Search Sustopedia

MetricCommunities and human rights

Identified Indigenous Peoples' rights non-compliance instances

Measurement answer

What this metric measures

Distinct non-compliance instances concerning Indigenous Peoples' rights identified through a declared established procedure during the reporting period.

Specification

Metric specification

Result format
Structured table
Unit
Distinct identified rights non-compliance instances
Reporting basis
Reporting period
Aggregation
Add only non-overlapping records after applying the stated identity and deduplication controls
Pillar
Social
Topic
Communities and human rights
Controlled domain
Human rights
Entity type
Metric

Reporting boundary

Count findings under one established procedure and period. Resolve overlap with formal cases and repeated audit observations before aggregation.

Verified source occurrences

Framework coverage

This is one canonical metric. The bindings below show every verified framework occurrence without creating duplicate metric pages. Edition, disclosure, role, and relationship remain source-specific.

  • Adopting Disclosure

    GRI Standards

    Source evidence
    Publisher
    Global Reporting Initiative
    Edition
    2016
    Requirement
    Not Specified
    Relationship
    Defines Disclosure
    Mapping outcome
    Direct Evidence
    Source locator
    Disclosure 411-1 and incident guidance, PDF page 8
    Open official framework source

Value structure

Dimensions and units

Unit
Distinct identified rights non-compliance instances
Reporting basis
Reporting period

Unit meaning: A non-negative count of findings identified through the stated audit, monitoring, grievance or other established procedure.

Table fields and units

  • Finding family
  • Procedure
  • Finding basis
  • Jurisdiction
  • Rights domain
  • Review state
  • Remediation state

Published dimensions

  • established procedure type
  • finding basis
  • jurisdiction
  • case-family key
  • rights domain
  • finding and review state
  • remediation and closure state
  • privacy and assurance state

Disclosure method

Formula information

Status
Not applicable
Formula type
Structured Disclosure

Disclosure form

No single formula

Populate the structured fields from qualifying source observations and retain each field-level unit, boundary, status, and method; do not collapse the disclosure into one calculated value.

Verified sources

Evidence and status sources

Sustopedia checked each record-specific claim directly against primary publisher material. Labels distinguish current measurement authority from future compatibility and corroborative, legal, edition, or method status context. Corroborative evidence can support a stated limitation but cannot establish the core measurement by itself.

Measurement evidence

  • Measurement evidenceChecked 15 August 2026

    GRI 411: Rights of Indigenous Peoples 2016

    Publisher
    Global Reporting Initiative
    Edition
    2016
    Locator
    Disclosure 411-1 and incident guidance, PDF page 8

    Supports: Supports the identified non-compliance finding population concerning Indigenous Peoples' rights.

    Open official source

Use with context

Interpretation boundaries

Method disclosures required

Source-edition basis: GRI 411: Rights of Indigenous Peoples 2016, current effective edition at the research cutoff.

  • Name the established procedure and finding basis.
  • Use an overlap rule for findings that arise from formal cases.
  • Protect rights-holder identity and do not infer sensitive attributes.

Record-specific limitations

  • An internal finding is not automatically a court finding, verified external decision, severe incident or affected-person count.
  • Remediation-plan or closure state does not establish effective remedy.

Interpret this metric with the stated reporting boundary, period convention, value shape, and unit. Results prepared with different boundaries or conventions may not be directly comparable.

Measurement evidence supports the core record-specific claims described above. Corroborative evidence can support limitations, while compatibility and status sources provide their separately labelled context. None of these cards by itself determines an organisation's legal applicability, filing readiness, assurance status, or compliance conclusion.