This was our first year of carrying out a DMA in accordance with the ESRS; namely, addressing the impacts we have on people and our environment as well as the potential risks and opportunities that affect us as a result of sustainability-related developments. We will re-assess our sustainability matters annually, based on regulatory developments, business developments, and stakeholder engagement. We expect that evolving sector disclosures and ESRS implementation guidance will bring new insights in the years to come.
To determine the disclosures in our sustainability statement, we followed a structured DMA process with four main steps.
Double materiality assessment: Our four-step process
Step 1: Stakeholder and value chain analysis
We started by analyzing our value chain, given our activities and assets. We conducted a high-level transactional mapping exercise, based on our main activities in Assurance and Advisory. The process included identifying internal and external stakeholders relevant to every potential sustainability matter. We used previous years’ materiality assessments, conducted desk research, and held sector discussions to validate and confirm that our value chain was accurately represented and that all relevant stakeholders had been identified.
Step 2: Identification of potential sustainability matters
This stage was informed by the list of potential sustainability matters in the topical ESRS and enriched by other potential sustainability matters that arose from our previous GRI-aligned materiality assessments or from our peer and sector analysis. Sustainability matters consist of IROs that may be interconnected and that can have a short-to-medium-term or long-term effect across the value chain.
Step 3: Assessment of sustainability matters
We assessed our identified sustainability matters in line with the principles outlined in ESRS 1. For impact materiality, the severity of negative impacts was assessed based on scale, scope, and irremediability. Positive impacts were assessed based on scale and scope with their likelihood also considered. Financial materiality was assessed based on the size and likelihood of financial effects.
Our DMA highlighted the importance of including the right stakeholders in qualitative discussions of the relevant matters at this stage. While our assessment phase also used quantitative scoring and threshold mechanisms, we concluded that relevant department and stakeholder involvement was crucial: this brought in qualitative insights that substantiated our granular, quantitative discussion with a wider range of stakeholder perspectives. Our topical assessment workshops gathered key departments and stakeholders, including the Board of Management, the Supervisory Board’s Audit & Risk Committee, Finance, Sustainability, HR, Procurement, and Marketing.
Step 4: Validation of outcome
After completion of the assessment workshops, the results were subject to further scrutiny. Final approval and validation was obtained from the Board of Management and Supervisory Board. Since our sustainability matters are mainly relevant in the short and medium term and are already addressed in our day-to-day strategy and business activities, we treat them all with equal importance when it comes to taking action.
Disclosures on sustainability matters
As the outcome of our DMA informs the reporting scope and disclosure requirements of this sustainability statement, we have included a detailed reference table (new window). This index lists all the ESRS disclosure requirements that we have complied with, alongside the paragraphs where the related disclosures can be found, to ensure clarity and transparency.
We determined the material information to be disclosed in our sustainability statement by applying the criteria outlined in ESRS 1, section 3.2, which focuses on material matters and materiality of information. Specifically, we used paragraph 31 of ESRS 1 to assess the significance of information and whether it would influence the decision-making needs of users of the sustainability statement.