SDG 1 and ISO/UNDP 53001: ‘No poverty’ through the audit lens
Selecting SDG 1 in an ISO/UNDP 53001 system means linking poverty to what the organisation really does: the pay it sets, what it buys, who can reach its services and where it operates. The auditor checks that this choice comes from the context analysis, carries measurable objectives backed by indicators, and is reflected in top management decisions.
Updated: · edition covered: ISO/UNDP 53001:2026
SDG 1 at a glance
Goal 1, ‘No poverty’, heads the list of 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 2015 as part of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. It addresses poverty in a wider sense than income alone: social protection, access to basic services and the ability of households to withstand a shock.
Where ISO 53001 and SDG 1 meet is practical ground: the way an organisation's activity creates, sustains or erodes livelihoods, among staff, suppliers and service users. The ISO/UNDP 53001 standard does not ask anyone to end poverty single-handed. It asks that the contribution an organisation has chosen be managed and demonstrable.
ISO 53001 SDG 1: from context to indicators
A priority SDG is the outcome of the analysis of internal and external issues (4.1) and of the needs and expectations of interested parties (4.2): low-paid employees, subcontractors in countries with weak social protection, customers in financial hardship, local labour markets that depend on a single site. The information required under clause 4 on the context of the organization is therefore where the auditor first looks for SDG 1.
The next step is the translation into objectives (6.2), governed by the planning requirements of clause 6. An objective tied to poverty has to sit within the organisation's reach: pay benchmarked against a living-wage reference, the share of purchasing placed with work-integration enterprises, access conditions to a service for low-income users. Monitoring and measurement (9.1) then show whether the objective is moving; without usable data, the auditor cannot conclude that it is effective.
Organisations for which SDG 1 is often relevant
| Type of organisation | Issues frequently linked to SDG 1 |
|---|---|
| Banks, insurers, microfinance | Access of excluded households to financial services, over-indebtedness, pricing of basic products |
| Retail and consumer goods | Income of producers along the supply chain, price of essential goods |
| Social housing providers, local authorities | Access to housing, social tariffs for public services, reception of people in precarious situations |
| Work-integration enterprises, charities | Return to employment, securing beneficiaries' income |
| Manufacturers in economically fragile regions | Local jobs, subcontractors' income, consequences of scaling down a site |
What the auditor examines
- Anchoring in the context: the poverty-related issue identified under clause 4 and the interested party it concerns.
- The definition used: monetary poverty, access to services, insecure employment. A vague notion makes the objective impossible to verify.
- Measurable objectives, each with a baseline, a deadline, an owner and indicators whose data source and calculation frequency are known.
- The data boundary: sites, subsidiaries, subcontracting. The auditor compares the scope that is claimed with the scope that is actually measured.
- Top management involvement: budget trade-offs, purchasing or pay decisions that take the objective into account, and records of it in the management review.
- Interviews: a buyer, an HR manager or a branch manager explains what the objective changes in their work.
Findings raised on SDG 1
- SDG 1 is declared a priority solely on the strength of occasional donations unrelated to the core business.
- The objective reads ‘contribute to reducing poverty’, with no baseline and no target specific to the organisation.
- The indicator tracks an input (money spent) and never an outcome for the people concerned.
- Subcontractors are named as an interested party but left out of the data boundary.
- A public report casts the organisation as a player in the fight against poverty beyond what its indicators show.
Minor or major: where the line falls
An incomplete indicator on an objective that is otherwise monitored usually leads to a minor nonconformity: the certification body then accepts a corrective action plan. Where SDG 1 is listed among the priorities with neither an objective nor any monitoring, the requirement has not been addressed. The nonconformity may then be major, and it must be corrected, with the correction and corrective action verified, before any positive certification decision.
Neighbouring SDGs and linked requirements
- SDG 2 and ISO/UNDP 53001: ‘Zero hunger’ through the audit lensSDG 2 matters first to organisations that grow, process, distribute or serve food.
- SDG 8 and ISO/UNDP 53001: decent work and economic growth through the audit lensSDG 8 has to be addressed by every organisation applying ISO/UNDP 53001, whatever its other priorities.
- SDG 10 and ISO/UNDP 53001: reduced inequalities through the audit lensIn an ISO 53001 system, SDG 10 is audited only when the organisation has selected it from its context.
- ISO/UNDP 53001 clause 6: what the auditor checksISO 53001 clause 6 deals with planning.
Frequently asked questions
Can a company with no social mission select SDG 1?
Yes, provided the context analysis shows a genuine link: low wages in its sourcing chains, customers in financial difficulty, a territory that depends on its jobs. The auditor checks that the issue is documented, that measurable objectives follow from it, and that results are tracked and reviewed by top management.
Is corporate philanthropy enough to demonstrate a contribution to SDG 1?
Rarely. Donations are not ruled out, but the auditor looks for a managed contribution: an objective, an indicator, a review of results. Giving that is disconnected from the issues identified under clause 4, and whose effect is never measured, is raised as a lack of consistency between the stated priorities and the management system.
Which indicators does the auditor expect to see for SDG 1?
There is no set list. The auditor checks that each indicator matches an objective, that its definition is written down, that the data are reliable, and that results are analysed under monitoring and measurement and then presented at the management review. Relevance is judged against the organisation's own context.