Pollution of air, water, and soil is allocated to both own operations and value chain (VC).

GN has identified two negative impacts related to pollution: 1) The use of substances of concern during production processes within own operations, affecting human health and ecosystems. 2) The release of harmful substances during raw material extraction and transportation in the upstream value chain, polluting water, soil, and food. Actions include substituting hazardous substances, auditing suppliers for compliance, and phasing out specific substances in outsourced manufacturing.

Pollution of air, water, and soil is allocated to both own operations and value chain (VC).

GN's Environmental Policy includes compliance with legislation related to substances of concern. Actions include substituting hazardous substances, auditing suppliers, and phasing out specific substances in outsourced manufacturing. In 2024, GN reduced isopropyl alcohol consumption and substituted dichloromethane with a safer alternative. The focus is on continuous evaluation of compliance and phasing out halogens in outsourced manufacturing.

In 2023, we commenced our double materiality process, in accordance with the process set out in ESRS 1, which covers general requirements for reporting in accordance with CSRD. We mapped our value chain and identified the industries on which we depend across our value chain. Next, we identified impacts, risks, and opportunities (IROs) across our full value chain for all ESG sub-topics and sub-sub-topics contained in Appendix A of ESRS 1. To assess the materiality of different IROs and topics, we developed a scoring key from 0-5 for both impact and risk materiality and set a materiality threshold at 2 or above for materiality and 3 or above for highly material topics, where 2 represented low scale, concentrated scope, remediable with some effort and a low likelihood, while a 3 represented medium across the same variables. Through this process we assessed 31% of topics to be highly material and 21% of topics to be material for our own operations, and 45% of topics to be highly material and 35% of topics to be materials for our value chain. In 2024, we finalized our double materiality process through the following steps: We made updates to IROs and scoring based on further inputs from stakeholders and additional guidance from EFRAG. We set the reporting threshold at 3 or higher to focus reporting on the most material topics. We then mapped disclosure requirements and data points against material IROs to determine the contents of this Sustainability Statement, taking into account the specificity of IROs where needed to scope out data points where the IROs are limited to for example specific parts of our value chain, employee groups, or geographies. We applied three analytical approaches in our double materiality process: Desk research: we consulted 40 reports from NGOs, governments, and key suppliers. Internal workshops: we held five internal workshops with 27 subject matter experts. External stakeholder interviews: we interviewed eight external stakeholders, constituting both readers of the report and impacted stakeholders. We selected external stakeholders based on the areas where we lacked visibility through our existing stakeholder engagement mechanisms: pollution, resource outflows, and human rights impacts far down our supply chain. We assumed our impacts and risks to be similar to industry averages in cases where we lacked clear data or were unable to allocate impacts prevalent to GN in our value chain. Our double materiality assessment was subject to ongoing review by senior management. It was formally approved by the Audit Committee in August 2024. Identification and assessment of impacts In scoring impacts, we gave equal weight to the three factors constituting severity combined (scale, scope, and irremediable character), and likelihood, prioritizing negative impacts based on their relative severity and likelihood.