Domain A · Area A-CA1 · Reporting purpose, users and authoritative sources
A.2Research and control authoritative sources
Working Draft version 1.1
Purpose and scope
This unit covers the capability to locate, authenticate, evaluate, use and cite the authoritative sources needed for sustainability reporting work and to maintain a controlled record of source status, jurisdiction, version, effective date and interpretive limitations. It includes laws, regulations, standards, official guidance, recognised methodologies and controlled use of secondary materials.
Applied competency statement
Can locate, authenticate, evaluate, use and cite authoritative reporting sources through a documented source hierarchy and maintain a controlled record of version, jurisdiction, effective date and interpretive limitations.
Boundary and escalation
This unit is the method-neutral owner of source authority, hierarchy, version, provenance and citation. I.4 addresses AI-assisted discovery and retrieval but does not change A.2 verification requirements. The practitioner may analyse sources for reporting purposes but must not present disputed legal or regulatory interpretation as legal advice; copyright, licensing and material ambiguity require authorised review.
Key quality risks
Reliance on outdated, unofficial or secondary sources; use of the wrong jurisdiction or reporting period; failure to distinguish adopted requirements from exposure drafts or proposals; use of unreliable translations; incomplete citations; copyright or licensing breaches; and unverified AI-generated summaries or references.
A.2-K01
Understands the hierarchy and different authority of legislation, regulation, adopted standards, official interpretations and guidance, recognised methodologies, implementation material and secondary commentary.
Knowledge Type: Source hierarchy · Normative Weight: Core
A.2-K02
Understands how jurisdiction, issuing body, adoption status, version, effective date, transition status, language and supersession affect the use of a source.
Knowledge Type: Source status · Normative Weight: Core
A.2-K03
Understands structured technical-research methods, search protocols, source registers, citation conventions, archival records and reproducible retrieval.
Knowledge Type: Research process · Normative Weight: Core
A.2-K04
Understands the role and limitations of basis documents, implementation guidance, frequently asked questions, educational material, legal commentary and other non-normative sources.
Knowledge Type: Interpretive material · Normative Weight: Core
A.2-K05
Understands copyright, licensing, quotation, reproduction, translation and data-extraction constraints relevant to standards and other protected material.
Knowledge Type: Intellectual property · Normative Weight: Core
A.2-K06
Understands source-verification requirements for AI-assisted research and the point at which legal, regulatory, scientific or other specialist interpretation is required.
Knowledge Type: Verification and boundary · Normative Weight: Core
A.2-S01
Formulate a reporting research question and define the relevant jurisdiction, entity, period, source classes and decision to be supported.
Skill Type: Core applied capability · Observable Output or Result: Research scope
A.2-S02
Locate and authenticate primary or otherwise authoritative sources and record their status, version, effective date and provenance.
Skill Type: Source authentication · Observable Output or Result: Controlled source register
A.2-S03
Evaluate the authority and currency of sources, reconcile routine discrepancies and distinguish normative requirements from explanation or commentary.
Skill Type: Evaluation and reconciliation · Observable Output or Result: Source evaluation record
A.2-S04
Extract, paraphrase and cite relevant requirements accurately and maintain a reproducible technical research and version-control record.
Skill Type: Technical documentation · Observable Output or Result: Technical research memorandum
A.2-S05
Document ambiguity, conflicting authority, translation limitations or licensing constraints and obtain specialist review where required.
Skill Type: Escalation and communication · Observable Output or Result: Escalation and review record
A.2-B01
Uses authoritative and current sources whenever reasonably available and does not substitute summaries, search results or AI output for the underlying source.
Behaviour Type: Source discipline · Non-compensable Requirement: No
A.2-B02
Records provenance, version, access date, interpretive assumptions and uncertainty sufficiently for another practitioner to reproduce the research.
Behaviour Type: Transparency and reproducibility · Non-compensable Requirement: No
A.2-B03
Does not fabricate citations, conceal contradictory authority or present legal uncertainty as a settled technical conclusion.
Behaviour Type: Professional boundary · Non-compensable Requirement: No
Typical tasks · 4
A.2-T01
Define the technical question, decision context, jurisdiction, reporting period and source classes required.
Primary Output Link: A.2-O02
A.2-T02
Search official repositories and capture the authoritative text and relevant metadata.
Primary Output Link: A.2-O01
A.2-T03
Evaluate source authority, currentness, adoption status, translation and relationship to other materials.
Primary Output Link: A.2-O01
A.2-T04
Prepare a cited research memorandum, record limitations and obtain legal or specialist review where necessary.
Primary Output Link: A.2-O02
Level 1 · Foundation
A.2-L1-01
Can locate specified authoritative sources, verify the current version and effective date, and record complete citation and provenance information using an established research protocol.
Indicator Dimension: Task execution
A.2-L1-02
Can distinguish a primary source from commentary, identify obvious status or translation limitations and escalate unresolved questions under supervision.
Indicator Dimension: Quality, judgement and accountability
Level 2 · Practitioner
A.2-L2-01
Can independently research a reporting question across multiple authoritative and supporting sources and prepare a reproducible, source-based technical memorandum.
Indicator Dimension: Task execution
A.2-L2-02
Can reconcile routine differences, explain the weight given to each source, document ambiguity and manage copyright, citation and version-control requirements.
Indicator Dimension: Quality, judgement and accountability
Level 3 · Advanced Practitioner
A.2-L3-01
Can design or review technical-research and source-governance methods for multi-standard or multi-jurisdictional reporting work, including controlled AI-assisted research.
Indicator Dimension: Method design and review
A.2-L3-02
Can resolve complex source-hierarchy issues within professional boundaries, challenge the research of others and establish escalation, review, archival and change-control expectations.
Indicator Dimension: Leadership and governance
Illustrative evidence · 6
A.2-E01
Controlled source register with authority, jurisdiction, version, status, effective date and provenance fields.
Evidence Type: Work product
A.2-E02
Technical research memorandum based on primary sources and clearly separated supporting commentary.
Evidence Type: Work product
A.2-E03
Citation and version-control record enabling another practitioner to reproduce the research.
Evidence Type: Work product
A.2-E04
Research protocol, search trail and documented treatment of contradictory or superseded material.
Evidence Type: Process evidence
A.2-E05
Technical, legal or specialist review comments and the practitioner's documented response.
Evidence Type: Review evidence
A.2-E06
Observed source-verification exercise or oral defence of the source hierarchy and conclusion.
Evidence Type: Observed performance
Assessment · 3
A.2-A-L1
Knowledge examination, source-authentication exercise and limited research task
Correct source selection; authority and version checks; citation quality; recognition of limitations and escalation needs.
A.2-A-L2
Source-based case examination and written technical memorandum
Research completeness; weighting of authority; currentness; reproducibility; treatment of ambiguity, licensing and non-normative material.
A.2-A-L3
Complex research case, portfolio and oral defence
Method design; source governance; treatment of conflicting authority; quality control; legal escalation; challenge and defence.
| From | To | Type | Rationale |
|---|---|---|---|
| A.3 | A.2 | Prerequisite | Applicability conclusions must be grounded in authenticated, current and correctly weighted sources. |
| A.5 | A.2 | Prerequisite | Change monitoring depends on controlled authoritative-source and version discipline. |
| A.8 | A.2 | Prerequisite | Requirements and claim controls must retain source, version and status traceability. |
| A.2 | I.4 | Risk and control linkage | AI-assisted research must operate within the source-verification and provenance requirements established here. |
| A.6 | A.2 | Prerequisite | Interoperability mapping depends on current authoritative sources and version control. |
| I.4 | A.2 | Evidence and traceability linkage | AI-assisted discovery should preserve authoritative source hierarchy and current source-version control. |
| Role | Target level | Relevance | Evidence expectation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Corporate Sustainability Reporting Practitioner | Practitioner | Required? | A case or work sample demonstrating independent performance, documented judgement and a reviewable professional output. |
| Sustainability Reporting Manager or Lead | Practitioner | Required? | A case or work sample demonstrating independent performance, documented judgement and a reviewable professional output. |
| Sustainability Reporting Adviser or Consultant | Advanced Practitioner | Role-defining? | A complex case or verified portfolio, supplemented by oral or observed defence, demonstrating design, challenge and governance capability. |
| Sustainability Data, Systems and Controls Specialist | Foundation | Supporting? | A supervised or defined work sample showing correct application, traceability and recognition of escalation needs. |
| Assurance Readiness and Reporting Quality Specialist | Practitioner | Required? | A case or work sample demonstrating independent performance, documented judgement and a reviewable professional output. |
| Investor, Capital Markets and Ratings Disclosure Specialist | Advanced Practitioner | Role-defining? | A complex case or verified portfolio, supplemented by oral or observed defence, demonstrating design, challenge and governance capability. |