your board can understand and use.

    A practical starting set for many Hong Kong issuers is an orderly transition scenario, a delayed or disorderly transition scenario and a high physical risk scenario. In the orderly transition scenario, climate policy is introduced early and consistently, carbon prices increase gradually and markets move steadily towards low-carbon solutions. In the delayed or disorderly transition scenario, policy action stays weak at first but strengthens abruptly later, investor pressure rises quickly and technology changes are disruptive. In the high physical risk scenario, global climate goals are not fully met, extreme weather becomes more frequent and severe and physical impacts on assets and supply chains increase.

    Write down the main assumptions for each scenario, including regulatory pathways, carbon price ranges, technology trends and customer behaviour.

  6. Run Scenario Analysis on Your Main Business Lines

    Apply these scenarios to your core business lines. For each scenario and time horizon, ask finance and business teams how the scenario would affect revenue, operating costs, capex and access to finance in their area. At the beginning, use simple directional assessments such as “increase”, “decrease” or “no significant change”, and record supporting explanations.

    Capture where margins may be squeezed by rising energy and carbon costs, where assets might become stranded or require significant retrofits, where new climate-aligned products and markets might emerge and how your financing terms might change. Summarise these insights in internal matrices and use them to inform strategy discussions. When you draft your ESG report, convert these matrices into narrative description of how different climate futures could influence your business model and resilience.

    Scenario analysis

    IPCC SSP pathways (AR6)

    Shared Socioeconomic Pathways describe how the world might develop and how much it might warm. Warming ranges below are the IPCC AR6 very likely range for 2081–2100 relative to 1850–1900. Hong Kong issuers rarely disclose all five; they pick two or three and map them onto the practical set further down this section.

    • SSP1-1.9

      Warming range

      1.0–1.8°C

      Very low emissions. Warming stays close to 1.5°C under a rapid shift to sustainable development.

      HK mapping Paris-aligned 1.5°C / NGFS orderly

    • SSP1-2.6

      Warming range

      1.3–2.4°C

      Low emissions. Consistent with the Paris Agreement’s well-below 2°C goal.

      HK mapping Paris-aligned 1.5°C / NGFS orderly

    • SSP2-4.5

      Warming range

      2.1–3.5°C

      Intermediate emissions. Roughly a world where current policies continue.

      HK mapping Mid-range ≈2°C / NGFS disorderly

    • SSP3-7.0

      Warming range

      2.8–4.6°C

      High emissions. Regional rivalry, weaker global cooperation and a delayed transition.

      HK mapping ≥3°C hot-house / NGFS hot-house

    • SSP5-8.5

      Warming range

      3.3–5.7°C

      Very high emissions. Fossil-fuel-intensive development and severe physical risk.

      HK mapping ≥3°C hot-house / high physical risk

    Swipe sideways to see all columns

    Scenario family Who publishes it Typical temperature outcomes What it is best for How HK listed companies normally use it How Mainland listed companies normally use it
    NGFS climate scenarios Network for Greening the Financial System (central banks, regulators)
    • Orderly: ~1.5–2°C
    • Disorderly: similar warming but higher transition shocks
    • Hot-House World: ≥3°C
    Full climate picture for finance: physical risk, transition risk and macro-economy across many countries and sectors Banks, insurers and large issuers use NGFS directly for climate stress tests, portfolio risk (Climate-VaR) and to frame “orderly vs disorderly vs hot-house” climate futures Financial institutions use NGFS for regulator-aligned stress tests; corporates use NGFS as the backbone for macro and policy assumptions, then tailor to China’s dual-carbon goals
    IPCC RCP / SSP / SR1.5 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (scientific body)
    • RCP2.6: ≈1–1.5°C
    • RCP4.5: <2°C
    • RCP6.0: ≈2–3°C
    • RCP8.5: ≈3–4°C
    • SR1.5 / SSP1-1.9: ≈1.5°C
    Physical climate pathways: long-term warming, sea level, heat, rainfall and chronic physical risk Used to understand chronic physical risks for assets and supply chains (coastal flooding, heat stress, water stress) in Hong Kong and regional locations; often combined with NGFS or IEA for economics Used similarly to map long-term physical risks for Chinese regions; often paired with local climate research and then overlaid with economic and policy assumptions from NGFS or domestic studies
    IEA WEO / ETP scenarios (NZE, SDS, STEPS, APS, 2DS etc.) International Energy Agency
    • NZE2050: ≈1.5°C
    • SDS: ≈1.5–1.8°C
    • APS: <2.5°C
    • STEPS: ≈2.7–3.3°C
    • Older 2DS / B2DS: ≤2°C
    Energy system and carbon-intensive sectors: fuel mix, power, heavy industry, transport and sector emissions Utilities, energy, transport and heavy industry issuers use IEA to calibrate fuel prices, energy mix, technology adoption and sector emissions under different warming pathways Similar usage for A-share and SOE issuers; IEA is often combined with China-specific energy policies and transition roadmaps to reflect national dual-carbon targets (peak 2030, net-zero 2060)
    PRI IPR scenarios (Inevitable Policy Response) Principles for Responsible Investment
    • Designed around ≈1.5°C policy-consistent pathways
    Forward-looking policy and legal risk: how “inevitable” climate policies, regulation and litigation could hit sectors and asset values Used mainly by investors and some large issuers to test policy and legal transition risks — especially sudden regulation, carbon pricing, and changes in subsidies and standards that affect Hong Kong exposure Used to explore how stronger climate policies in China and globally might affect domestic sectors, including carbon-intensive industries and export-oriented companies

    Typical scenario set used by HK / China issuers

    To keep disclosure practical and HKEX-ready, most issuers build a simple three-scenario set using these families as inputs:

    1. A Paris-aligned 1.5°C scenario

      Usually combines NGFS Orderly Transition with IPCC SSP1-1.9 / SSP1-2.6 (RCP2.6 / SR1.5) and IEA NZE or SDS.

      Used to test how early, coordinated policy and smooth technology adoption change revenues, costs and capex plans.

    2. A mid-range ≈2°C scenario

      Often built around NGFS Disorderly Transition, IPCC SSP2-4.5 (RCP4.5) and IEA APS or SDS.

      Used to explore transition risks: abrupt regulation, stranded assets, rapid consumer shifts and financing impacts.

    3. A ≥3°C hot-house scenario

      Typically aligns with NGFS Hot-House World, IPCC SSP3-7.0 / SSP5-8.5 (RCP6.0 / RCP8.5) and IEA STEPS.

      Used to focus on physical risks: more frequent extreme weather, heat waves, coastal and river flooding, and knock-on operational and insurance costs.

    Banks and insurers in Hong Kong usually follow NGFS directly and plug these scenarios into climate stress tests and Climate-VaR models, then disclose outputs in line with HKEX and HKMA guidance. Real-economy issuers tend to keep it qualitative at first: they pick a 1.5°C scenario and a ≥3°C scenario, run workshops to discuss business impacts, and then gradually add more quantitative estimates as data improves.

  7. Identify Transition-Ready Strategic Responses

    From the scenario results and risk register, identify a small number of strategic responses that directly address your most material transition risks. Examples include upgrading or relocating assets, changing product mix, diversifying markets or customer profiles, adjusting procurement to lower emissions exposure and introducing internal carbon pricing to guide investment decisions.

    In your ESG report, explain how scenario analysis influenced these responses. This makes clear that climate-related scenario analysis is being used as a planning tool, not just a disclosure requirement, and aligns with HKEX’s emphasis on strategy and resilience.

    If you are writing a plan, Part D asks for these items

    HKEX does not ask Hong Kong issuers for a European-style standalone Climate Transition Plan. Paragraph 22 asks whether the issuer has a climate-related transition plan — an aspect of strategy that names the targets, actions and resources for moving toward a lower-carbon economy — including key assumptions and dependencies.

    If there is no plan, keep the negative statement. If this cycle is the first plan, the climate chapter should still be able to name:

    1. Targets

      The targets the plan is meant to meet, and whether they are voluntary or required by law.

    2. Actions

      Current and anticipated changes to the business model and resource allocation, covering adaptation and mitigation.

    3. Resourcing

      How those activities are funded or staffed (paragraph 22(b)).

    4. Assumptions

      Policy, carbon price, technology, grid and demand assumptions the plan relies on.

    5. Dependencies

      Suppliers, offtake, or existing assets and products that lock in emissions and could threaten the target.

    6. Progress

      Progress against last year’s plan (paragraph 23), or state that this is the first year and there is no prior plan.

  8. Start With Straightforward, Honest Climate Metrics and Targets

    Appendix C2 requires disclosure of Scope 1 and Scope 2 greenhouse gas emissions and expects issuers to address material Scope 3 emissions over time. Begin by building a simple greenhouse gas inventory for Scope 1 and Scope 2 using recognised methodologies such as the Greenhouse Gas Protocol Corporate Standard. Present absolute emissions and relevant intensity measures, and compare them year on year.

    For Scope 3, do not screen fifteen categories in isolation. Run every GHG Protocol category through the same three questions, in order: financial relevance, data availability, then first-cycle commitment. An absent category reads as an omission; a stated “screened out” or “not yet measured” reads as a considered decision.

    The Full 15-Category Scope 3 Funnel

    Not a fixed checklist. Screening fifteen categories in isolation tends to produce fifteen half-finished answers. The funnel runs every category through the same three questions, in order, so the result is a defensible process outcome, not a pre-selected shortlist.

    1. Stage 1

      Financial relevance

      Could this category plausibly move cash flow, financing cost or valuation for this issuer’s actual business model?

    2. Stage 2

      Data availability

      Does a system of record already exist, or would this require new data collection?

    3. Stage 3

      First-cycle commitment

      Does this category make the list for this reporting cycle, or does it get a dated “not yet measured” line?

    Every category below needs a status. An absent category reads as an omission; a stated “screened out” or “not yet measured” reads as a considered decision.

    Swipe sideways to see all columns

    # GHG Protocol category Typical financial relevance Typical data source HKEX / Mainland note
    1 Purchased goods and services Often high for retail, F&B, manufacturing. Procurement spend by category; supplier-specific data where available. Mainland estimates often use China industry-average factors; recast for the HKEX-acceptable factor set before reuse.
    2 Capital goods Material for asset-heavy issuers (utilities, manufacturing, property construction) in the year of major capex. Capex register; asset purchase records. Capital-intensive Mainland subsidiaries may have separate fixed-asset ledgers; reconcile boundary before combining.
    3 Fuel- and energy-related activities (not in Scope 1/2) Often the first defensible add-on, since energy invoices already exist. Scope 1/2 activity ledger plus well-to-tank and T&D loss factors. Same kWh, two factor sets — see Break 2; do not mix CLP/HKE and provincial grid factors in one inventory.
    4 Upstream transportation and distribution Material for logistics, retail and F&B inbound freight. Inbound tonne-km, mode split, 3PL reports. Mainland freight factors and tonne-km data may not match the HKEX method note; document both separately.
    5 Waste generated in operations Often already tracked for Appendix C2 environmental KPIs. Waste contractor records already used for environmental KPIs. Waste statistics may sit in a separate EHS report; align boundary with the ESG chapter before converting to GHG.
    6 Business travel Easy to measure, rarely the most financially material category. Travel booking system; class of travel. Often already feeds a Mainland sustainability table; do not let this stand in for harder categories like 1 or 11.
    7 Employee commuting Usually low materiality unless workforce is very large or commute-intensive. Employee survey; HR headcount and site location data. Cross-border commuting patterns (HK–Shenzhen) may need a specific note if material.
    8 Upstream leased assets Relevant where the issuer leases (not owns) significant operating assets. Lease register; landlord energy data where available. Distinguish from Category 13 (downstream leased assets) — this is what the issuer leases from others.
    9 Downstream transportation and distribution Material where the issuer sells through distributors or third-party logistics after point of sale. Distributor and logistics partner data; sales contract terms. Often the least available data category for both regimes; state clearly if not yet measured.
    10 Processing of sold products Relevant for issuers selling intermediate goods that undergo further processing downstream. Customer/processor data, often difficult to obtain. Rarely measured in early cycles for either regime; a clear “not yet measured” line is standard practice.
    11 Use of sold products Often material for property (tenant energy), autos, appliances and electronics — a financial-effect category, not a CSR footnote. Product energy ratings, occupancy data, tenant bills where accessible. Mainland product-use may sit on different grid factors; keep the underlying activity dataset once.
    12 End-of-life treatment of sold products Material for durable goods, electronics, packaging-heavy businesses. Product design data, recycling/disposal industry averages. Rarely measured in first cycles; state screening conclusion and date for future work.
    13 Downstream leased assets Core for landlords; distinct from Category 11. Leased GFA, HVAC vintage, tenant energy where available. A-share property reports may classify tenant energy differently — map the category, do not copy the heading.
    14 Franchises Material only for issuers operating a franchise model. Franchisee energy or activity data, often contractually limited. Franchise agreements may restrict data access; document the limitation as part of the negative statement.
    15 Investments Material for banks, insurers and investment holding companies — financed emissions belong in Part D metrics, not a CSR annex. Investment and lending book; PCAF or equivalent method if used. Mainland financial-institution templates do not replace HKEX category selection or PCAF-style method notes.

    Reading the table for a first cycle: most non-financial issuers screen out Categories 2, 7, 9, 10, 12 and 14 quickly at Stage 1 unless a specific business feature makes one of them material (for example, a franchise-heavy retailer keeps Category 14; a landlord keeps Category 13 as core, not screened out). Categories 1, 3, 6 and 11 survive Stage 1 for most consumer-facing and property issuers and move to the data-availability test. Financial institutions treat Category 15 as core from the outset, not as one row among fifteen.

    What “done” looks like: a completed table with all fifteen rows carrying one of three statuses (measured, screened out with a one-line reason, or not yet measured with a review date), attached to the metrics and targets section of the climate chapter.

  9. Draft Your Climate Section Using HKEX’s Four Pillars

    When drafting your climate disclosure, follow the four-pillars structure HKEX has adopted from IFRS S2: governance, strategy, risk management and metrics and targets. In the governance section, describe how the board oversees climate topics, which committees are involved, which senior executives are responsible and how often climate is discussed. In the strategy section, explain your key physical and transition risks, main climate-related opportunities, scenario analysis narrative and the strategic responses you are considering or implementing. In the risk management section, describe your climate risk identification, assessment and monitoring processes, including the climate risk register and integration into enterprise risk management. In the metrics and targets section, present emissions data, exposure metrics and climate-related targets, together with explanations of methodologies and assumptions.

    State clearly that you have used climate-related scenario analysis to assess your resilience and describe the scenarios, inputs and main findings. This aligns with HKEX’s Implementation Guidance and helps investors understand how you are planning for different climate futures.

    A board does not ask “have we made our negative statements yet?” It asks three plain questions, and a climate chapter either answers them or exposes a gap a regulator will find first. These are drafting checks, not policy prescriptions: a missing topic reads as an oversight; a stated “not yet” reads as a controlled, disclosed position.

    Three Sign-Off Traps

    Not “negative statements.” A board does not ask “have we made our negative statements yet?” It asks three plain questions, and a climate chapter either answers them or exposes a gap a regulator will find first.

    These are drafting checks, not policy prescriptions. We are not assuming every issuer already has the underlying policy — we are flagging that HKEX’s Implementation Guidance requires an explicit answer either way. A missing topic reads as an oversight. A stated “not yet” reads as a controlled, disclosed position.

    1. Trap 1

      Do we have a transition plan?

      Part D’s strategy pillar asks whether the issuer has a climate-related transition plan — the targets, actions and resource commitments behind a shift toward a lower-carbon business — including its key assumptions and dependencies.

      If yes Name the targets, the actions and resourcing behind them, the assumptions the plan relies on (policy, carbon price, technology, demand), the dependencies that could threaten it (suppliers, offtake, legacy assets), and progress against last year’s plan.

      If no State plainly that the Group has not adopted a climate-related transition plan as at the reporting date, and whether one is under consideration for the next cycle. Do not leave the topic out of the report.

    2. Trap 2

      Did we price carbon in any decision this year?

      The Code asks whether internal carbon pricing informed decisions such as investment appraisal, transfer pricing or scenario analysis, and at what price per tonne.

      If yes State the price, the decisions it informed, and how it was set.

      If no State that the Group did not use an internal carbon price in decision-making during the reporting period. A Mainland ETS allowance price is not an internal carbon price unless it genuinely drove a board or management decision — do not let one stand in for the other.

    3. Trap 3

      Is anyone’s pay tied to a climate number?

      Issuers must say whether climate-related factors are built into remuneration — for example, executive scorecards linked to emissions intensity or climate targets.

      If yes Describe the mechanism and the metric used.

      If no State that climate-related considerations were not incorporated into the Group’s remuneration policy during the reporting period.

    A negative statement is still disclosure. It is cleaner for HKEX and for investors than silence, and it gives the next reporting cycle a named, trackable improvement item.

  10. Use HKEX Implementation Reliefs Transparently, With a Plan to Improve

    HKEX’s Implementation Guidance includes several reliefs designed to help issuers build their climate disclosure capabilities over time. These include Reasonable Information Relief, Capabilities Relief, Commercial Sensitivity Relief and Financial Effects Relief. If you rely on these reliefs, say so clearly in your report and explain why. For example, you might state that quantitative scenario analysis is not yet available due to data limitations, or that only some Scope 3 categories are currently measured.

    Then describe your plan to improve over the next two to three reporting cycles. This plan can cover data projects, enhanced systems, internal training, adoption of specialist tools and engagement of external advisors. Transparent use of reliefs and a concrete improvement roadmap show regulators and investors that your company is moving purposefully towards full, decision-useful climate disclosure under Appendix C2.

Mainland companies listed in Hong Kong

For mainland-related issuers, Part D climate disclosure often sits between HKEX expectations and Mainland sustainability calendars. We help stage Scope 1–3 and climate narrative so the board has one evidence base for both.

Mainland issuers on HKEX

Need help with climate disclosure?

Contact Us

AMMO Group Corporate Services Limited

AMMO Group advises Hong Kong–listed issuers on ESG reporting, climate disclosure and board governance under the HKEX codes. Practical notes for company secretaries and IR — not generic sustainability commentary.

T: +852 3686 1521

E: [email protected]

Hong Kong: 21/F The Chelsea, 69 Jervois Street, Sheung Wan
Shenzhen: Room 1713, East Tower, Qiushi Building, No. 17 Zizhu 7th Road, Zhulin Community, Xiangmihu Subdistrict, Futian District, Shenzhen, China