GN Store Nord
ESRS disclosure: ESRS ESRS 2 \ DR BP-1
Tags Tree
- Provide information on whether the sustainability statement has been prepared on a consolidated or individual basis, as per Disclosure Requirement BP-1 – General basis for preparation of the sustainability statement.
-
Question Id: BP-1_01
GN’s Sustainability Statement is reported based on the same consolidation principles as the financial statements, covering all GN divisions, markets, and global levels.
Report Date: 4Q2024Relevance: 90%
- Confirm whether the scope of consolidation for the consolidated sustainability statement aligns with that of the financial statements. If not applicable, declare whether the reporting undertaking is exempt from preparing financial statements or is preparing consolidated sustainability reporting in accordance with Article 48i of Directive 2013/34/EU.
-
Question Id: BP-1_02
GN’s Sustainability Statement is reported based on the same consolidation principles as the financial statements, covering all GN divisions, markets, and global levels.
Report Date: 4Q2024Relevance: 95%
- Provide a detailed account of the extent to which the sustainability statement encompasses the undertaking's upstream and downstream value chain, as stipulated in Disclosure Requirement BP-1 concerning the general basis for preparation of the sustainability statement.
-
Question Id: BP-1_04
Following the materiality assessment and due diligence processes, this Sustainability Statement covers all upstream and downstream value chain activities.
Report Date: 4Q2024Relevance: 60%
- Provide a summarized description of any amendments to your strategy and/or business model, as required under Disclosure Requirement SBM-2, which pertains to the interests and views of stakeholders.
-
Question Id: SBM-2_08
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.
Report Date: 4Q2024Relevance: 60%