Our approach to resilience analysis consists of two main components: assessing and managing transition risks and opportunities, and conducting physical climate risk assessments. Transition risks stem from a shift to a low-carbon economy and encompass factors such as new regulations, technological innovation, changing market dynamics, and shifting consumer preferences. We have effectively mitigated these risks by transforming our business model from fossil fuels to renewable energy, aligning our operations with a 1.5 °C climate trajectory. This proactive shift has positioned us well to capitalise on the increasing demand for renewable energy deployment.

Incorporating climate-related considerations into the executive remuneration framework ensures that incentives are aligned with both financial performance and climate objectives. As a renewable energy company, our financial metrics inherently reflect climate performance, reinforcing the link between executive pay and our decarbonisation efforts. A key financial metric linked to executive remuneration is EBITDA. The majority of EBITDA (91 %) is taxonomy-aligned, generated through activities that contribute to climate change mitigation under the EU taxonomy framework. This highlights the connection between executive remuneration and renewable energy growth, supporting our long-term decarbonisation ambition. Beyond financial performance, a portion of executive remuneration is linked to climate-specific considerations, including our scope 1-2 emissions intensity target. The proportion of recognised remuneration linked to these climate-specific considerations was 1.9% for the CEO, with corresponding figures for the Executive Board as follows: 1.6% for the CCO, 1.4% for the CFO, and 1.5% for the Chief HR Officer. Further details on the methodology, including how climate-related performance is factored into remuneration, can be found in our remuneration report.