We are in continuous dialogue with our stakeholders to ensure we understand their requirements and find ways to work in partnership to strengthen our business and the societies in which we operate. This chapter covers who we consider our key stakeholders. Views of stakeholders related to sustainability are shared with Executive Management and the Board of Directors as part of overall sustainability governance. Customers: Customer-centricity is a key pillar of our strategy, which is why we continuously proactively engage with customers to understand their needs. Customer engagement takes place through direct dialogues, customer councils, and surveys. Views of customers are integrated into the development of our strategy and in the design of our products and services. ESG topics are integrated into customer dialogues, so that we can support customers in achieving their ESG objectives such as sustainable procurement or decarbonization targets. ESG is also integrated in customer dialogues as part of assessing potential upstream impacts and risks. Employees: To ensure the well-being of our employees and maintain a diverse, engaged, and passionate workforce, employee engagement takes place on an ongoing basis through several channels: biannual professional and personal development dialogues, employee surveys, and employee groups representing specific demographics and their allies. Employees are also represented in the Board of Directors through the employee-elected board members. Employees can raise concerns confidentially through GN’s whistleblower hotline or regular HR channels. Views of employees collected through these channels are integrated in strategy development, policy creations, adjustments, and other decision-making on a continuous basis. Where necessary, specific initiatives are developed to ensure employee well-being. Employees are informed about ESG topics regularly through internal communication channels, which also allow for engagement on topics communicated. Investors: It is GN’s investor relations and communication policy to have an open and active dialogue with our existing shareholders, potential shareholders, other investors, financial analysts, and the media. GN ensures that relevant information is provided to the financial community in a timely manner to ensure that the GN share is fairly priced. This is done in the form of company announcements, press releases, investor meetings, conferences, and presentations of GN’s interim and annual financial results. Following the release of interim and annual financial results, GN hosts roadshows where the Executive Management and the investor relations team inform shareholders, other investors, and financial analysts about the recent developments in GN. Moreover, when relevant, GN maintains a good dialogue with proxy advisors and other external advisors ahead of the Annual General Meeting. As a public company, GN discloses ESG data in relevant areas via our integrated annual report, our Annual General Meeting, and where relevant on request to ESG rating agencies and investors. To ensure our ESG disclosures always meet investor requirements, we welcome dialogue with our investors on ESG topics at any time. In 2024, we continued to make ESG a prominent part of our proactive communication with investors. Regulatory authorities: In support of our policy objective to proactively comply with all ESG legislation, GN assesses relevant regulations on an ongoing basis to ensure we comply with all relevant legislation, and where needed engage directly with policy makers to fully understand the implications of specific legislation for GN. We only engage policy makers on the shaping of future legislation through industry associations such as EHIMA, Danish Industry, and the Responsible Business Alliance, in line with their policy positions. New legislation is emerging in the area of product sustainability, including further chemical restrictions, right to repair, and battery legislation. On a corporate level, aside from CSRD, we closely monitor legislation in the area of ESG due diligence (CSDDDD) and human rights-related laws across many different geographies. Where necessary we adjust our strategy, product, and service offerings to comply with legislation. Suppliers: We engage with suppliers on an ongoing basis as part of regular business processes. We expect our suppliers to uphold the standards set out in our Supplier Code of Conduct and several supporting policies, employing a variety of tools to ensure compliance. Supplier ESG performance, based on their EcoVadis score and decarbonization maturity, is integrated into overall supplier performance and preference assessments. Where this is strategically relevant, we work in partnership with our suppliers to achieve joint business and ESG objectives. Industry and ESG associations: GN is a member of several industry and ESG-related associations, for the purpose of demonstrating commitment to jointly developed standards and policy positions, engaging with industry peers on industry-spanning issues, tracking legislation and engaging with policy makers through representatives of these organizations.

We are in continuous dialogue with our stakeholders to ensure we understand their requirements and find ways to work in partnership to strengthen our business and the societies in which we operate. This chapter covers who we consider our key stakeholders. Views of stakeholders related to sustainability are shared with Executive Management and the Board of Directors as part of overall sustainability governance. Customers: Customer-centricity is a key pillar of our strategy, which is why we continuously proactively engage with customers to understand their needs. Customer engagement takes place through direct dialogues, customer councils, and surveys. Views of customers are integrated into the development of our strategy and in the design of our products and services. ESG topics are integrated into customer dialogues, so that we can support customers in achieving their ESG objectives such as sustainable procurement or decarbonization targets. ESG is also integrated in customer dialogues as part of assessing potential upstream impacts and risks. Employees: To ensure the well-being of our employees and maintain a diverse, engaged, and passionate workforce, employee engagement takes place on an ongoing basis through several channels: biannual professional and personal development dialogues, employee surveys, and employee groups representing specific demographics and their allies. Employees are also represented in the Board of Directors through the employee-elected board members. Employees can raise concerns confidentially through GN’s whistleblower hotline or regular HR channels. Views of employees collected through these channels are integrated in strategy development, policy creations, adjustments, and other decision-making on a continuous basis. Where necessary, specific initiatives are developed to ensure employee well-being. Employees are informed about ESG topics regularly through internal communication channels, which also allow for engagement on topics communicated. Investors: It is GN’s investor relations and communication policy to have an open and active dialogue with our existing shareholders, potential shareholders, other investors, financial analysts, and the media. GN ensures that relevant information is provided to the financial community in a timely manner to ensure that the GN share is fairly priced. This is done in the form of company announcements, press releases, investor meetings, conferences, and presentations of GN’s interim and annual financial results. Following the release of interim and annual financial results, GN hosts roadshows where the Executive Management and the investor relations team inform shareholders, other investors, and financial analysts about the recent developments in GN. Moreover, when relevant, GN maintains a good dialogue with proxy advisors and other external advisors ahead of the Annual General Meeting. As a public company, GN discloses ESG data in relevant areas via our integrated annual report, our Annual General Meeting, and where relevant on request to ESG rating agencies and investors. To ensure our ESG disclosures always meet investor requirements, we welcome dialogue with our investors on ESG topics at any time. In 2024, we continued to make ESG a prominent part of our proactive communication with investors. Regulatory authorities: In support of our policy objective to proactively comply with all ESG legislation, GN assesses relevant regulations on an ongoing basis to ensure we comply with all relevant legislation, and where needed engage directly with policy makers to fully understand the implications of specific legislation for GN. We only engage policy makers on the shaping of future legislation through industry associations such as EHIMA, Danish Industry, and the Responsible Business Alliance, in line with their policy positions. New legislation is emerging in the area of product sustainability, including further chemical restrictions, right to repair, and battery legislation. On a corporate level, aside from CSRD, we closely monitor legislation in the area of ESG due diligence (CSDDDD) and human rights-related laws across many different geographies. Where necessary we adjust our strategy, product, and service offerings to comply with legislation. Suppliers: We engage with suppliers on an ongoing basis as part of regular business processes. We expect our suppliers to uphold the standards set out in our Supplier Code of Conduct and several supporting policies, employing a variety of tools to ensure compliance. Supplier ESG performance, based on their EcoVadis score and decarbonization maturity, is integrated into overall supplier performance and preference assessments. Where this is strategically relevant, we work in partnership with our suppliers to achieve joint business and ESG objectives. Industry and ESG associations: GN is a member of several industry and ESG-related associations, for the purpose of demonstrating commitment to jointly developed standards and policy positions, engaging with industry peers on industry-spanning issues, tracking legislation and engaging with policy makers through representatives of these organizations.

The categories of stakeholders with whom engagement occurs include: Customers, Employees, Investors, Regulatory authorities, Suppliers, and Industry and ESG associations. Customers are engaged through direct dialogues, customer councils, and surveys. Employees are engaged through biannual professional and personal development dialogues, employee surveys, and employee groups. Investors are engaged through company announcements, press releases, investor meetings, conferences, and presentations. Regulatory authorities are engaged through compliance and policy discussions. Suppliers are engaged through regular business processes and compliance assessments. Industry and ESG associations are engaged for joint standards and policy positions.

The organization maintains continuous dialogue with stakeholders to understand their requirements and work in partnership to strengthen the business and societies. Key stakeholders include customers, employees, investors, regulatory authorities, suppliers, and industry and ESG associations. Customer engagement is proactive and includes direct dialogues, customer councils, and surveys. Employee engagement occurs through biannual dialogues, surveys, and employee groups, with representation in the Board of Directors. Investors are engaged through open dialogue, announcements, press releases, and roadshows. Regulatory authorities are engaged to ensure compliance with ESG legislation, and suppliers are engaged through regular business processes and compliance tools. Industry and ESG associations are engaged for joint standards and policy positions.

The purpose of stakeholder engagement activities is to ensure understanding of stakeholder requirements and to work in partnership to strengthen the business and societies. For customers, the purpose is to understand needs and integrate their views into strategy and product design, supporting their ESG objectives. For employees, the purpose is to ensure well-being and maintain a diverse, engaged workforce, integrating their views into strategy development and decision-making. For investors, the purpose is to provide timely information to ensure fair pricing of shares and to maintain proactive communication on ESG topics. For regulatory authorities, the purpose is to ensure compliance with ESG legislation and understand implications of specific legislation. For suppliers, the purpose is to ensure compliance with standards and to achieve joint business and ESG objectives. For industry and ESG associations, the purpose is to demonstrate commitment to jointly developed standards and policy positions.

The outcomes of stakeholder engagements are integrated into the company's decision-making and operational strategies by incorporating customer views into strategy development and product design, integrating employee views into strategy development, policy creations, and decision-making, and ensuring investor requirements are met through proactive communication. Employee feedback is used for strategy development and policy adjustments. Customer feedback is used to support ESG objectives and assess potential impacts and risks. Investor feedback ensures fair pricing of shares and proactive communication on ESG topics. Regulatory feedback ensures compliance with ESG legislation. Supplier feedback ensures compliance with standards and joint business objectives. Industry feedback demonstrates commitment to standards and policy positions.

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.

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.

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.

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.