GN’s Environmental Policy addresses our pollution-related negative impact in terms of substances used during both production in our own operations and outsourced manufacturing. Our policy commitments include compliance with all pollution-related legislation related to the use of substances of concern and very high concern, such as REACH and RoHS, and the substitution of substances with less harmful alternatives that can fulfill the same purpose, even when not legally required. This policy is supported by internal procedures on controlling and limiting the impact of incidents and emergency situations. Our Supplier Code of Conduct covers supplier requirements in terms of pollution, specifically addressing our negative impacts relating to our value chain. Through this, we expect suppliers to comply with all pollution-related legislation and proactively minimize or eliminate emissions and discharges of pollution, which can have a potential negative impact on the pollution of water, soil and food.

To assess the materiality of IROs in terms of financial risks or opportunities, we used the same prioritization in terms of value chain industries and economic activities in our own operations as impact scoring. We used our existing enterprise risk management mechanism to score risks on a 0-5 scale, meaning we gave equal weight to likelihood and two factors constituting magnitude combined: revenue impact and reputational risk. For revenue impact, we used the same thresholds as for other risks to score risks between minor and critical, thereby giving equal weight to sustainability-related risks as to other risks. Our double materiality process is aligned with our enterprise risk management and overall business strategy processes, as we use the insights gathered in the double materiality assessment to improve our assessment of the relative financial risk materiality of ESG topics to inform business decisions related to risk mitigation in accordance with the overall enterprise risk management process. For opportunities, we apply the same process where instead of financial risk we assess the relative financial upside.