Materiality assessment
In 2024, Geberit carried out a comprehensive double materiality assessment (DMA) according to the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS Set 1, 2023) for the first time. The term “double materiality” relates to the mutual relationship between a company and the environment and society in which it operates. On the one hand, the business activities of a company impact the environment and society (impact materiality). On the other hand, changes in environment and society have an impact on the business success of the company (financial materiality).
The goal was to identify material topics and the associated impacts, risks and opportunities (IRO). The structured process takes into account both impact materiality and financial materiality. The results from 2024 were analysed and updated in the reporting year.
Structured process
The materiality assessment process consists of the following steps:
1. Analysis of context: Analysis of the business model, strategy, governance, value chain and relevant stakeholder groups.
2. Identification of impacts, risks and opportunities: Internal analysis and assessment of impacts, risks and opportunities across the 94 ESRS topics, supplemented by thematic specifications from Art. 964a ff. CO, SASB, GRI disclosure requirements and competitor topics based on internal expertise, studies and trends. A total of 150 impacts, risks and opportunities were identified along the entire value chain. Possible dependencies between impacts, risks and opportunities were also taken into account here. These were then subjected to a detailed assessment.
3. Shortlist: Aggregation of the identified IRO into 20 shortlisted topics for further analysis and assessment.
4. Involvement of internal and external stakeholders: As part of an online survey, a total of 168 internal and external stakeholders were invited to assess the impact materiality. Eleven stakeholder groups were involved here: investors and analysts, customers and customer associations, suppliers and transport companies, employees and employee representatives, partners in the branch, NGOs, public bodies, neighbouring municipalities and authorities, members of the Geberit stakeholder panel, scientific institutes and the media. The response rate was 59%.
Geberit management assessed the financial materiality of the 20 topics in terms of their potential impact on EBIT, reputation and regulatory risks, among others (response rate 80%). Additionally, the survey also offered the chance of adding other topics that had not yet been included.
5. Validation of the assessments: The assessment of the identified IRO and the results of the stakeholder and management surveys were compared. The same threshold of 3.0 (on a scale of 1 to 4) was specified both on the IRO and topic level for defining the materiality.
6. Plausibility check: The results of the assessment steps were evaluated to see whether there were significant differences between the assessments from the surveys and from the project team.
7. Final approval: The final list of topics was approved by the Group Executive Board on 28 October 2024 and adopted by the Board of Directors of the Geberit Group on 16 April 2025.
8. External assessment: To ensure methodological quality and clarity, the materiality process was subjected to an independent assessment by an external auditing company.
The process for identifying, assessing and prioritising material impacts, risks and opportunities in the respective main topic is described in the topic chapters.
A periodic review of the material impacts, risks and opportunities, including reporting, sent to the Board of Directors ensures close monitoring of material impacts, risks and opportunities and the possibility of correcting them.
Methodology
Geberit applied a structured methodology in order to assess materiality according to ESRS 1. The methodology on which the materiality assessment is founded is based on the following:
Assessment criteria according to ESRS 1:
Impacts: based on scale, scope and irremediability (for negative impacts). The likelihood is taken into consideration for potential impacts.
Risks/opportunities: magnitude and likelihood.
Calculation of materiality values:
In order to ensure a uniform and clear assessment, the same scale (1 to 4) is used for the quantitative assessment of negative and positive impacts, risks and opportunities according to the above-mentioned criteria. The scale is closely aligned with the assessment processes in the internal risk management system. In order to prevent a tendency towards the mean in the stakeholder assessment, a scale of 1 to 4 is used (instead of 1 to 5 as seen in internal risk management).
The assessment is made qualitatively and quantitatively, backed up by the available data, certifications, audit reports and discussions with experts. The results are transposed algorithmically into quantitative values to ensure transparency and comparability.
Potential negative impacts relating to human rights are prioritised: each individual case is considered here, with the impact weighted higher than the probability of occurrence (according to ESRS 1, section 45).
Assumptions
The assessments are based on the following assumptions:
The assessment focuses on current business activities, supplemented by scenarios on regulatory trends, e. g. increasing requirements relating to water consumption, CO2 emissions or due diligence obligations relating to human rights.
It is assumed that existing management systems (e. g. ISO 9001, 14001, 45001) are effective in minimising risks.
External benchmarks (competitors, industry and trend reports, other reporting standards, rankings) are taken into account.
The surveys were considered as a snapshot from 2024. Changes in the regulatory environment or social expectations are considered qualitatively in workshops and may lead to adjustments in future assessments.
Integration and role of due diligence processes
The double materiality assessment process is closely linked to existing due diligence processes in the Group that relate to human rights and the environment. These include:
Internal and external supplier audits and assessments of the Code of Conduct along the entire value chain, focusing on high-risk areas (e. g. regions with an increased risk of child labour or corruption, regions with an increased risk of violations of environmental or occupational safety standards)
Risk-based selection of suppliers
Internal audits of occupational safety and environmental standards at the production sites
Participation in industry initiatives for transparency in the supply chain (e. g. EcoVadis, CDP, UNGC)
These due diligence activities are taken into account systematically in the materiality assessment process, particularly if increased risks are identified due to particular geographical circumstances, business relationships and activities. The risk profile of the supply chain is low in terms of social, environmental and business ethic risks. This is due to a regional procurement strategy with short supply chains, a high production depth and a very high share of Western European suppliers. For further information, see Due diligence declaration.