NIS in Mexico: from regulatory reporting to competitive advantage

How to work progressively to stay one step ahead of regulatory compliance

The first reporting exercise under the Sustainability Reporting Standards (NIS) in 2026 marked a turning point for companies in Mexico. Issued by the Mexican Financial Reporting Standards Council (CINIF), these regulations establish a rigorous institutional framework that requires entities to disclose their sustainability information jointly and in line with their financial statements. Far from being an isolated phenomenon, this requirement reflects a trend that is increasingly present in different Latin American countries. In practice, this requirement involves reporting on 30 indicators—21 quantitative and 9 qualitative—organized across the environmental, social, and governance pillars.

‍

Although many organizations already have a solid technical and methodological base derived from previous carbon footprint measurement exercises or sustainability reports under other global standards such as GRI or SASB, the arrival of NIS expands this horizon, opening up a much more robust and comprehensive range. Its entry into force demonstrated that sustainability is no longer an isolated agenda. On the contrary, it consolidates itself as an axis inextricably linked to finance, corporate structures and business, while placing an unprecedented focus on very specific physical and climate risks for the country, such as water risk and the impact on biodiversity.

‍

With 2026 as a basis, and knowing that many organizations took transition eases (such as the temporary exemption from reporting Scope 3 emissions), the big challenge is to capitalize on these learnings to get ahead of 2027. Next, we share the challenges, lessons learned and opportunities to stay one step ahead that we identified at Kolibri in supporting renowned retail, e-commerce and food industry companies during this first reporting cycle.

‍

‍

The challenges of the first exercise

Passing through new regulations always brings initial friction. During this first year, the most significant challenges were not lack of will, but rather in the structure and traceability of information:

‍

• Definition of corporate scope: Unlike the carbon footprint, which is usually delimited by operational scopes, for example, sites or plants, NIS require the reporting of environmental information at the corporate entity level, in line with financial statements. This exercise of reordering and crossing data to identify the information of each society shows that the greatest complexity is not technical, but of an organizational nature, requiring deep internal alignment between legal and operational structures.
• Transversality and data validation: It's natural for areas such as Maintenance or Administration to handle separate records. This process demonstrated the value of building bridges to consolidate information across the board. In addition, audits require high traceability, which involves going beyond aggregated data and supporting each metric with verifiable documentation, such as invoices.
• Integration with spatial indicators: Measuring biodiversity and water stress requires an advanced level of technical analysis. This process required the use of specialized tools to cross the coordinates of the facilities with territorial risk maps and hydrographic basins, ensuring that the scale of analysis is correct.
• Execution times: As it is a report that consolidates annual information, the process of collecting and collecting data inevitably takes place between November and January. Navigating this period, marked by accounting closures and dynamic recess dynamics, requires great agility and anticipatory strategies so that the project flows organically.

‍

‍

Learning and practices that make a difference

The experience left us with valuable lessons so that any sustainability leader or area responsible for collecting information can optimize and facilitate the journey towards the validation of auditing entities:

‍

• Keep a rigorous log for the baseline: When establishing a reference year, it is vital to record in detail all modifications, justification for adjustments and methodological assumptions to facilitate future assurance processes.
• Involving strategic stakeholders: The active participation of directors and core areas, such as Legal and Administration, is essential. Its support makes the process agile, unlocks data collection and ensures that the initiative is prioritized over other company demands.

Standardization and methodological development: Data collection and processing requires designing clear methodological guidelines and standardizing processes. From the rigorous monitoring of basic information to the systematization of complex indicators using specialized tools, having consolidated frameworks optimizes current efficiency and establishes a robust and scalable technical base to streamline the next reporting cycles.