Skip to the screening
Courses

Materiality Navigator·Food and Beverage Processing

Which topics should you investigate first?

Choose a business model to see the candidate sustainability topics most likely to need investigation, and why. Then refine the shortlist, work through each topic and record a preliminary screening decision.

This is an industry-informed hypothesis. Your task is to test it against the organisation's impacts, dependencies, risks, opportunities and stakeholder evidence. Industry relevance does not make a topic material.

Copper brewing vessels and pipework inside a brewery.
Step 1 Choose the business model you are screening

Candidate topics — Food and Beverage Processing

  • Environment
  • Industry baseline
  • Strong industry signal
  • Double materiality

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Environmental stewardship of fermentable crop, botanical and oak supply chains used in beer, wine, cider, spirits and ready-to-drink products.

How it shows up in this industry

Beer, wine, cider and spirits depend on barley, wheat, maize, rice, rye, grapes, apples, pears, agave, sugarcane, molasses, hops, botanicals and oak. Monoculture cereals, vineyards, orchards, hop yards and agave or sugarcane landscapes can drive fertiliser runoff, pesticide use, soil erosion, land-use pressure and biodiversity loss.

Why it may be material

Agricultural sourcing creates direct ecosystem, water and soil impacts and can affect ingredient availability, yields and brand reputation. Retailers and premium brands increasingly expect credible sustainable or regenerative sourcing evidence.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach ecosystems.
  2. Potential effects may reach water bodies.
  3. Potential effects may reach soil and groundwater.
  4. Potential effects may reach affected communities.
  5. Potential effects may reach future generations.
  6. Potential effects may reach supply-chain workers.
  7. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Affected communities, Customers / end-users, Suppliers.
  8. The source places the pathway in Upstream.

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may affect demand, pricing, market access or product and service revenue.
  2. The topic may change operating costs through resource use, controls, remediation or ongoing management.
  3. The topic may affect access to finance, funding terms or the cost of capital.
  4. The topic may affect asset useful lives, impairment assumptions, valuations or stranded-asset exposure.
  5. The topic may affect reputation, licences to operate, intellectual property or other intangible value.

Questions to test

  • What evidence supports both the impact and financial materiality pathways?
  • Which upstream activities, suppliers or inputs create or concentrate the pathway?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on ecosystems?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on water bodies?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on soil and groundwater?
  • What scientific evidence or consensus could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Biodiversity, habitat and ecosystem-impact evidence
  • Water withdrawal, discharge, quality and catchment-impact records
  • Soil and groundwater monitoring, incident and remediation records
  • Community engagement, grievance and impact records
  • Long-term scenario, cumulative-impact and intergenerational analysis
  • Supplier workforce, audit, grievance and remediation records
  • Revenue, demand, pricing and market-access analysis linked to the topic
  • Operating-cost records and budgets linked to the topic
  • Funding terms, lender or investor requirements and cost-of-capital analysis
  • Asset valuations, useful-life assumptions, impairment tests and stranded-asset analysis
  • Reputation, licence-to-operate, intellectual-property and other intangible-value evidence
  • Process-map item (emerging_pressures): Tighter alcohol health labelling, calorie disclosure, ingredient disclosure and pregnancy warning requirements
  • Process-map item (emerging_pressures): Water scarcity in barley-growing regions, hop regions, vineyards and distillery catchments
  • Process-map item (emerging_pressures): Investor and customer demand for Scope 3 emissions reduction across agriculture, glass, aluminium, logistics and refrigeration
  • Process-map item (external_impacts): High water abstraction for mashing, dilution, rinsing, cooling, cleaning and vineyard irrigation in stressed catchments
  • Process-map item (external_impacts): Agricultural impacts from barley, maize, rice, grapes, apples, agave and sugarcane cultivation, including fertiliser runoff and pesticide use

It may be less material when…

  • Organisation-specific evidence does not support significant scale, severity, likelihood or financial effect.
  • The organisation has no meaningful exposure to or influence over the relevant upstream pathway.
  • The emerging signal has not yet created a relevant exposure, impact or financial effect for the organisation.

Affected stakeholders

  • Affected communities
  • Customers / end-users
  • Suppliers

Users of the information

  • Investors / creditors
  • NGOs / civil society

Standards to check

See how companies report it →

Your preliminary screening decision

Saved in this browser. Your notes leave it only when you export the screening.

  • Environment
  • Industry baseline
  • Strong industry signal
  • Double materiality

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

End-of-life and circularity stewardship for beverage packaging across design, procurement, return systems, recovery, recycled content and leakage prevention.

How it shows up in this industry

Non-alcoholic beverages are sold in high volumes of PET bottles, aluminium cans, glass containers, cartons, pouches, caps, labels, sleeves, shrink film and corrugate, with some returnable bottle crates, kegs, refill stations and fountain formats. Packaging extended producer responsibility, deposit return schemes, mandatory recycled content and food-grade rPET scarcity are reshaping packaging cost, design and market access.

Why it may be material

Packaging is a visible waste stream and a major input cost for beverage producers. Extended producer responsibility fees, deposit return obligations, recycled-content rules, retailer packaging standards and rPET price premiums can affect margins, listings, capex, brand value and litigation exposure.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach affected communities.
  2. Potential effects may reach ecosystems.
  3. Potential effects may reach water bodies.
  4. Potential effects may reach soil and groundwater.
  5. Potential effects may reach supply-chain workers.
  6. Potential effects may reach future generations.
  7. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Affected communities, Customers / end-users, Suppliers.
  8. The source places the pathway in Own operations, Upstream, Downstream, Cross value chain.

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may affect demand, pricing, market access or product and service revenue.
  2. The topic may change operating costs through resource use, controls, remediation or ongoing management.
  3. The topic may require capital expenditure to adapt assets, processes or infrastructure.
  4. The topic may create provisions, penalties, remediation costs, claims or other liabilities.
  5. The topic may affect access to finance, funding terms or the cost of capital.
  6. The topic may affect asset useful lives, impairment assumptions, valuations or stranded-asset exposure.
  7. The topic may affect reputation, licences to operate, intellectual property or other intangible value.

Questions to test

  • What evidence supports both the impact and financial materiality pathways?
  • Which own operations, assets or decisions create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Which upstream activities, suppliers or inputs create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Which products, services, customers or end uses create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Where across the value chain is the pathway most significant?
  • What current or proposed regulation could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Community engagement, grievance and impact records
  • Biodiversity, habitat and ecosystem-impact evidence
  • Water withdrawal, discharge, quality and catchment-impact records
  • Soil and groundwater monitoring, incident and remediation records
  • Supplier workforce, audit, grievance and remediation records
  • Long-term scenario, cumulative-impact and intergenerational analysis
  • Revenue, demand, pricing and market-access analysis linked to the topic
  • Operating-cost records and budgets linked to the topic
  • Capital plans, asset adaptation budgets and investment approvals
  • Provision, claim, penalty, remediation and contingent-liability records
  • Funding terms, lender or investor requirements and cost-of-capital analysis
  • Asset valuations, useful-life assumptions, impairment tests and stranded-asset analysis
  • Reputation, licence-to-operate, intellectual-property and other intangible-value evidence
  • Process-map item (assets): Quality laboratories for microbiology, brix, pH, carbonation, sensory testing and packaging migration checks
  • Process-map item (customers): Industrial beverage blenders or co-packers buying concentrates, syrups or semi-finished bases
  • Process-map item (emerging_pressures): Expansion of deposit return schemes and digital return infrastructure for PET bottles, aluminium cans and glass containers
  • Process-map item (emerging_pressures): Rising recycled PET demand, food-grade rPET shortages and price premiums driven by mandatory recycled content targets
  • Process-map item (emerging_pressures): PFAS, bisphenol, phthalate and mineral oil migration concerns in packaging inks, liners, caps and processing aids

It may be less material when…

  • Organisation-specific evidence does not support significant scale, severity, likelihood or financial effect.
  • The organisation has no meaningful exposure to or influence over the relevant upstream or downstream pathway.

Affected stakeholders

  • Affected communities
  • Customers / end-users
  • Suppliers

Users of the information

  • Investors / creditors
  • Local authorities
  • NGOs / civil society
  • Regulators

Standards to check

See how companies report it →

Your preliminary screening decision

Saved in this browser. Your notes leave it only when you export the screening.

  • Environment
  • Industry baseline
  • Strong industry signal
  • Double materiality

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Circular packaging stewardship for alcoholic beverage containers and secondary packaging across retail, hospitality and household end-of-life pathways.

How it shows up in this industry

Alcoholic beverages are distributed through glass bottles, aluminium cans, steel kegs, closures, corks, capsules, labels, cartons, shrink film, bag-in-box formats and single-use kegs. Deposit return schemes, extended producer responsibility fees and retailer pressure to reduce heavy single-use glass affect packaging lines, exports, brand presentation and hospitality waste systems.

Why it may be material

Packaging costs and producer responsibility charges can materially affect margins, particularly for glass-heavy beer, wine and spirits. Market-specific deposit schemes and retailer packaging scorecards can shape shelf access, packaging CAPEX and consumer perception.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach ecosystems.
  2. Potential effects may reach affected communities.
  3. Potential effects may reach water bodies.
  4. Potential effects may reach soil and groundwater.
  5. Potential effects may reach workers.
  6. Potential effects may reach future generations.
  7. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Business partners, Customers / end-users, Suppliers.
  8. The source places the pathway in Own operations, Downstream, Cross value chain.

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may change operating costs through resource use, controls, remediation or ongoing management.
  2. The topic may require capital expenditure to adapt assets, processes or infrastructure.
  3. The topic may affect demand, pricing, market access or product and service revenue.
  4. The topic may create provisions, penalties, remediation costs, claims or other liabilities.
  5. The topic may affect reputation, licences to operate, intellectual property or other intangible value.

Questions to test

  • What evidence supports both the impact and financial materiality pathways?
  • Which own operations, assets or decisions create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Which products, services, customers or end uses create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Where across the value chain is the pathway most significant?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on ecosystems?
  • What current or proposed regulation could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Biodiversity, habitat and ecosystem-impact evidence
  • Community engagement, grievance and impact records
  • Water withdrawal, discharge, quality and catchment-impact records
  • Soil and groundwater monitoring, incident and remediation records
  • Workforce, health and safety, engagement and grievance records
  • Long-term scenario, cumulative-impact and intergenerational analysis
  • Operating-cost records and budgets linked to the topic
  • Capital plans, asset adaptation budgets and investment approvals
  • Revenue, demand, pricing and market-access analysis linked to the topic
  • Provision, claim, penalty, remediation and contingent-liability records
  • Reputation, licence-to-operate, intellectual-property and other intangible-value evidence
  • Process-map item (assets): Bottling, canning, kegging and bag-in-box packaging lines with fillers, cappers, seamers, labellers and pasteurisers
  • Process-map item (assets): Quality laboratories for microbiology, sensory testing, alcohol strength, methanol, sulphites and contaminant analysis
  • Process-map item (customers): Export distributors and local market brand owners in regulated alcohol markets
  • Process-map item (customers): Consumers of beer, cider, wine, spirits, liqueurs, ready-to-drink cocktails and low or no alcohol variants
  • Process-map item (emerging_pressures): Tighter alcohol health labelling, calorie disclosure, ingredient disclosure and pregnancy warning requirements

It may be less material when…

  • Organisation-specific evidence does not support significant scale, severity, likelihood or financial effect.
  • The organisation has no meaningful exposure to or influence over the relevant downstream pathway.

Affected stakeholders

  • Business partners
  • Customers / end-users
  • Suppliers

Users of the information

  • Investors / creditors
  • Local authorities
  • Regulators

Standards to check

See how companies report it →

Your preliminary screening decision

Saved in this browser. Your notes leave it only when you export the screening.

  • Environment
  • Industry baseline
  • Strong industry signal
  • Double materiality

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Management of climate, water and ecosystem pressures that affect the availability, quality and cost of agricultural inputs and maturation conditions for alcoholic beverages.

How it shows up in this industry

Alcoholic beverages depend on climate-sensitive inputs such as malting barley, hops, grapes, apples, agave, sugarcane and botanicals, as well as maturation warehouses and cellars where temperature and humidity affect yield and flavour. Grape ripening, barley protein levels, hop yields, wildfire smoke taint and evaporation losses can change recipes, protected-origin claims and aged inventory economics.

Why it may be material

Climate adaptation is a direct threat to alcohol quality, regional identity and supply reliability. Companies with vineyards, orchards, hop contracts, malt sourcing or barrel warehouses face product-style drift, crop rejection, asset losses and commodity volatility.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach ecosystems.
  2. Potential effects may reach water bodies.
  3. Potential effects may reach supply-chain workers.
  4. Potential effects may reach affected communities.
  5. Potential effects may reach future generations.
  6. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Affected communities, Customers / end-users, Suppliers, Value chain workers.
  7. The source places the pathway in Upstream, Own operations, Cross value chain.

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may affect demand, pricing, market access or product and service revenue.
  2. The topic may change operating costs through resource use, controls, remediation or ongoing management.
  3. The topic may require capital expenditure to adapt assets, processes or infrastructure.
  4. The topic may affect insurance availability, coverage terms, premiums or claims.
  5. The topic may affect asset useful lives, impairment assumptions, valuations or stranded-asset exposure.
  6. The topic may affect reputation, licences to operate, intellectual property or other intangible value.

Questions to test

  • What evidence supports both the impact and financial materiality pathways?
  • Which upstream activities, suppliers or inputs create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Which own operations, assets or decisions create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Where across the value chain is the pathway most significant?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on ecosystems?
  • What scientific evidence or consensus could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Biodiversity, habitat and ecosystem-impact evidence
  • Water withdrawal, discharge, quality and catchment-impact records
  • Supplier workforce, audit, grievance and remediation records
  • Community engagement, grievance and impact records
  • Long-term scenario, cumulative-impact and intergenerational analysis
  • Revenue, demand, pricing and market-access analysis linked to the topic
  • Operating-cost records and budgets linked to the topic
  • Capital plans, asset adaptation budgets and investment approvals
  • Insurance coverage, premium, exclusion and claims records
  • Asset valuations, useful-life assumptions, impairment tests and stranded-asset analysis
  • Reputation, licence-to-operate, intellectual-property and other intangible-value evidence
  • Process-map item (assets): Maturation warehouses, bonded stores, rack houses and cask or barrel inventories
  • Process-map item (assets): Quality laboratories for microbiology, sensory testing, alcohol strength, methanol, sulphites and contaminant analysis
  • Process-map item (assets): Brand portfolios, geographical indications, recipes, yeast strains, maturation know-how and consumer data platforms
  • Process-map item (customers): Export distributors and local market brand owners in regulated alcohol markets
  • Process-map item (customers): Consumers of beer, cider, wine, spirits, liqueurs, ready-to-drink cocktails and low or no alcohol variants

It may be less material when…

  • Organisation-specific evidence does not support significant scale, severity, likelihood or financial effect.
  • The organisation has no meaningful exposure to or influence over the relevant upstream pathway.
  • The emerging signal has not yet created a relevant exposure, impact or financial effect for the organisation.

Affected stakeholders

  • Affected communities
  • Customers / end-users
  • Suppliers
  • Value chain workers

Users of the information

  • Board / management
  • Investors / creditors

Standards to check

See how companies report it →

Your preliminary screening decision

Saved in this browser. Your notes leave it only when you export the screening.

  • Environment
  • Industry baseline
  • Strong industry signal
  • Double materiality

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Management of greenhouse gas emissions and energy cost exposure across combustion, electricity use, refrigeration leakage and ingredient-related Scope 3 emissions, including transition planning for low-carbon heat, renewable electricity, heat recovery and lower-emission refrigeration.

How it shows up in this industry

Processed food manufacturing uses energy-intensive thermal processes such as baking, frying, roasting, blanching, pasteurisation, retorting, evaporation and drying, while chilled and frozen products depend on refrigeration plants, cold rooms, frozen stores and temperature-controlled dispatch. Upstream agricultural ingredients such as grains, dairy, meat, oils, cocoa, coffee, sugar and vegetables often dominate product carbon footprints requested by retailers and foodservice chains.

Why it may be material

Energy price volatility directly affects operating expenditure for ovens, fryers, dryers, boilers, compressed air and cold stores. Retailers, investors and lenders increasingly require emissions data and reduction plans, while low-carbon heat, waste heat recovery and refrigerant replacement require material capital expenditure and can affect access to finance and customer mandates.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach the atmosphere.
  2. Potential effects may reach future generations.
  3. Potential effects may reach ecosystems.
  4. Potential effects may reach affected communities.
  5. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Customers / end-users, Suppliers.
  6. The source places the pathway in Own operations, Upstream, Downstream, Cross value chain.

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may change operating costs through resource use, controls, remediation or ongoing management.
  2. The topic may require capital expenditure to adapt assets, processes or infrastructure.
  3. The topic may affect demand, pricing, market access or product and service revenue.
  4. The topic may affect access to finance, funding terms or the cost of capital.
  5. The topic may affect asset useful lives, impairment assumptions, valuations or stranded-asset exposure.
  6. The topic may affect insurance availability, coverage terms, premiums or claims.

Questions to test

  • What evidence supports both the impact and financial materiality pathways?
  • Which own operations, assets or decisions create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Which upstream activities, suppliers or inputs create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Which products, services, customers or end uses create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Where across the value chain is the pathway most significant?
  • What current or proposed regulation could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Emissions, air-quality and atmospheric-impact records linked to the topic
  • Long-term scenario, cumulative-impact and intergenerational analysis
  • Biodiversity, habitat and ecosystem-impact evidence
  • Community engagement, grievance and impact records
  • Operating-cost records and budgets linked to the topic
  • Capital plans, asset adaptation budgets and investment approvals
  • Revenue, demand, pricing and market-access analysis linked to the topic
  • Funding terms, lender or investor requirements and cost-of-capital analysis
  • Asset valuations, useful-life assumptions, impairment tests and stranded-asset analysis
  • Insurance coverage, premium, exclusion and claims records
  • Process-map item (assets): Ingredient intake bays, silos, chilled stores and frozen stores for grains, oils, dairy ingredients, meat, fruit, vegetables, sugar, salt and additives
  • Process-map item (assets): High-care and high-risk production rooms with controlled hygiene zoning, air handling, positive pressure and temperature control
  • Process-map item (assets): On-site utilities including boilers, refrigeration plants, compressed air systems, water treatment, effluent treatment and waste heat recovery equipment
  • Process-map item (assets): Quality control laboratories for microbiology, allergen testing, water activity, shelf-life testing and contaminant screening
  • Process-map item (assets): Warehouses, pallet racking, automated storage and retrieval systems, cold rooms and finished-goods dispatch docks

It may be less material when…

  • Organisation-specific evidence does not support significant scale, severity, likelihood or financial effect.
  • The organisation has no meaningful exposure to or influence over the relevant upstream or downstream pathway.

Affected stakeholders

  • Customers / end-users
  • Suppliers

Users of the information

  • Board / management
  • Investors / creditors
  • Regulators

Standards to check

See how companies report it →

Your preliminary screening decision

Saved in this browser. Your notes leave it only when you export the screening.

  • Environment
  • Industry baseline
  • Strong industry signal
  • Double materiality

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Environmental impact from avoidable food loss, organic residuals and imperfect recovery of edible or useful by-products across processing and distribution.

How it shows up in this industry

Cleaning, sorting, trimming, peeling, milling, batching, frying, freezing, shelf-life failures, recalls and retailer returns generate peelings, pomace, spent grain, whey, trimmings, off-specification edible material, used cooking oil, sludge and non-conforming finished goods. Some residues can become animal feed, rendering inputs, compost feedstock or anaerobic digestion feedstock.

Why it may be material

Food loss and product losses arise across production, stock rotation, recalls and returns. This issue affects the embedded land, water, energy and emissions already used to produce ingredients and influences disposal costs, retailer penalties, waste hierarchy scrutiny and category reputation.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach ecosystems.
  2. Potential effects may reach the atmosphere.
  3. Potential effects may reach affected communities.
  4. Potential effects may reach water bodies.
  5. Potential effects may reach future generations.
  6. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Affected communities, Customers / end-users, Suppliers.
  7. The source places the pathway in Own operations, Downstream.

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may change operating costs through resource use, controls, remediation or ongoing management.
  2. The topic may affect demand, pricing, market access or product and service revenue.
  3. The topic may create provisions, penalties, remediation costs, claims or other liabilities.
  4. The topic may affect reputation, licences to operate, intellectual property or other intangible value.

Questions to test

  • What evidence supports both the impact and financial materiality pathways?
  • Which own operations, assets or decisions create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Which products, services, customers or end uses create or concentrate the pathway?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on ecosystems?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on the atmosphere?
  • What current or proposed regulation could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Biodiversity, habitat and ecosystem-impact evidence
  • Emissions, air-quality and atmospheric-impact records linked to the topic
  • Community engagement, grievance and impact records
  • Water withdrawal, discharge, quality and catchment-impact records
  • Long-term scenario, cumulative-impact and intergenerational analysis
  • Operating-cost records and budgets linked to the topic
  • Revenue, demand, pricing and market-access analysis linked to the topic
  • Provision, claim, penalty, remediation and contingent-liability records
  • Reputation, licence-to-operate, intellectual-property and other intangible-value evidence
  • Process-map item (assets): Cleaning, sorting, peeling, milling, blending, cooking, baking, frying, extrusion, pasteurisation, dehydration and freezing lines
  • Process-map item (assets): On-site utilities including boilers, refrigeration plants, compressed air systems, water treatment, effluent treatment and waste heat recovery equipment
  • Process-map item (assets): Quality control laboratories for microbiology, allergen testing, water activity, shelf-life testing and contaminant screening
  • Process-map item (assets): Food safety management systems, batch traceability platforms, enterprise resource planning, recipe control and production scheduling software
  • Process-map item (assets): Brands, private-label supply contracts, product formulations, recipes, sensory panels and consumer insight data

It may be less material when…

  • Organisation-specific evidence does not support significant scale, severity, likelihood or financial effect.
  • The organisation has no meaningful exposure to or influence over the relevant downstream pathway.

Affected stakeholders

  • Affected communities
  • Customers / end-users
  • Suppliers

Users of the information

  • Investors / creditors
  • Regulators

Standards to check

See how companies report it →

Your preliminary screening decision

Saved in this browser. Your notes leave it only when you export the screening.

  • Environment
  • Industry baseline
  • Strong industry signal
  • Double materiality

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Management of routine high-strength process effluents and treatment residues from alcoholic beverage production.

How it shows up in this industry

Breweries, distilleries, wineries and cideries generate high-strength wastewater from fermentation residues, lees, trub, yeast, wash waters, stillage, vinasse and cleaning chemicals. Undersized or poorly controlled effluent treatment can overload municipal systems or harm receiving waters.

Why it may be material

High chemical oxygen demand and biochemical oxygen demand streams drive treatment OPEX, trade effluent charges and upgrade CAPEX. Consent breaches can lead to enforcement, clean-up costs and production bottlenecks.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach water bodies.
  2. Potential effects may reach ecosystems.
  3. Potential effects may reach soil and groundwater.
  4. Potential effects may reach affected communities.
  5. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Affected communities.
  6. The source places the pathway in Own operations.

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may change operating costs through resource use, controls, remediation or ongoing management.
  2. The topic may require capital expenditure to adapt assets, processes or infrastructure.
  3. The topic may create provisions, penalties, remediation costs, claims or other liabilities.
  4. The topic may affect access to finance, funding terms or the cost of capital.

Questions to test

  • What evidence supports both the impact and financial materiality pathways?
  • Which own operations, assets or decisions create or concentrate the pathway?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on water bodies?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on ecosystems?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on soil and groundwater?
  • What current or proposed regulation could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Water withdrawal, discharge, quality and catchment-impact records
  • Biodiversity, habitat and ecosystem-impact evidence
  • Soil and groundwater monitoring, incident and remediation records
  • Community engagement, grievance and impact records
  • Operating-cost records and budgets linked to the topic
  • Capital plans, asset adaptation budgets and investment approvals
  • Provision, claim, penalty, remediation and contingent-liability records
  • Funding terms, lender or investor requirements and cost-of-capital analysis
  • Process-map item (assets): Effluent treatment plants handling high biochemical oxygen demand streams, lees, trub, yeast and wash waters
  • Process-map item (assets): Quality laboratories for microbiology, sensory testing, alcohol strength, methanol, sulphites and contaminant analysis
  • Process-map item (customers): On-trade customers such as pubs, bars, restaurants, hotels, clubs and music venues
  • Process-map item (customers): Off-trade retailers including supermarkets, convenience stores, bottle shops and specialist wine merchants
  • Process-map item (customers): Animal feed producers and farmers using spent grain, draff, grape pomace or yeast by-products

It may be less material when…

  • Organisation-specific evidence does not support significant scale, severity, likelihood or financial effect.

Affected stakeholders

  • Affected communities

Users of the information

  • Investors / creditors
  • Local authorities
  • NGOs / civil society
  • Regulators

Standards to check

See how companies report it →

Your preliminary screening decision

Saved in this browser. Your notes leave it only when you export the screening.

  • Environment
  • Industry baseline
  • Strong industry signal
  • Double materiality

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Routine water pollution control for beverage manufacturing effluents, including organic loading, pH shifts, cleaning chemicals, sludge and treatment capacity pressures.

How it shows up in this industry

Beverage plants generate high-strength wastewater from sugar residues, fruit pulp, syrup preparation, filter backwash, caustic and acid clean-in-place cycles and sanitation solutions. Balancing tanks, dissolved air flotation, biological treatment and sludge handling determine whether discharges burden municipal wastewater operators or receiving waters.

Why it may be material

High biochemical oxygen demand, chemical oxygen demand, colour, acidity and cleaning chemicals can breach trade effluent consents, raise treatment charges and disrupt municipal wastewater works. Pre-treatment performance is therefore both an environmental impact pathway and a cost and compliance driver.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach water bodies.
  2. Potential effects may reach ecosystems.
  3. Potential effects may reach affected communities.
  4. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Affected communities, Business partners.
  5. The source places the pathway in Own operations.

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may change operating costs through resource use, controls, remediation or ongoing management.
  2. The topic may require capital expenditure to adapt assets, processes or infrastructure.
  3. The topic may create provisions, penalties, remediation costs, claims or other liabilities.

Questions to test

  • What evidence supports both the impact and financial materiality pathways?
  • Which own operations, assets or decisions create or concentrate the pathway?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on water bodies?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on ecosystems?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on affected communities?
  • What current or proposed regulation could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Water withdrawal, discharge, quality and catchment-impact records
  • Biodiversity, habitat and ecosystem-impact evidence
  • Community engagement, grievance and impact records
  • Operating-cost records and budgets linked to the topic
  • Capital plans, asset adaptation budgets and investment approvals
  • Provision, claim, penalty, remediation and contingent-liability records
  • Process-map item (assets): Syrup rooms with bulk sugar silos, high-fructose syrup tanks, ingredient dosing skids and flavour concentrate stores
  • Process-map item (assets): Water treatment plants using filtration, activated carbon, reverse osmosis, UV and ozone systems
  • Process-map item (assets): Carbonation, blending, pasteurisation, ultra-high temperature and aseptic processing lines
  • Process-map item (assets): On-site wastewater treatment plants with balancing tanks, dissolved air flotation, biological treatment and sludge handling
  • Process-map item (assets): Quality laboratories for microbiology, brix, pH, carbonation, sensory testing and packaging migration checks

It may be less material when…

  • Organisation-specific evidence does not support significant scale, severity, likelihood or financial effect.

Affected stakeholders

  • Affected communities
  • Business partners

Users of the information

  • Board / management
  • Local authorities
  • Regulators

Standards to check

See how companies report it →

Your preliminary screening decision

Saved in this browser. Your notes leave it only when you export the screening.

  • Environment
  • Industry baseline
  • Strong industry signal
  • Double materiality

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Ecosystem, water and community impacts embedded in the agricultural and animal-derived ingredients used in processed food formulations.

How it shows up in this industry

Processed food recipes depend on grains, potatoes, tomatoes, fruit, vegetables, cocoa, coffee, sugar, palm oil, soy, dairy, meat, fish and eggs sourced through farms, traders, brokers, ports and primary processors. These ingredient chains can carry embedded impacts from land conversion, deforestation, irrigation demand, fertiliser run-off and pesticide use.

Why it may be material

Biodiversity and land-use impacts are material in palm oil, soy, cocoa, beef, dairy, grains, sugar and fruit supply chains. Retailer and investor demands for farm-level traceability and deforestation-free sourcing increase the materiality of this impact pathway, while ecosystem degradation can weaken supply resilience.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach ecosystems.
  2. Potential effects may reach water bodies.
  3. Potential effects may reach affected communities.
  4. Potential effects may reach supply-chain workers.
  5. Potential effects may reach Indigenous peoples.
  6. Potential effects may reach future generations.
  7. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Affected communities, Customers / end-users, Suppliers, Value chain workers.
  8. The source places the pathway in Upstream.

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may affect demand, pricing, market access or product and service revenue.
  2. The topic may change operating costs through resource use, controls, remediation or ongoing management.
  3. The topic may create provisions, penalties, remediation costs, claims or other liabilities.
  4. The topic may affect access to finance, funding terms or the cost of capital.
  5. The topic may affect reputation, licences to operate, intellectual property or other intangible value.

Questions to test

  • What evidence supports both the impact and financial materiality pathways?
  • Which upstream activities, suppliers or inputs create or concentrate the pathway?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on ecosystems?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on water bodies?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on affected communities?
  • What current or proposed regulation could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Biodiversity, habitat and ecosystem-impact evidence
  • Water withdrawal, discharge, quality and catchment-impact records
  • Community engagement, grievance and impact records
  • Supplier workforce, audit, grievance and remediation records
  • Indigenous engagement, consent, grievance and impact records
  • Long-term scenario, cumulative-impact and intergenerational analysis
  • Revenue, demand, pricing and market-access analysis linked to the topic
  • Operating-cost records and budgets linked to the topic
  • Provision, claim, penalty, remediation and contingent-liability records
  • Funding terms, lender or investor requirements and cost-of-capital analysis
  • Reputation, licence-to-operate, intellectual-property and other intangible-value evidence
  • Process-map item (assets): Ingredient intake bays, silos, chilled stores and frozen stores for grains, oils, dairy ingredients, meat, fruit, vegetables, sugar, salt and additives
  • Process-map item (assets): High-care and high-risk production rooms with controlled hygiene zoning, air handling, positive pressure and temperature control
  • Process-map item (assets): Food safety management systems, batch traceability platforms, enterprise resource planning, recipe control and production scheduling software
  • Process-map item (assets): Brands, private-label supply contracts, product formulations, recipes, sensory panels and consumer insight data
  • Process-map item (customers): Quick-service restaurant chains and contract caterers using sauces, bakery items, frozen meals, snacks and prepared ingredients

It may be less material when…

  • Organisation-specific evidence does not support significant scale, severity, likelihood or financial effect.
  • The organisation has no meaningful exposure to or influence over the relevant upstream pathway.

Affected stakeholders

  • Affected communities
  • Customers / end-users
  • Suppliers
  • Value chain workers

Users of the information

  • Investors / creditors
  • NGOs / civil society
  • Regulators

Standards to check

See how companies report it →

Your preliminary screening decision

Saved in this browser. Your notes leave it only when you export the screening.

  • Environment
  • Industry baseline
  • Strong industry signal
  • Double materiality

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Climate mitigation and transition planning for energy-intensive alcoholic beverage production and high-emission value-chain inputs.

How it shows up in this industry

Alcoholic beverage production uses steam boilers, distillation heat, pasteurisation, refrigeration plants, compressed air and temperature-controlled cellars. Significant value-chain emissions also arise from malting barley, grapes, sugar, glass furnaces, aluminium cans, cardboard, distribution and chilled hospitality systems.

Why it may be material

Energy and carbon costs affect margins in heat-intensive breweries and distilleries, while packaging and agriculture can dominate product carbon footprints. Retailer scorecards, investor expectations and customer mandates increasingly require credible Scope 3 data and supplier decarbonisation.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach the atmosphere.
  2. Potential effects may reach future generations.
  3. Potential effects may reach ecosystems.
  4. Potential effects may reach supply-chain workers.
  5. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Customers / end-users, Suppliers.
  6. The source places the pathway in Own operations, Upstream, Downstream, Cross value chain.

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may change operating costs through resource use, controls, remediation or ongoing management.
  2. The topic may require capital expenditure to adapt assets, processes or infrastructure.
  3. The topic may affect access to finance, funding terms or the cost of capital.
  4. The topic may affect demand, pricing, market access or product and service revenue.
  5. The topic may affect asset useful lives, impairment assumptions, valuations or stranded-asset exposure.
  6. The topic may affect reputation, licences to operate, intellectual property or other intangible value.

Questions to test

  • What evidence supports both the impact and financial materiality pathways?
  • Which own operations, assets or decisions create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Which upstream activities, suppliers or inputs create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Which products, services, customers or end uses create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Where across the value chain is the pathway most significant?
  • What current or proposed regulation could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Emissions, air-quality and atmospheric-impact records linked to the topic
  • Long-term scenario, cumulative-impact and intergenerational analysis
  • Biodiversity, habitat and ecosystem-impact evidence
  • Supplier workforce, audit, grievance and remediation records
  • Operating-cost records and budgets linked to the topic
  • Capital plans, asset adaptation budgets and investment approvals
  • Funding terms, lender or investor requirements and cost-of-capital analysis
  • Revenue, demand, pricing and market-access analysis linked to the topic
  • Asset valuations, useful-life assumptions, impairment tests and stranded-asset analysis
  • Reputation, licence-to-operate, intellectual-property and other intangible-value evidence
  • Process-map item (assets): Bottling, canning, kegging and bag-in-box packaging lines with fillers, cappers, seamers, labellers and pasteurisers
  • Process-map item (assets): Refrigeration plants, steam boilers, compressed air systems, carbon dioxide recovery units and clean-in-place systems
  • Process-map item (assets): Quality laboratories for microbiology, sensory testing, alcohol strength, methanol, sulphites and contaminant analysis
  • Process-map item (assets): Brand portfolios, geographical indications, recipes, yeast strains, maturation know-how and consumer data platforms
  • Process-map item (customers): Export distributors and local market brand owners in regulated alcohol markets

It may be less material when…

  • Organisation-specific evidence does not support significant scale, severity, likelihood or financial effect.
  • The organisation has no meaningful exposure to or influence over the relevant upstream or downstream pathway.

Affected stakeholders

  • Customers / end-users
  • Suppliers

Users of the information

  • Board / management
  • Investors / creditors
  • Regulators

Standards to check

See how companies report it →

Your preliminary screening decision

Saved in this browser. Your notes leave it only when you export the screening.

  • Environment
  • Industry baseline
  • Strong industry signal
  • Double materiality

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Transition management for energy use, greenhouse gas emissions and refrigerant leakage across beverage processing, storage, packaging supply and distribution operations.

How it shows up in this industry

Beverage processing uses electricity, natural gas, steam, fuel oil, diesel and liquefied petroleum gas for bottle blowing, pasteurisation, hot filling, ultra-high temperature treatment, aseptic processing, compressed air, chillers, cold stores and warehouses. Additional emissions arise from heavy, high-volume finished-goods logistics, cold-chain distribution and refrigerant leakage from ammonia, carbon dioxide and hydrofluorocarbon-alternative systems.

Why it may be material

Energy, refrigeration and freight affect operating cost, capex, customer tender access and financing conditions. Retailers and food-service customers increasingly request lower-carbon logistics, electric refrigeration and credible decarbonisation evidence for packaged and fountain beverage supply.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach the atmosphere.
  2. Potential effects may reach affected communities.
  3. Potential effects may reach ecosystems.
  4. Potential effects may reach future generations.
  5. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Customers / end-users, Suppliers.
  6. The source places the pathway in Own operations, Upstream, Downstream, Cross value chain.

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may affect demand, pricing, market access or product and service revenue.
  2. The topic may change operating costs through resource use, controls, remediation or ongoing management.
  3. The topic may require capital expenditure to adapt assets, processes or infrastructure.
  4. The topic may affect access to finance, funding terms or the cost of capital.
  5. The topic may affect insurance availability, coverage terms, premiums or claims.
  6. The topic may affect asset useful lives, impairment assumptions, valuations or stranded-asset exposure.

Questions to test

  • What evidence supports both the impact and financial materiality pathways?
  • Which own operations, assets or decisions create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Which upstream activities, suppliers or inputs create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Which products, services, customers or end uses create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Where across the value chain is the pathway most significant?
  • What current or proposed regulation could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Emissions, air-quality and atmospheric-impact records linked to the topic
  • Community engagement, grievance and impact records
  • Biodiversity, habitat and ecosystem-impact evidence
  • Long-term scenario, cumulative-impact and intergenerational analysis
  • Revenue, demand, pricing and market-access analysis linked to the topic
  • Operating-cost records and budgets linked to the topic
  • Capital plans, asset adaptation budgets and investment approvals
  • Funding terms, lender or investor requirements and cost-of-capital analysis
  • Insurance coverage, premium, exclusion and claims records
  • Asset valuations, useful-life assumptions, impairment tests and stranded-asset analysis
  • Process-map item (assets): Water treatment plants using filtration, activated carbon, reverse osmosis, UV and ozone systems
  • Process-map item (assets): Clean-in-place systems, caustic and acid chemical stores, compressed air plants, boilers, chillers and refrigeration systems
  • Process-map item (assets): Cold stores, ambient finished-goods warehouses, palletisers, stretch-wrapping lines and automated storage systems
  • Process-map item (customers): Consumers of carbonated soft drinks, bottled water, juices, energy drinks, sports drinks, mixers, ready-to-drink tea and coffee, kombucha and plant-based drinks
  • Process-map item (customers): Industrial beverage blenders or co-packers buying concentrates, syrups or semi-finished bases

It may be less material when…

  • Organisation-specific evidence does not support significant scale, severity, likelihood or financial effect.
  • The organisation has no meaningful exposure to or influence over the relevant upstream or downstream pathway.

Affected stakeholders

  • Customers / end-users
  • Suppliers

Users of the information

  • Board / management
  • Investors / creditors
  • Regulators

Standards to check

See how companies report it →

Your preliminary screening decision

Saved in this browser. Your notes leave it only when you export the screening.

  • Environment
  • Industry baseline
  • Strong industry signal
  • Double materiality

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Financial and impact management of primary and secondary packaging, including recyclability, reusable systems, packaging waste, plastic tax exposure, EPR costs, deposit return interfaces, lightweighting and production-line modifications for new formats.

How it shows up in this industry

Processed foods are sold in high-volume formats including flexible films, pouches, trays, cartons, tins, jars, labels, shrink wrap and secondary cases. Modified-atmosphere packs, retort pouches and multilayer films can protect shelf life but may be difficult to recycle, while extended producer responsibility, deposit return and plastic packaging tax regimes increase costs for hard-to-recycle formats and can require changes to sealing, pouching, canning, carton packing and case-packing equipment.

Why it may be material

Packaging choices affect input costs, EPR fees, plastic taxes, line efficiency, shelf life, transport damage, retailer listing criteria and brand reputation. Conversion to recyclable or reusable formats can require investment and product validation, while failure to adapt can impair assets tied to non-recyclable formats and reduce market access.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach ecosystems.
  2. Potential effects may reach water bodies.
  3. Potential effects may reach affected communities.
  4. Potential effects may reach future generations.
  5. Potential effects may reach consumers.
  6. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Customers / end-users, Suppliers.
  7. The source places the pathway in Own operations, Downstream, Cross value chain.

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may change operating costs through resource use, controls, remediation or ongoing management.
  2. The topic may require capital expenditure to adapt assets, processes or infrastructure.
  3. The topic may affect demand, pricing, market access or product and service revenue.
  4. The topic may create provisions, penalties, remediation costs, claims or other liabilities.
  5. The topic may affect access to finance, funding terms or the cost of capital.
  6. The topic may affect asset useful lives, impairment assumptions, valuations or stranded-asset exposure.
  7. The topic may affect reputation, licences to operate, intellectual property or other intangible value.

Questions to test

  • What evidence supports both the impact and financial materiality pathways?
  • Which own operations, assets or decisions create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Which products, services, customers or end uses create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Where across the value chain is the pathway most significant?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on ecosystems?
  • What current or proposed regulation could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Biodiversity, habitat and ecosystem-impact evidence
  • Water withdrawal, discharge, quality and catchment-impact records
  • Community engagement, grievance and impact records
  • Long-term scenario, cumulative-impact and intergenerational analysis
  • Consumer outcome, complaint and product-impact records
  • Operating-cost records and budgets linked to the topic
  • Capital plans, asset adaptation budgets and investment approvals
  • Revenue, demand, pricing and market-access analysis linked to the topic
  • Provision, claim, penalty, remediation and contingent-liability records
  • Funding terms, lender or investor requirements and cost-of-capital analysis
  • Asset valuations, useful-life assumptions, impairment tests and stranded-asset analysis
  • Reputation, licence-to-operate, intellectual-property and other intangible-value evidence
  • Process-map item (assets): Quality control laboratories for microbiology, allergen testing, water activity, shelf-life testing and contaminant screening
  • Process-map item (assets): Brands, private-label supply contracts, product formulations, recipes, sensory panels and consumer insight data
  • Process-map item (emerging_pressures): Extended producer responsibility, deposit return and plastic packaging taxes increasing the cost of multilayer films, pouches and difficult-to-recycle formats
  • Process-map item (emerging_pressures): Shift towards recyclable mono-material packaging, reusable systems and lower-carbon refrigeration requiring line modifications and capital expenditure
  • Process-map item (emerging_pressures): Automation, robotics and digital traceability changing workforce skills, maintenance needs and cyber-risk exposure

It may be less material when…

  • Organisation-specific evidence does not support significant scale, severity, likelihood or financial effect.
  • The organisation has no meaningful exposure to or influence over the relevant downstream pathway.

Affected stakeholders

  • Customers / end-users
  • Suppliers

Users of the information

  • Board / management
  • Investors / creditors
  • NGOs / civil society
  • Regulators

Standards to check

See how companies report it →

Your preliminary screening decision

Saved in this browser. Your notes leave it only when you export the screening.

  • Environment
  • Industry baseline
  • Strong industry signal
  • Double materiality

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Water stewardship for alcoholic beverages, including abstraction, consumption, reuse and catchment impacts across production sites and agricultural inputs.

How it shows up in this industry

Breweries, distilleries, wineries and cideries use water for mashing, dilution, proofing, rinsing, cooling, steam raising and cleaning-in-place, while vineyards, orchards and some grain or hop supply regions depend on irrigation. Water scarcity in distillery catchments, vineyards and barley or hop regions can affect production security and local ecosystems.

Why it may be material

Water access is fundamental to brewing, distilling, winemaking and cider production, and several inputs are grown in water-stressed regions. Abstraction limits, drought and community concern can constrain production volumes, increase CAPEX for reuse and affect retailer or investor confidence.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach affected communities.
  2. Potential effects may reach ecosystems.
  3. Potential effects may reach water bodies.
  4. Potential effects may reach soil and groundwater.
  5. Potential effects may reach future generations.
  6. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Affected communities, Customers / end-users, Suppliers.
  7. The source places the pathway in Own operations, Upstream, Cross value chain.

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may change operating costs through resource use, controls, remediation or ongoing management.
  2. The topic may require capital expenditure to adapt assets, processes or infrastructure.
  3. The topic may affect demand, pricing, market access or product and service revenue.
  4. The topic may affect access to finance, funding terms or the cost of capital.
  5. The topic may affect asset useful lives, impairment assumptions, valuations or stranded-asset exposure.
  6. The topic may affect reputation, licences to operate, intellectual property or other intangible value.

Questions to test

  • What evidence supports both the impact and financial materiality pathways?
  • Which own operations, assets or decisions create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Which upstream activities, suppliers or inputs create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Where across the value chain is the pathway most significant?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on affected communities?
  • What current or proposed regulation could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Community engagement, grievance and impact records
  • Biodiversity, habitat and ecosystem-impact evidence
  • Water withdrawal, discharge, quality and catchment-impact records
  • Soil and groundwater monitoring, incident and remediation records
  • Long-term scenario, cumulative-impact and intergenerational analysis
  • Operating-cost records and budgets linked to the topic
  • Capital plans, asset adaptation budgets and investment approvals
  • Revenue, demand, pricing and market-access analysis linked to the topic
  • Funding terms, lender or investor requirements and cost-of-capital analysis
  • Asset valuations, useful-life assumptions, impairment tests and stranded-asset analysis
  • Reputation, licence-to-operate, intellectual-property and other intangible-value evidence
  • Process-map item (assets): Effluent treatment plants handling high biochemical oxygen demand streams, lees, trub, yeast and wash waters
  • Process-map item (emerging_pressures): Water scarcity in barley-growing regions, hop regions, vineyards and distillery catchments
  • Process-map item (emerging_pressures): Deposit return schemes, extended producer responsibility fees and retailer pressure to cut single-use glass weight
  • Process-map item (emerging_pressures): Electrification of boilers, heat recovery, biogas from effluent and renewable power procurement for energy-intensive sites
  • Process-map item (external_impacts): High water abstraction for mashing, dilution, rinsing, cooling, cleaning and vineyard irrigation in stressed catchments

It may be less material when…

  • Organisation-specific evidence does not support significant scale, severity, likelihood or financial effect.
  • The organisation has no meaningful exposure to or influence over the relevant upstream pathway.

Affected stakeholders

  • Affected communities
  • Customers / end-users
  • Suppliers

Users of the information

  • Investors / creditors
  • Local authorities
  • Regulators

Standards to check

See how companies report it →

Your preliminary screening decision

Saved in this browser. Your notes leave it only when you export the screening.

  • Environment
  • Industry baseline
  • Strong industry signal
  • Double materiality

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Management of beverage source-water abstraction, treatment, consumption efficiency, catchment stewardship and licence resilience.

How it shows up in this industry

Non-alcoholic beverage plants use water as the main product ingredient for bottled water, flavoured waters, soft drinks, juices from concentrate and fountain syrups, as well as for filtration, reverse osmosis, UV, ozone, bottle washing and clean-in-place support. High-volume bottling sites can become focal points in aquifers, spring catchments and drought-prone regions where communities, agriculture and ecosystems compete for resilient freshwater resources.

Why it may be material

Water availability can directly cap beverage production, especially for bottled water and soft drink plants in stressed catchments. Abstraction licence conditions, drought restrictions, local opposition and catchment stewardship commitments can affect capacity, asset value, financing and brand acceptance.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach affected communities.
  2. Potential effects may reach water bodies.
  3. Potential effects may reach ecosystems.
  4. Potential effects may reach future generations.
  5. Potential effects may reach Indigenous peoples.
  6. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Affected communities, Customers / end-users.
  7. The source places the pathway in Own operations, Cross value chain.

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may affect demand, pricing, market access or product and service revenue.
  2. The topic may change operating costs through resource use, controls, remediation or ongoing management.
  3. The topic may require capital expenditure to adapt assets, processes or infrastructure.
  4. The topic may create provisions, penalties, remediation costs, claims or other liabilities.
  5. The topic may affect access to finance, funding terms or the cost of capital.
  6. The topic may affect asset useful lives, impairment assumptions, valuations or stranded-asset exposure.
  7. The topic may affect reputation, licences to operate, intellectual property or other intangible value.

Questions to test

  • What evidence supports both the impact and financial materiality pathways?
  • Which own operations, assets or decisions create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Where across the value chain is the pathway most significant?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on affected communities?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on water bodies?
  • What current or proposed regulation could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Community engagement, grievance and impact records
  • Water withdrawal, discharge, quality and catchment-impact records
  • Biodiversity, habitat and ecosystem-impact evidence
  • Long-term scenario, cumulative-impact and intergenerational analysis
  • Indigenous engagement, consent, grievance and impact records
  • Revenue, demand, pricing and market-access analysis linked to the topic
  • Operating-cost records and budgets linked to the topic
  • Capital plans, asset adaptation budgets and investment approvals
  • Provision, claim, penalty, remediation and contingent-liability records
  • Funding terms, lender or investor requirements and cost-of-capital analysis
  • Asset valuations, useful-life assumptions, impairment tests and stranded-asset analysis
  • Reputation, licence-to-operate, intellectual-property and other intangible-value evidence
  • Process-map item (assets): Water treatment plants using filtration, activated carbon, reverse osmosis, UV and ozone systems
  • Process-map item (customers): Export distributors and importers handling regional soft drink, juice, bottled water and functional drink brands
  • Process-map item (customers): Consumers of carbonated soft drinks, bottled water, juices, energy drinks, sports drinks, mixers, ready-to-drink tea and coffee, kombucha and plant-based drinks
  • Process-map item (customers): Industrial beverage blenders or co-packers buying concentrates, syrups or semi-finished bases
  • Process-map item (emerging_pressures): Growing scrutiny of bottled water abstraction rights in water-stressed catchments and drought-prone regions

It may be less material when…

  • Organisation-specific evidence does not support significant scale, severity, likelihood or financial effect.

Affected stakeholders

  • Affected communities
  • Customers / end-users

Users of the information

  • Investors / creditors
  • Local authorities
  • NGOs / civil society
  • Regulators

Standards to check

See how companies report it →

Your preliminary screening decision

Saved in this browser. Your notes leave it only when you export the screening.

  • Environment
  • Industry baseline
  • Strong industry signal
  • Double materiality

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Water withdrawal, consumption, reuse and effluent control in food processing operations, including process water, sanitation water, cleaning-in-place, wastewater pre-treatment, dissolved air flotation, sludge handling and compliance with discharge limits in water-stressed locations.

How it shows up in this industry

Processed food facilities use water for ingredient make-up, washing, blanching, cooking, cooling, steam generation, sanitation and cleaning-in-place systems. Effluent treatment plants and dissolved air flotation units handle high-strength wastewater containing fats, oils, greases, proteins, starches, sugars, suspended solids and cleaning chemicals, often in processing clusters facing discharge limits or local water stress.

Why it may be material

Water scarcity and tighter discharge limits can raise expenditure for abstraction, treatment chemicals, sludge disposal and sewer charges, require investment in reuse or pre-treatment systems, and create liabilities or production constraints after permit breaches. Water and effluent performance can also affect retailer audits, local acceptance and insurance after wastewater incidents.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach water bodies.
  2. Potential effects may reach affected communities.
  3. Potential effects may reach ecosystems.
  4. Potential effects may reach future generations.
  5. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Affected communities, Customers / end-users.
  6. The source places the pathway in Own operations.

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may change operating costs through resource use, controls, remediation or ongoing management.
  2. The topic may require capital expenditure to adapt assets, processes or infrastructure.
  3. The topic may create provisions, penalties, remediation costs, claims or other liabilities.
  4. The topic may affect demand, pricing, market access or product and service revenue.
  5. The topic may affect asset useful lives, impairment assumptions, valuations or stranded-asset exposure.
  6. The topic may affect insurance availability, coverage terms, premiums or claims.

Questions to test

  • What evidence supports both the impact and financial materiality pathways?
  • Which own operations, assets or decisions create or concentrate the pathway?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on water bodies?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on affected communities?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on ecosystems?
  • What current or proposed regulation could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Water withdrawal, discharge, quality and catchment-impact records
  • Community engagement, grievance and impact records
  • Biodiversity, habitat and ecosystem-impact evidence
  • Long-term scenario, cumulative-impact and intergenerational analysis
  • Operating-cost records and budgets linked to the topic
  • Capital plans, asset adaptation budgets and investment approvals
  • Provision, claim, penalty, remediation and contingent-liability records
  • Revenue, demand, pricing and market-access analysis linked to the topic
  • Asset valuations, useful-life assumptions, impairment tests and stranded-asset analysis
  • Insurance coverage, premium, exclusion and claims records
  • Process-map item (assets): Cleaning, sorting, peeling, milling, blending, cooking, baking, frying, extrusion, pasteurisation, dehydration and freezing lines
  • Process-map item (assets): High-care and high-risk production rooms with controlled hygiene zoning, air handling, positive pressure and temperature control
  • Process-map item (assets): On-site utilities including boilers, refrigeration plants, compressed air systems, water treatment, effluent treatment and waste heat recovery equipment
  • Process-map item (assets): Quality control laboratories for microbiology, allergen testing, water activity, shelf-life testing and contaminant screening
  • Process-map item (assets): Food safety management systems, batch traceability platforms, enterprise resource planning, recipe control and production scheduling software

It may be less material when…

  • Organisation-specific evidence does not support significant scale, severity, likelihood or financial effect.

Affected stakeholders

  • Affected communities
  • Customers / end-users

Users of the information

  • Board / management
  • Investors / creditors
  • Local authorities
  • Regulators

Standards to check

See how companies report it →

Your preliminary screening decision

Saved in this browser. Your notes leave it only when you export the screening.

  • Environment
  • Business-model dependent
  • Moderate industry signal
  • Double materiality

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Control of routine local air emissions from food processing combustion, frying, roasting, smokehouses, standby generators, volatile compounds and odour-generating processes.

How it shows up in this industry

Processed food operations can emit local air pollutants from boilers, fryers, ovens, roasters, smokehouses, standby generators, cleaning activities and odour control systems. Frying fumes, combustion gases, smokehouse emissions and volatile compounds can be material where plants operate near residential areas or under air permits.

Why it may be material

Air emissions can require abatement expenditure, fuel switching, monitoring and permit compliance. Poor control can lead to enforcement, complaints, production limits and reputational harm, especially for bakeries, snack plants, smokehouse operations and sites with ageing boilers or generators.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach the atmosphere.
  2. Potential effects may reach affected communities.
  3. Potential effects may reach workers.
  4. Potential effects may reach ecosystems.
  5. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Affected communities, Employees.
  6. The source places the pathway in Own operations.

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may change operating costs through resource use, controls, remediation or ongoing management.
  2. The topic may require capital expenditure to adapt assets, processes or infrastructure.
  3. The topic may create provisions, penalties, remediation costs, claims or other liabilities.
  4. The topic may affect insurance availability, coverage terms, premiums or claims.
  5. The topic may affect reputation, licences to operate, intellectual property or other intangible value.

Questions to test

  • What evidence supports both the impact and financial materiality pathways?
  • Which own operations, assets or decisions create or concentrate the pathway?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on the atmosphere?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on affected communities?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on workers?
  • What current or proposed regulation could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Emissions, air-quality and atmospheric-impact records linked to the topic
  • Community engagement, grievance and impact records
  • Workforce, health and safety, engagement and grievance records
  • Biodiversity, habitat and ecosystem-impact evidence
  • Operating-cost records and budgets linked to the topic
  • Capital plans, asset adaptation budgets and investment approvals
  • Provision, claim, penalty, remediation and contingent-liability records
  • Insurance coverage, premium, exclusion and claims records
  • Reputation, licence-to-operate, intellectual-property and other intangible-value evidence
  • Process-map item (assets): Cleaning, sorting, peeling, milling, blending, cooking, baking, frying, extrusion, pasteurisation, dehydration and freezing lines
  • Process-map item (assets): High-care and high-risk production rooms with controlled hygiene zoning, air handling, positive pressure and temperature control
  • Process-map item (assets): Quality control laboratories for microbiology, allergen testing, water activity, shelf-life testing and contaminant screening
  • Process-map item (assets): Food safety management systems, batch traceability platforms, enterprise resource planning, recipe control and production scheduling software
  • Process-map item (emerging_pressures): Growing retailer and investor demands for Scope 3 emissions data, farm-level traceability and deforestation-free commodity sourcing

It may be less material when…

  • The organisation's scale, exposure or effects are below the threshold set for further assessment.
  • The relevant business model, activity, asset or product is not present or is not significant.

Affected stakeholders

  • Affected communities
  • Employees

Users of the information

  • Investors / creditors
  • Local authorities
  • Regulators

Standards to check

See how companies report it →

Your preliminary screening decision

Saved in this browser. Your notes leave it only when you export the screening.

  • Environment
  • Business-model dependent
  • Moderate industry signal
  • Double materiality
  • Cross-cutting

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Prevention and response controls for unintended releases of process chemicals, refrigeration gases, fuels and pressurised gases used in beverage manufacturing, storage and site utilities.

How it shows up in this industry

Beverage sites store and use caustic soda, nitric and phosphoric acid, peracetic acid, chlorine-based sanitisers, fuels, carbon dioxide cylinders and ammonia or other refrigerants for chillers and cold stores. Loss of containment can occur around clean-in-place chemical stores, refrigeration plant, tanks, loading areas, wastewater systems and fuel storage.

Why it may be material

Although beverage processing is not as high-hazard as petrochemicals, releases from refrigeration systems, pressurised gases and cleaning chemicals can cause acute harm, site shutdowns, enforcement and clean-up liabilities. The issue is materially different from routine effluent because it concerns unintended incidents and emergency controls.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach workers.
  2. Potential effects may reach contractors.
  3. Potential effects may reach affected communities.
  4. Potential effects may reach emergency responders.
  5. Potential effects may reach water bodies.
  6. Potential effects may reach soil and groundwater.
  7. Potential effects may reach the atmosphere.
  8. Potential effects may reach ecosystems.
  9. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Affected communities, Contractors, Employees.
  10. The source places the pathway in Own operations.

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may create provisions, penalties, remediation costs, claims or other liabilities.
  2. The topic may affect insurance availability, coverage terms, premiums or claims.
  3. The topic may change operating costs through resource use, controls, remediation or ongoing management.
  4. The topic may require capital expenditure to adapt assets, processes or infrastructure.
  5. The topic may affect asset useful lives, impairment assumptions, valuations or stranded-asset exposure.

Questions to test

  • What evidence supports both the impact and financial materiality pathways?
  • Which own operations, assets or decisions create or concentrate the pathway?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on workers?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on contractors?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on affected communities?
  • What current or proposed regulation could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Workforce, health and safety, engagement and grievance records
  • Contractor working-condition, incident and engagement records
  • Community engagement, grievance and impact records
  • Emergency-response plans, incident logs and responder feedback
  • Water withdrawal, discharge, quality and catchment-impact records
  • Soil and groundwater monitoring, incident and remediation records
  • Emissions, air-quality and atmospheric-impact records linked to the topic
  • Biodiversity, habitat and ecosystem-impact evidence
  • Provision, claim, penalty, remediation and contingent-liability records
  • Insurance coverage, premium, exclusion and claims records
  • Operating-cost records and budgets linked to the topic
  • Capital plans, asset adaptation budgets and investment approvals
  • Asset valuations, useful-life assumptions, impairment tests and stranded-asset analysis
  • Process-map item (assets): Clean-in-place systems, caustic and acid chemical stores, compressed air plants, boilers, chillers and refrigeration systems
  • Process-map item (assets): Enterprise resource planning, batch traceability, recipe management, allergen control and retailer order systems
  • Process-map item (external_impacts): Wastewater with high biochemical oxygen demand, chemical oxygen demand, sugar residues, colour, acidity and cleaning chemicals entering municipal or on-site treatment systems
  • Process-map item (external_impacts): Chemical spill risks from caustic soda, acids, sanitiser, ammonia refrigeration systems, carbon dioxide cylinders and fuel storage
  • Process-map item (external_impacts): Food loss and organic residues from out-of-specification batches, expired stock, returned goods and damaged packaging

It may be less material when…

  • The organisation's scale, exposure or effects are below the threshold set for further assessment.
  • The relevant business model, activity, asset or product is not present or is not significant.

Affected stakeholders

  • Affected communities
  • Contractors
  • Employees

Users of the information

  • Board / management
  • Local authorities
  • Regulators

Standards to check

See how companies report it →

Your preliminary screening decision

Saved in this browser. Your notes leave it only when you export the screening.

  • Environment
  • Business-model dependent
  • Moderate industry signal
  • Double materiality

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Adaptation and resilience planning for physical climate hazards affecting beverage manufacturing sites, utilities, warehouses, water supplies, wastewater systems and distribution interfaces.

How it shows up in this industry

Beverage operations depend on continuous water treatment, pasteurisation, refrigeration, compressed air, packaging lines, warehouses and high-volume dispatch to retailers and food-service customers. Flooding, heatwaves, drought, storms and wildfire smoke can disrupt water availability, cold stores, ingredient deliveries, wastewater treatment, staff safety and customer supply commitments.

Why it may be material

Physical climate events can interrupt production, raise insurance costs and force adaptation capex at water-dependent bottling plants and distribution depots. The issue is distinct from climate mitigation because it concerns operational resilience, site design and emergency preparedness under changing hazard profiles.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach workers.
  2. Potential effects may reach contractors.
  3. Potential effects may reach affected communities.
  4. Potential effects may reach water bodies.
  5. Potential effects may reach future generations.
  6. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Affected communities, Contractors, Customers / end-users, Employees.
  7. The source places the pathway in Own operations, Upstream, Downstream, Cross value chain.

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may affect demand, pricing, market access or product and service revenue.
  2. The topic may change operating costs through resource use, controls, remediation or ongoing management.
  3. The topic may require capital expenditure to adapt assets, processes or infrastructure.
  4. The topic may affect insurance availability, coverage terms, premiums or claims.
  5. The topic may affect asset useful lives, impairment assumptions, valuations or stranded-asset exposure.
  6. The topic may affect access to finance, funding terms or the cost of capital.

Questions to test

  • What evidence supports both the impact and financial materiality pathways?
  • Which own operations, assets or decisions create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Which upstream activities, suppliers or inputs create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Which products, services, customers or end uses create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Where across the value chain is the pathway most significant?
  • What scientific evidence or consensus could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Workforce, health and safety, engagement and grievance records
  • Contractor working-condition, incident and engagement records
  • Community engagement, grievance and impact records
  • Water withdrawal, discharge, quality and catchment-impact records
  • Long-term scenario, cumulative-impact and intergenerational analysis
  • Revenue, demand, pricing and market-access analysis linked to the topic
  • Operating-cost records and budgets linked to the topic
  • Capital plans, asset adaptation budgets and investment approvals
  • Insurance coverage, premium, exclusion and claims records
  • Asset valuations, useful-life assumptions, impairment tests and stranded-asset analysis
  • Funding terms, lender or investor requirements and cost-of-capital analysis
  • Process-map item (assets): On-site wastewater treatment plants with balancing tanks, dissolved air flotation, biological treatment and sludge handling
  • Process-map item (customers): Industrial beverage blenders or co-packers buying concentrates, syrups or semi-finished bases
  • Process-map item (emerging_pressures): Growing scrutiny of bottled water abstraction rights in water-stressed catchments and drought-prone regions
  • Process-map item (emerging_pressures): Climate-related volatility in citrus, sugar, coffee, tea, cocoa, fruit purée and aluminium supply chains
  • Process-map item (external_impacts): Wastewater with high biochemical oxygen demand, chemical oxygen demand, sugar residues, colour, acidity and cleaning chemicals entering municipal or on-site treatment systems

It may be less material when…

  • The organisation's scale, exposure or effects are below the threshold set for further assessment.
  • The relevant business model, activity, asset or product is not present or is not significant.
  • The organisation has no meaningful exposure to or influence over the relevant upstream or downstream pathway.
  • The emerging signal has not yet created a relevant exposure, impact or financial effect for the organisation.

Affected stakeholders

  • Affected communities
  • Contractors
  • Customers / end-users
  • Employees

Users of the information

  • Board / management
  • Investors / creditors
  • Regulators

Standards to check

See how companies report it →

Your preliminary screening decision

Saved in this browser. Your notes leave it only when you export the screening.

  • Environment
  • Business-model dependent
  • Moderate industry signal
  • Double materiality
  • Cross-cutting

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Prevention, containment and remediation of unintended environmental releases from alcoholic beverage production, storage, warehousing and loading activities.

How it shows up in this industry

Alcoholic beverage sites store ethanol, caustic soda, peracetic acid, detergents, fuels, oils, by-products and high-strength organic liquids around tank farms, stillhouses, bottling halls, warehouses, loading bays and effluent treatment plants. Spills, drain misconnections or contaminated firewater can create soil, groundwater and watercourse impacts even where routine effluent permits are otherwise compliant.

Why it may be material

Unintended releases can create clean-up liabilities, permit action, reputational damage and insurance scrutiny. The issue is material at sites with bulk spirit storage, chemical stores, old drainage systems, maturation warehouses or sensitive receiving waters.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach soil and groundwater.
  2. Potential effects may reach water bodies.
  3. Potential effects may reach ecosystems.
  4. Potential effects may reach affected communities.
  5. Potential effects may reach emergency responders.
  6. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Affected communities.
  7. The source places the pathway in Own operations.

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may create provisions, penalties, remediation costs, claims or other liabilities.
  2. The topic may require capital expenditure to adapt assets, processes or infrastructure.
  3. The topic may change operating costs through resource use, controls, remediation or ongoing management.
  4. The topic may affect insurance availability, coverage terms, premiums or claims.
  5. The topic may affect asset useful lives, impairment assumptions, valuations or stranded-asset exposure.
  6. The topic may affect reputation, licences to operate, intellectual property or other intangible value.

Questions to test

  • What evidence supports both the impact and financial materiality pathways?
  • Which own operations, assets or decisions create or concentrate the pathway?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on soil and groundwater?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on water bodies?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on ecosystems?
  • What current or proposed regulation could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Soil and groundwater monitoring, incident and remediation records
  • Water withdrawal, discharge, quality and catchment-impact records
  • Biodiversity, habitat and ecosystem-impact evidence
  • Community engagement, grievance and impact records
  • Emergency-response plans, incident logs and responder feedback
  • Provision, claim, penalty, remediation and contingent-liability records
  • Capital plans, asset adaptation budgets and investment approvals
  • Operating-cost records and budgets linked to the topic
  • Insurance coverage, premium, exclusion and claims records
  • Asset valuations, useful-life assumptions, impairment tests and stranded-asset analysis
  • Reputation, licence-to-operate, intellectual-property and other intangible-value evidence
  • Process-map item (external_impacts): High water abstraction for mashing, dilution, rinsing, cooling, cleaning and vineyard irrigation in stressed catchments
  • Process-map item (external_impacts): High-strength wastewater with alcohol, sugars, yeast, cleaning chemicals and suspended solids that can deplete oxygen in receiving waters
  • Process-map item (external_impacts): Fire, explosion and spill risks from high-strength ethanol storage, cask warehouses, tanker loading and vapour-rich areas
  • Process-map item (financial_channels): Energy and carbon costs for brewing heat, distillation, refrigeration, glass-heavy packaging and warehouse climate control
  • Process-map item (financial_channels): Product recall, contamination, mislabelling and allergen liabilities involving sulphites, gluten, methanol or cleaning chemical residues

It may be less material when…

  • The organisation's scale, exposure or effects are below the threshold set for further assessment.
  • The relevant business model, activity, asset or product is not present or is not significant.

Affected stakeholders

  • Affected communities

Users of the information

  • Board / management
  • Investors / creditors
  • Local authorities
  • Regulators

Standards to check

See how companies report it →

Your preliminary screening decision

Saved in this browser. Your notes leave it only when you export the screening.

  • Environment
  • Emerging issue
  • Moderate industry signal
  • Double materiality

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Adaptation of ingredient sourcing, specifications, approved substitutions and recipe design to manage rising climate disruption in agricultural inputs used by processed food manufacturers.

How it shows up in this industry

Processed food manufacturers depend on climate-sensitive commodities including cocoa, coffee, grains, vegetable oils, tomatoes, potatoes, fruit and sugar crops. Recipe control systems, sensory panels, retailer specifications, allergen segregation and shelf-life validation can make rapid ingredient substitution difficult when drought, heat, floods or crop disease disrupt supply, quality or mycotoxin prevalence.

Why it may be material

Climate-related crop shocks affect input availability, price, quality, contaminant levels and retailer service levels. Manufacturers with rigid recipes, private-label contracts or short shelf-life chilled ranges may have limited room to absorb disruption without reformulation, customer approval or additional working capital.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach consumers.
  2. Potential effects may reach supply-chain workers.
  3. Potential effects may reach affected communities.
  4. Potential effects may reach ecosystems.
  5. Potential effects may reach future generations.
  6. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Customers / end-users, Suppliers.
  7. The source places the pathway in Upstream, Own operations, Cross value chain.

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may affect demand, pricing, market access or product and service revenue.
  2. The topic may change operating costs through resource use, controls, remediation or ongoing management.
  3. The topic may require capital expenditure to adapt assets, processes or infrastructure.
  4. The topic may affect insurance availability, coverage terms, premiums or claims.
  5. The topic may affect asset useful lives, impairment assumptions, valuations or stranded-asset exposure.
  6. The topic may affect reputation, licences to operate, intellectual property or other intangible value.

Questions to test

  • What evidence supports both the impact and financial materiality pathways?
  • Which upstream activities, suppliers or inputs create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Which own operations, assets or decisions create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Where across the value chain is the pathway most significant?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on consumers?
  • What scientific evidence or consensus could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Consumer outcome, complaint and product-impact records
  • Supplier workforce, audit, grievance and remediation records
  • Community engagement, grievance and impact records
  • Biodiversity, habitat and ecosystem-impact evidence
  • Long-term scenario, cumulative-impact and intergenerational analysis
  • Revenue, demand, pricing and market-access analysis linked to the topic
  • Operating-cost records and budgets linked to the topic
  • Capital plans, asset adaptation budgets and investment approvals
  • Insurance coverage, premium, exclusion and claims records
  • Asset valuations, useful-life assumptions, impairment tests and stranded-asset analysis
  • Reputation, licence-to-operate, intellectual-property and other intangible-value evidence
  • Process-map item (assets): Ingredient intake bays, silos, chilled stores and frozen stores for grains, oils, dairy ingredients, meat, fruit, vegetables, sugar, salt and additives
  • Process-map item (assets): Food safety management systems, batch traceability platforms, enterprise resource planning, recipe control and production scheduling software
  • Process-map item (assets): Brands, private-label supply contracts, product formulations, recipes, sensory panels and consumer insight data
  • Process-map item (customers): Quick-service restaurant chains and contract caterers using sauces, bakery items, frozen meals, snacks and prepared ingredients
  • Process-map item (emerging_pressures): Climate-related supplier disruption affecting cocoa, coffee, grains, vegetable oils, tomatoes, potatoes, fruit and sugar crops

It may be less material when…

  • The organisation's scale, exposure or effects are below the threshold set for further assessment.
  • The organisation has no meaningful exposure to or influence over the relevant upstream pathway.
  • The emerging signal has not yet created a relevant exposure, impact or financial effect for the organisation.

Affected stakeholders

  • Customers / end-users
  • Suppliers

Users of the information

  • Board / management
  • Investors / creditors
  • Regulators

Standards to check

See how companies report it →

Your preliminary screening decision

Saved in this browser. Your notes leave it only when you export the screening.

  • Social
  • Industry baseline
  • Strong industry signal
  • Double materiality

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Transparent and accurate consumer information on alcohol content, health warnings, ingredients, calories, pregnancy advice and relevant allergens or intolerances across alcoholic and low or no alcohol products.

How it shows up in this industry

Alcoholic beverage producers sell beer, cider, wine, spirits, liqueurs and ready-to-drink products where ethanol itself is health-relevant, while sulphites, gluten, fining agents, residual sugars and alcohol strength are managed through quality laboratories, labelling lines and market-specific export rules.

Why it may be material

Tighter health labelling, calorie disclosure, ingredient disclosure and pregnancy warning requirements can affect market access, relabelling costs, consumer trust and liability exposure. The issue is distinct from promotion because it concerns the adequacy and accuracy of product information at the point of sale and use.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach consumers.
  2. Potential effects may reach affected communities.
  3. Potential effects may reach future generations.
  4. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Customers / end-users.
  5. The source places the pathway in Own operations, Downstream, Cross value chain.

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may affect demand, pricing, market access or product and service revenue.
  2. The topic may create provisions, penalties, remediation costs, claims or other liabilities.
  3. The topic may affect reputation, licences to operate, intellectual property or other intangible value.
  4. The topic may change operating costs through resource use, controls, remediation or ongoing management.

Questions to test

  • What evidence supports both the impact and financial materiality pathways?
  • Which own operations, assets or decisions create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Which products, services, customers or end uses create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Where across the value chain is the pathway most significant?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on consumers?
  • What current or proposed regulation could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Consumer outcome, complaint and product-impact records
  • Community engagement, grievance and impact records
  • Long-term scenario, cumulative-impact and intergenerational analysis
  • Revenue, demand, pricing and market-access analysis linked to the topic
  • Provision, claim, penalty, remediation and contingent-liability records
  • Reputation, licence-to-operate, intellectual-property and other intangible-value evidence
  • Operating-cost records and budgets linked to the topic
  • Process-map item (assets): Quality laboratories for microbiology, sensory testing, alcohol strength, methanol, sulphites and contaminant analysis
  • Process-map item (assets): Brand portfolios, geographical indications, recipes, yeast strains, maturation know-how and consumer data platforms
  • Process-map item (customers): E-commerce platforms, subscription clubs and direct-to-consumer cellar door or taproom customers
  • Process-map item (customers): Export distributors and local market brand owners in regulated alcohol markets
  • Process-map item (customers): Consumers of beer, cider, wine, spirits, liqueurs, ready-to-drink cocktails and low or no alcohol variants

It may be less material when…

  • Organisation-specific evidence does not support significant scale, severity, likelihood or financial effect.
  • The organisation has no meaningful exposure to or influence over the relevant downstream pathway.
  • The emerging signal has not yet created a relevant exposure, impact or financial effect for the organisation.

Affected stakeholders

  • Customers / end-users

Users of the information

  • Board / management
  • Investors / creditors
  • NGOs / civil society
  • Regulators

Standards to check

See how companies report it →

Your preliminary screening decision

Saved in this browser. Your notes leave it only when you export the screening.

  • Social
  • Industry baseline
  • Strong industry signal
  • Double materiality

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Occupational health and safety for employees and contractors in production, packaging, laboratories, warehouses and internal logistics.

How it shows up in this industry

Breweries, distilleries, wineries, cideries and packaging halls expose employees and contractors to hot liquids, steam, caustic soda, peracetic acid, detergents, sterilants, carbon dioxide accumulation, confined spaces, noise, rotating equipment, glass breakage, forklifts, heavy pallets and seasonal maintenance pressures.

Why it may be material

Alcohol production and packaging involve multiple high-frequency occupational hazards, including hot liquids, cleaning chemicals, confined spaces and moving equipment. Poor control can cause serious injuries, regulatory enforcement, compensation claims and production disruption.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach workers.
  2. Potential effects may reach contractors.
  3. Potential effects may reach emergency responders.
  4. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Contractors, Employees, Trade unions.
  5. The source places the pathway in Own operations.

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may change operating costs through resource use, controls, remediation or ongoing management.
  2. The topic may create provisions, penalties, remediation costs, claims or other liabilities.
  3. The topic may affect insurance availability, coverage terms, premiums or claims.
  4. The topic may affect reputation, licences to operate, intellectual property or other intangible value.

Questions to test

  • What evidence supports both the impact and financial materiality pathways?
  • Which own operations, assets or decisions create or concentrate the pathway?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on workers?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on contractors?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on emergency responders?
  • What current or proposed regulation could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Workforce, health and safety, engagement and grievance records
  • Contractor working-condition, incident and engagement records
  • Emergency-response plans, incident logs and responder feedback
  • Operating-cost records and budgets linked to the topic
  • Provision, claim, penalty, remediation and contingent-liability records
  • Insurance coverage, premium, exclusion and claims records
  • Reputation, licence-to-operate, intellectual-property and other intangible-value evidence
  • Process-map item (assets): Bottling, canning, kegging and bag-in-box packaging lines with fillers, cappers, seamers, labellers and pasteurisers
  • Process-map item (assets): Quality laboratories for microbiology, sensory testing, alcohol strength, methanol, sulphites and contaminant analysis
  • Process-map item (customers): Export distributors and local market brand owners in regulated alcohol markets
  • Process-map item (customers): Consumers of beer, cider, wine, spirits, liqueurs, ready-to-drink cocktails and low or no alcohol variants
  • Process-map item (emerging_pressures): Tighter alcohol health labelling, calorie disclosure, ingredient disclosure and pregnancy warning requirements

It may be less material when…

  • Organisation-specific evidence does not support significant scale, severity, likelihood or financial effect.

Affected stakeholders

  • Contractors
  • Employees
  • Trade unions

Users of the information

  • Board / management
  • Regulators

Standards to check

See how companies report it →

Your preliminary screening decision

Saved in this browser. Your notes leave it only when you export the screening.

  • Social
  • Industry baseline
  • Strong industry signal
  • Double materiality

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Controls in brewing, winemaking, distilling, packaging and quality-release processes that prevent unsafe, contaminated, incorrectly labelled or compositionally non-conforming alcoholic beverages reaching consumers and trade customers.

How it shows up in this industry

Alcoholic beverage producers operate breweries, wineries, distilleries, maturation facilities and packaging lines where laboratories and release systems verify microbiology, sensory quality, alcohol strength, methanol, sulphites, allergens, fining-agent residues and contaminants. Product safety failures can arise from raw-material mycotoxins, cleaning chemical residues, incorrect dilution or blending, refermentation in bottles or kegs, glass breakage, closure defects and inaccurate ingredient or alcohol-content information.

Why it may be material

A product safety failure or composition labelling breach can rapidly remove beer, wine, cider or spirits from retailers, distributors, export channels and hospitality customers, with direct liability and brand damage. Food safety certification, batch traceability within production and robust laboratory verification are commercial prerequisites for major retailers, distributors and regulated export markets.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach consumers.
  2. Potential effects may reach downstream users.
  3. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Business partners, Customers / end-users.
  4. The source places the pathway in Own operations, Upstream, Downstream.

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may affect demand, pricing, market access or product and service revenue.
  2. The topic may create provisions, penalties, remediation costs, claims or other liabilities.
  3. The topic may change operating costs through resource use, controls, remediation or ongoing management.
  4. The topic may affect reputation, licences to operate, intellectual property or other intangible value.
  5. The topic may affect insurance availability, coverage terms, premiums or claims.

Questions to test

  • What evidence supports both the impact and financial materiality pathways?
  • Which own operations, assets or decisions create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Which upstream activities, suppliers or inputs create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Which products, services, customers or end uses create or concentrate the pathway?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on consumers?
  • What current or proposed regulation could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Consumer outcome, complaint and product-impact records
  • Downstream-user outcome, complaint and product-use evidence
  • Revenue, demand, pricing and market-access analysis linked to the topic
  • Provision, claim, penalty, remediation and contingent-liability records
  • Operating-cost records and budgets linked to the topic
  • Reputation, licence-to-operate, intellectual-property and other intangible-value evidence
  • Insurance coverage, premium, exclusion and claims records
  • Process-map item (assets): Bottling, canning, kegging and bag-in-box packaging lines with fillers, cappers, seamers, labellers and pasteurisers
  • Process-map item (assets): Quality laboratories for microbiology, sensory testing, alcohol strength, methanol, sulphites and contaminant analysis
  • Process-map item (emerging_pressures): Tighter alcohol health labelling, calorie disclosure, ingredient disclosure and pregnancy warning requirements
  • Process-map item (external_impacts): Packaging waste and litter from glass bottles, cans, closures, labels, cardboard, plastic rings, shrink wrap and single-use kegs
  • Process-map item (financial_channels): Energy and carbon costs for brewing heat, distillation, refrigeration, glass-heavy packaging and warehouse climate control

It may be less material when…

  • Organisation-specific evidence does not support significant scale, severity, likelihood or financial effect.
  • The organisation has no meaningful exposure to or influence over the relevant upstream or downstream pathway.

Affected stakeholders

  • Business partners
  • Customers / end-users

Users of the information

  • Board / management
  • Media
  • Regulators

Standards to check

See how companies report it →

Your preliminary screening decision

Saved in this browser. Your notes leave it only when you export the screening.

  • Social
  • Industry baseline
  • Strong industry signal
  • Double materiality

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Management of beverage product safety, contamination prevention, allergen segregation, process verification, physical hazard control and batch traceability across processing and filling operations.

How it shows up in this industry

Beverage plants operate syrup rooms, ingredient dosing skids, pasteurisation, ultra-high temperature and aseptic lines, can fillers, glass bottling lines, carton fillers, pouch lines, clean-in-place systems and quality laboratories. Juice, plant-based drinks, kombucha, shared allergen lines, glass bottles, carbonated containers and fountain beverages create distinct product safety and recall pathways.

Why it may be material

Contamination, mislabelling or processing failures can lead to immediate product withdrawal, destruction of stock, retailer fines, liability claims, higher insurance cost and lasting brand damage. Major retailers often require BRCGS, GFSI-benchmarked or ISO 22000 systems as a condition of supply.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach consumers.
  2. Potential effects may reach downstream users.
  3. Potential effects may reach workers.
  4. Potential effects may reach contractors.
  5. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Business partners, Customers / end-users.
  6. The source places the pathway in Own operations, Downstream, Cross value chain.

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may affect demand, pricing, market access or product and service revenue.
  2. The topic may change operating costs through resource use, controls, remediation or ongoing management.
  3. The topic may require capital expenditure to adapt assets, processes or infrastructure.
  4. The topic may create provisions, penalties, remediation costs, claims or other liabilities.
  5. The topic may affect insurance availability, coverage terms, premiums or claims.
  6. The topic may affect reputation, licences to operate, intellectual property or other intangible value.

Questions to test

  • What evidence supports both the impact and financial materiality pathways?
  • Which own operations, assets or decisions create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Which products, services, customers or end uses create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Where across the value chain is the pathway most significant?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on consumers?
  • What current or proposed regulation could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Consumer outcome, complaint and product-impact records
  • Downstream-user outcome, complaint and product-use evidence
  • Workforce, health and safety, engagement and grievance records
  • Contractor working-condition, incident and engagement records
  • Revenue, demand, pricing and market-access analysis linked to the topic
  • Operating-cost records and budgets linked to the topic
  • Capital plans, asset adaptation budgets and investment approvals
  • Provision, claim, penalty, remediation and contingent-liability records
  • Insurance coverage, premium, exclusion and claims records
  • Reputation, licence-to-operate, intellectual-property and other intangible-value evidence
  • Process-map item (assets): Quality laboratories for microbiology, brix, pH, carbonation, sensory testing and packaging migration checks
  • Process-map item (assets): Enterprise resource planning, batch traceability, recipe management, allergen control and retailer order systems
  • Process-map item (customers): Food-service operators, quick-service restaurants, cafés, cinemas, hotels and contract caterers using packaged and fountain beverages
  • Process-map item (customers): Industrial beverage blenders or co-packers buying concentrates, syrups or semi-finished bases
  • Process-map item (emerging_pressures): Rising recycled PET demand, food-grade rPET shortages and price premiums driven by mandatory recycled content targets

It may be less material when…

  • Organisation-specific evidence does not support significant scale, severity, likelihood or financial effect.
  • The organisation has no meaningful exposure to or influence over the relevant downstream pathway.

Affected stakeholders

  • Business partners
  • Customers / end-users

Users of the information

  • Board / management
  • Investors / creditors
  • Media
  • Regulators

Standards to check

See how companies report it →

Your preliminary screening decision

Saved in this browser. Your notes leave it only when you export the screening.

  • Social
  • Industry baseline
  • Strong industry signal
  • Double materiality

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Consumer and public-health impacts from the nutritional, stimulant and acidity profile of non-alcoholic beverages, including reformulation with alternative sweeteners and functional ingredients.

How it shows up in this industry

Non-alcoholic beverage portfolios include carbonated soft drinks, juices, energy drinks, sports drinks, ready-to-drink tea and coffee, kombucha, mixers, flavoured waters and functional drinks. Formulation choices involve sugar, glucose-fructose syrup, acids, caffeine, vitamins, minerals, botanical extracts and sweeteners such as aspartame, acesulfame K, sucralose, steviol glycosides and saccharin.

Why it may be material

Soft drinks levies, sugar taxes, retailer nutrition thresholds, youth marketing restrictions and consumer trust debates can change margins, channel access and portfolio mix. Reformulation can reduce levy exposure but may create new taste, labelling, toxicology monitoring and public confidence challenges.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach consumers.
  2. Potential effects may reach affected communities.
  3. Potential effects may reach future generations.
  4. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Customers / end-users.
  5. The source places the pathway in Own operations, Downstream.

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may affect demand, pricing, market access or product and service revenue.
  2. The topic may change operating costs through resource use, controls, remediation or ongoing management.
  3. The topic may require capital expenditure to adapt assets, processes or infrastructure.
  4. The topic may create provisions, penalties, remediation costs, claims or other liabilities.
  5. The topic may affect reputation, licences to operate, intellectual property or other intangible value.
  6. The topic may affect access to finance, funding terms or the cost of capital.

Questions to test

  • What evidence supports both the impact and financial materiality pathways?
  • Which own operations, assets or decisions create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Which products, services, customers or end uses create or concentrate the pathway?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on consumers?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on affected communities?
  • What current or proposed regulation could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Consumer outcome, complaint and product-impact records
  • Community engagement, grievance and impact records
  • Long-term scenario, cumulative-impact and intergenerational analysis
  • Revenue, demand, pricing and market-access analysis linked to the topic
  • Operating-cost records and budgets linked to the topic
  • Capital plans, asset adaptation budgets and investment approvals
  • Provision, claim, penalty, remediation and contingent-liability records
  • Reputation, licence-to-operate, intellectual-property and other intangible-value evidence
  • Funding terms, lender or investor requirements and cost-of-capital analysis
  • Process-map item (assets): Syrup rooms with bulk sugar silos, high-fructose syrup tanks, ingredient dosing skids and flavour concentrate stores
  • Process-map item (customers): Food-service operators, quick-service restaurants, cafés, cinemas, hotels and contract caterers using packaged and fountain beverages
  • Process-map item (customers): Online grocery platforms and direct-to-consumer subscription customers
  • Process-map item (customers): Export distributors and importers handling regional soft drink, juice, bottled water and functional drink brands
  • Process-map item (customers): Industrial beverage blenders or co-packers buying concentrates, syrups or semi-finished bases

It may be less material when…

  • Organisation-specific evidence does not support significant scale, severity, likelihood or financial effect.
  • The organisation has no meaningful exposure to or influence over the relevant downstream pathway.

Affected stakeholders

  • Customers / end-users

Users of the information

  • Board / management
  • Investors / creditors
  • Media
  • NGOs / civil society
  • Regulators

Standards to check

See how companies report it →

Your preliminary screening decision

Saved in this browser. Your notes leave it only when you export the screening.

  • Social
  • Industry baseline
  • Strong industry signal
  • Double materiality

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Protection of employees and contractors from safety hazards in beverage processing, refrigeration, warehousing, maintenance, dispatch and customer-site equipment servicing.

How it shows up in this industry

Non-alcoholic beverage facilities combine wet processing areas, syrup rooms, filling halls, clean-in-place systems, caustic and acid stores, ammonia or carbon dioxide refrigeration, compressed air, boilers, palletisers, stretch-wrapping, automated storage, forklift traffic and heavy case handling. Service staff may also maintain vending machines, coolers, fountain equipment and carbon dioxide cylinders at customer sites.

Why it may be material

Safety performance affects downtime, compensation claims, enforcement exposure, insurance premiums, labour retention and customer confidence in high-volume beverage plants and warehouses. Ammonia leaks, pressure-system failures, severe forklift incidents and repetitive handling injuries can create business interruption and reputational loss.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach workers.
  2. Potential effects may reach contractors.
  3. Potential effects may reach emergency responders.
  4. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Contractors, Employees, Trade unions.
  5. The source places the pathway in Own operations, Downstream.

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may change operating costs through resource use, controls, remediation or ongoing management.
  2. The topic may create provisions, penalties, remediation costs, claims or other liabilities.
  3. The topic may affect insurance availability, coverage terms, premiums or claims.
  4. The topic may affect demand, pricing, market access or product and service revenue.
  5. The topic may affect reputation, licences to operate, intellectual property or other intangible value.

Questions to test

  • What evidence supports both the impact and financial materiality pathways?
  • Which own operations, assets or decisions create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Which products, services, customers or end uses create or concentrate the pathway?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on workers?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on contractors?
  • What current or proposed regulation could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Workforce, health and safety, engagement and grievance records
  • Contractor working-condition, incident and engagement records
  • Emergency-response plans, incident logs and responder feedback
  • Operating-cost records and budgets linked to the topic
  • Provision, claim, penalty, remediation and contingent-liability records
  • Insurance coverage, premium, exclusion and claims records
  • Revenue, demand, pricing and market-access analysis linked to the topic
  • Reputation, licence-to-operate, intellectual-property and other intangible-value evidence
  • Process-map item (assets): Clean-in-place systems, caustic and acid chemical stores, compressed air plants, boilers, chillers and refrigeration systems
  • Process-map item (customers): Consumers of carbonated soft drinks, bottled water, juices, energy drinks, sports drinks, mixers, ready-to-drink tea and coffee, kombucha and plant-based drinks
  • Process-map item (customers): Industrial beverage blenders or co-packers buying concentrates, syrups or semi-finished bases
  • Process-map item (emerging_pressures): Retailer pressure for lower-carbon logistics, electric refrigeration, lightweight packaging and verified product carbon data
  • Process-map item (emerging_pressures): Potential litigation or regulatory action over health claims, functional ingredients, caffeine warnings and misleading naturalness claims

It may be less material when…

  • Organisation-specific evidence does not support significant scale, severity, likelihood or financial effect.
  • The organisation has no meaningful exposure to or influence over the relevant downstream pathway.

Affected stakeholders

  • Contractors
  • Employees
  • Trade unions

Users of the information

  • Board / management
  • Investors / creditors
  • Regulators

Standards to check

See how companies report it →

Your preliminary screening decision

Saved in this browser. Your notes leave it only when you export the screening.

  • Social
  • Industry baseline
  • Strong industry signal
  • Double materiality
  • Cross-cutting

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Prevention of catastrophic fire, explosion, pressure and loss-of-containment events at high-hazard alcoholic beverage production, storage and loading assets.

How it shows up in this industry

Distilleries, maturation warehouses, bonded stores, spirit receivers, cask inventories and tanker loading areas can hold high-strength ethanol and create vapour-rich atmospheres. Breweries and wineries also handle carbon dioxide, pressure systems and combustible dust or vapour interfaces, while large spirit inventories can create severe fire-load and business interruption exposure.

Why it may be material

A distillery fire, ethanol vapour explosion, carbon dioxide release, tanker loading spill or warehouse collapse can injure workers or neighbours, destroy ageing stock, trigger investigation and materially increase insurance premiums. Long-maturation spirits create particularly high asset value and working-capital exposure in cask inventories.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach workers.
  2. Potential effects may reach contractors.
  3. Potential effects may reach affected communities.
  4. Potential effects may reach emergency responders.
  5. Potential effects may reach soil and groundwater.
  6. Potential effects may reach water bodies.
  7. Potential effects may reach the atmosphere.
  8. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Affected communities, Contractors, Employees.
  9. The source places the pathway in Own operations.

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may create provisions, penalties, remediation costs, claims or other liabilities.
  2. The topic may affect insurance availability, coverage terms, premiums or claims.
  3. The topic may require capital expenditure to adapt assets, processes or infrastructure.
  4. The topic may change operating costs through resource use, controls, remediation or ongoing management.
  5. The topic may affect asset useful lives, impairment assumptions, valuations or stranded-asset exposure.
  6. The topic may affect demand, pricing, market access or product and service revenue.
  7. The topic may affect reputation, licences to operate, intellectual property or other intangible value.

Questions to test

  • What evidence supports both the impact and financial materiality pathways?
  • Which own operations, assets or decisions create or concentrate the pathway?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on workers?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on contractors?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on affected communities?
  • What current or proposed regulation could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Workforce, health and safety, engagement and grievance records
  • Contractor working-condition, incident and engagement records
  • Community engagement, grievance and impact records
  • Emergency-response plans, incident logs and responder feedback
  • Soil and groundwater monitoring, incident and remediation records
  • Water withdrawal, discharge, quality and catchment-impact records
  • Emissions, air-quality and atmospheric-impact records linked to the topic
  • Provision, claim, penalty, remediation and contingent-liability records
  • Insurance coverage, premium, exclusion and claims records
  • Capital plans, asset adaptation budgets and investment approvals
  • Operating-cost records and budgets linked to the topic
  • Asset valuations, useful-life assumptions, impairment tests and stranded-asset analysis
  • Revenue, demand, pricing and market-access analysis linked to the topic
  • Reputation, licence-to-operate, intellectual-property and other intangible-value evidence
  • Process-map item (assets): Maturation warehouses, bonded stores, rack houses and cask or barrel inventories
  • Process-map item (emerging_pressures): Water scarcity in barley-growing regions, hop regions, vineyards and distillery catchments
  • Process-map item (external_impacts): Odour, noise, traffic and vapour emissions affecting neighbours around breweries, distilleries, wineries and maturation warehouses
  • Process-map item (external_impacts): Fire, explosion and spill risks from high-strength ethanol storage, cask warehouses, tanker loading and vapour-rich areas
  • Process-map item (financial_channels): Excise duty, customs controls, bonded warehouse compliance and tax stamp requirements affecting cash flow and market access

It may be less material when…

  • Organisation-specific evidence does not support significant scale, severity, likelihood or financial effect.

Affected stakeholders

  • Affected communities
  • Contractors
  • Employees

Users of the information

  • Board / management
  • Investors / creditors
  • Local authorities
  • Regulators

Standards to check

See how companies report it →

Your preliminary screening decision

Saved in this browser. Your notes leave it only when you export the screening.

  • Social
  • Industry baseline
  • Strong industry signal
  • Double materiality
  • Cross-cutting

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Controls that prevent unsafe processed foods from reaching customers, including supplier approval, raw material sampling, allergen identification and segregation, environmental monitoring, sanitation, in-line inspection, microbiological and contaminant testing, packaging integrity, shelf-life validation, traceability and recall execution.

How it shows up in this industry

Processed food plants operate high-care and high-risk rooms, controlled hygiene zoning, thermal and non-thermal preservation lines, filling and packing equipment, quality control laboratories, batch traceability systems and cold-chain dispatch. Ready meals, chilled foods, canned goods, bakery items, snacks and frozen foods carry exposure to pathogens, undeclared allergens, contaminants, foreign bodies, packaging migration, shelf-life failure and temperature-control failures across own factories, co-manufacturers and distribution networks.

Why it may be material

Food safety failures can trigger recalls, retailer delisting, import holds, enforced shutdowns, litigation, insurance exclusions and loss of branded or private-label contracts. The issue also drives recurring expenditure for testing, sanitation, pest management, traceability, hygienic maintenance and audits, and capital expenditure for hygienic redesign, segregation, inspection equipment and controlled environments.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach consumers.
  2. Potential effects may reach downstream users.
  3. Potential effects may reach workers.
  4. Potential effects may reach affected communities.
  5. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Affected communities, Customers / end-users, Suppliers.
  6. The source places the pathway in Own operations, Upstream, Downstream, Cross value chain.

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may affect demand, pricing, market access or product and service revenue.
  2. The topic may change operating costs through resource use, controls, remediation or ongoing management.
  3. The topic may require capital expenditure to adapt assets, processes or infrastructure.
  4. The topic may create provisions, penalties, remediation costs, claims or other liabilities.
  5. The topic may affect insurance availability, coverage terms, premiums or claims.
  6. The topic may affect reputation, licences to operate, intellectual property or other intangible value.

Questions to test

  • What evidence supports both the impact and financial materiality pathways?
  • Which own operations, assets or decisions create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Which upstream activities, suppliers or inputs create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Which products, services, customers or end uses create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Where across the value chain is the pathway most significant?
  • What current or proposed regulation could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Consumer outcome, complaint and product-impact records
  • Downstream-user outcome, complaint and product-use evidence
  • Workforce, health and safety, engagement and grievance records
  • Community engagement, grievance and impact records
  • Revenue, demand, pricing and market-access analysis linked to the topic
  • Operating-cost records and budgets linked to the topic
  • Capital plans, asset adaptation budgets and investment approvals
  • Provision, claim, penalty, remediation and contingent-liability records
  • Insurance coverage, premium, exclusion and claims records
  • Reputation, licence-to-operate, intellectual-property and other intangible-value evidence
  • Process-map item (assets): High-care and high-risk production rooms with controlled hygiene zoning, air handling, positive pressure and temperature control
  • Process-map item (assets): Quality control laboratories for microbiology, allergen testing, water activity, shelf-life testing and contaminant screening
  • Process-map item (assets): Food safety management systems, batch traceability platforms, enterprise resource planning, recipe control and production scheduling software
  • Process-map item (assets): Brands, private-label supply contracts, product formulations, recipes, sensory panels and consumer insight data
  • Process-map item (customers): Industrial food manufacturers buying intermediate products such as fillings, coatings, flavour bases, frozen vegetables, dried mixes and oils

It may be less material when…

  • Organisation-specific evidence does not support significant scale, severity, likelihood or financial effect.
  • The organisation has no meaningful exposure to or influence over the relevant upstream or downstream pathway.

Affected stakeholders

  • Affected communities
  • Customers / end-users
  • Suppliers

Users of the information

  • Board / management
  • Investors / creditors
  • Regulators

Standards to check

See how companies report it →

Your preliminary screening decision

Saved in this browser. Your notes leave it only when you export the screening.

  • Social
  • Industry baseline
  • Strong industry signal
  • Double materiality

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Management of processed food nutrition, reformulation and product communication, including salt, sugar, saturated fat, trans fat, energy density, portion size, additives, claims integrity, labelling clarity and responsible positioning in sensitive channels.

How it shows up in this industry

Processed food portfolios include snacks, confectionery, cereals, bakery products, ready meals, sauces, condiments, frozen meals and chilled prepared foods, many of which are exposed to public health scrutiny over salt, saturated fat, added sugar, energy density, additives, emulsifiers, sweeteners and portion sizes. Product formulations, recipes, sensory panels, consumer insight data and labelling systems are material control points.

Why it may be material

Rules on high fat, salt and sugar foods can restrict advertising, placement and public procurement access. Reformulation can require research and development, ingredient changes, line trials and consumer testing, while misleading nutrition, health, naturalness, origin or sustainability claims can trigger enforcement, litigation and brand damage.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach consumers.
  2. Potential effects may reach future generations.
  3. Potential effects may reach downstream users.
  4. Potential effects may reach affected communities.
  5. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Customers / end-users.
  6. The source places the pathway in Own operations, Downstream, Cross value chain.

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may affect demand, pricing, market access or product and service revenue.
  2. The topic may change operating costs through resource use, controls, remediation or ongoing management.
  3. The topic may require capital expenditure to adapt assets, processes or infrastructure.
  4. The topic may create provisions, penalties, remediation costs, claims or other liabilities.
  5. The topic may affect access to finance, funding terms or the cost of capital.
  6. The topic may affect asset useful lives, impairment assumptions, valuations or stranded-asset exposure.
  7. The topic may affect reputation, licences to operate, intellectual property or other intangible value.

Questions to test

  • What evidence supports both the impact and financial materiality pathways?
  • Which own operations, assets or decisions create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Which products, services, customers or end uses create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Where across the value chain is the pathway most significant?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on consumers?
  • What current or proposed regulation could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Consumer outcome, complaint and product-impact records
  • Long-term scenario, cumulative-impact and intergenerational analysis
  • Downstream-user outcome, complaint and product-use evidence
  • Community engagement, grievance and impact records
  • Revenue, demand, pricing and market-access analysis linked to the topic
  • Operating-cost records and budgets linked to the topic
  • Capital plans, asset adaptation budgets and investment approvals
  • Provision, claim, penalty, remediation and contingent-liability records
  • Funding terms, lender or investor requirements and cost-of-capital analysis
  • Asset valuations, useful-life assumptions, impairment tests and stranded-asset analysis
  • Reputation, licence-to-operate, intellectual-property and other intangible-value evidence
  • Process-map item (assets): Food safety management systems, batch traceability platforms, enterprise resource planning, recipe control and production scheduling software
  • Process-map item (assets): Brands, private-label supply contracts, product formulations, recipes, sensory panels and consumer insight data
  • Process-map item (customers): Supermarkets, convenience retailers, discounters and online grocery platforms buying branded and private-label packaged foods
  • Process-map item (customers): Industrial food manufacturers buying intermediate products such as fillings, coatings, flavour bases, frozen vegetables, dried mixes and oils
  • Process-map item (customers): End consumers purchasing ready meals, canned foods, snacks, cereals, bakery products, condiments, confectionery and frozen foods

It may be less material when…

  • Organisation-specific evidence does not support significant scale, severity, likelihood or financial effect.
  • The organisation has no meaningful exposure to or influence over the relevant downstream pathway.
  • The emerging signal has not yet created a relevant exposure, impact or financial effect for the organisation.

Affected stakeholders

  • Customers / end-users

Users of the information

  • Board / management
  • Investors / creditors
  • Media
  • NGOs / civil society
  • Regulators

Standards to check

See how companies report it →

Your preliminary screening decision

Saved in this browser. Your notes leave it only when you export the screening.

  • Social
  • Industry baseline
  • Strong industry signal
  • Double materiality

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Protection of employees and contractors from safety and health hazards in food processing, sanitation, maintenance, warehousing and cold-chain operations, including machine guarding, lockout, thermal hazards, chemical handling, refrigeration systems, pressure systems, ergonomic strain and shift-work fatigue.

How it shows up in this industry

Processed food sites use blades, conveyors, mixers, extruders, ovens, fryers, retorts, pressure vessels, compressed air, pallet racking, automated storage, cold rooms and refrigeration plants. Cleaning and sanitation crews handle caustic soda, acids, quaternary ammonium compounds, peracetic acid and detergents on wet floors, often during night shifts and maintenance windows.

Why it may be material

Poor safety performance raises compensation costs, insurance premiums, enforcement exposure, absenteeism and turnover, while serious incidents can shut down lines, disrupt retailer service levels and require investment in guarding, ventilation, refrigeration controls or hygienic maintenance redesign. Automation can reduce some ergonomic burden but adds maintenance and lockout complexity.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach workers.
  2. Potential effects may reach contractors.
  3. Potential effects may reach emergency responders.
  4. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Contractors, Employees, Trade unions.
  5. The source places the pathway in Own operations.

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may change operating costs through resource use, controls, remediation or ongoing management.
  2. The topic may require capital expenditure to adapt assets, processes or infrastructure.
  3. The topic may create provisions, penalties, remediation costs, claims or other liabilities.
  4. The topic may affect insurance availability, coverage terms, premiums or claims.
  5. The topic may affect demand, pricing, market access or product and service revenue.
  6. The topic may affect reputation, licences to operate, intellectual property or other intangible value.

Questions to test

  • What evidence supports both the impact and financial materiality pathways?
  • Which own operations, assets or decisions create or concentrate the pathway?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on workers?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on contractors?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on emergency responders?
  • What current or proposed regulation could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Workforce, health and safety, engagement and grievance records
  • Contractor working-condition, incident and engagement records
  • Emergency-response plans, incident logs and responder feedback
  • Operating-cost records and budgets linked to the topic
  • Capital plans, asset adaptation budgets and investment approvals
  • Provision, claim, penalty, remediation and contingent-liability records
  • Insurance coverage, premium, exclusion and claims records
  • Revenue, demand, pricing and market-access analysis linked to the topic
  • Reputation, licence-to-operate, intellectual-property and other intangible-value evidence
  • Process-map item (assets): On-site utilities including boilers, refrigeration plants, compressed air systems, water treatment, effluent treatment and waste heat recovery equipment
  • Process-map item (assets): Food safety management systems, batch traceability platforms, enterprise resource planning, recipe control and production scheduling software
  • Process-map item (customers): Industrial food manufacturers buying intermediate products such as fillings, coatings, flavour bases, frozen vegetables, dried mixes and oils
  • Process-map item (customers): Pet food and animal feed manufacturers using suitable food by-products and downgraded edible material
  • Process-map item (emerging_pressures): Rising scrutiny of ultra-processed foods, additives, emulsifiers, sweeteners and portion sizes in public health policy and litigation

It may be less material when…

  • Organisation-specific evidence does not support significant scale, severity, likelihood or financial effect.

Affected stakeholders

  • Contractors
  • Employees
  • Trade unions

Users of the information

  • Board / management
  • Investors / creditors
  • Regulators

Standards to check

See how companies report it →

Your preliminary screening decision

Saved in this browser. Your notes leave it only when you export the screening.

  • Social
  • Business-model dependent
  • Moderate industry signal
  • Double materiality

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Human rights and working conditions for agricultural and seasonal workers producing alcoholic beverage ingredients.

How it shows up in this industry

Ingredient sourcing for alcoholic beverages includes vineyards, orchards, hop yards, cereal farms, agave fields and sugarcane or molasses supply chains, often with seasonal harvest peaks and outsourced labour. Farm workers, vineyard workers, hop growers and seasonal pickers can face heat, pesticide exposure, machinery hazards, insecure work, poor accommodation and weak grievance access.

Why it may be material

Agricultural and seasonal labour is a direct upstream impact pathway for beer, wine, cider and spirits ingredients. Labour abuses can also disrupt harvests, damage brand reputation and jeopardise retailer mandates.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach supply-chain workers.
  2. Potential effects may reach workers.
  3. Potential effects may reach affected communities.
  4. Potential effects may reach Indigenous peoples.
  5. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Customers / end-users, Suppliers, Trade unions, Value chain workers.
  6. The source places the pathway in Upstream.

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may affect demand, pricing, market access or product and service revenue.
  2. The topic may create provisions, penalties, remediation costs, claims or other liabilities.
  3. The topic may affect reputation, licences to operate, intellectual property or other intangible value.
  4. The topic may change operating costs through resource use, controls, remediation or ongoing management.

Questions to test

  • What evidence supports both the impact and financial materiality pathways?
  • Which upstream activities, suppliers or inputs create or concentrate the pathway?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on supply-chain workers?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on workers?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on affected communities?
  • What current or proposed regulation could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Supplier workforce, audit, grievance and remediation records
  • Workforce, health and safety, engagement and grievance records
  • Community engagement, grievance and impact records
  • Indigenous engagement, consent, grievance and impact records
  • Revenue, demand, pricing and market-access analysis linked to the topic
  • Provision, claim, penalty, remediation and contingent-liability records
  • Reputation, licence-to-operate, intellectual-property and other intangible-value evidence
  • Operating-cost records and budgets linked to the topic
  • Process-map item (external_impacts): High water abstraction for mashing, dilution, rinsing, cooling, cleaning and vineyard irrigation in stressed catchments
  • Process-map item (external_impacts): Agricultural impacts from barley, maize, rice, grapes, apples, agave and sugarcane cultivation, including fertiliser runoff and pesticide use
  • Process-map item (external_impacts): Land-use pressure, soil erosion and biodiversity loss in vineyards, orchards, hop yards and monoculture cereal supply chains
  • Process-map item (financial_channels): Insurance premiums and loss exposure for distillery fires, barrel warehouse collapse, flood, drought, crop failure and supply disruption
  • Process-map item (financial_channels): Working capital tied up in long maturation spirits, bonded stock, seasonal grape or apple harvests and ageing inventory

It may be less material when…

  • The organisation's scale, exposure or effects are below the threshold set for further assessment.
  • The relevant business model, activity, asset or product is not present or is not significant.
  • The organisation has no meaningful exposure to or influence over the relevant upstream pathway.

Affected stakeholders

  • Customers / end-users
  • Suppliers
  • Trade unions
  • Value chain workers

Users of the information

  • NGOs / civil society
  • Regulators

Standards to check

See how companies report it →

Your preliminary screening decision

Saved in this browser. Your notes leave it only when you export the screening.

  • Social
  • Business-model dependent
  • Moderate industry signal
  • Double materiality

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Local community amenity and wellbeing impacts from routine operations and visitor activity around alcoholic beverage sites.

How it shows up in this industry

Breweries, distilleries, wineries, cideries, maturation warehouses and visitor centres can sit close to towns, rural villages or hospitality districts. Neighbours may experience fermentation and distillation odours, boiler and refrigeration noise, night-time tanker or pallet traffic, vapour concerns, warehouse activity and tourism pressure around taprooms, cellar doors and brand homes.

Why it may be material

Odour, noise, traffic and visitor activity can create local disturbance and planning concerns, especially where production sites operate near homes or tourism areas. Poor grievance handling can lead to restrictions on deliveries, events or expansion.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach affected communities.
  2. Potential effects may reach workers.
  3. Potential effects may reach emergency responders.
  4. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Affected communities.
  5. The source places the pathway in Own operations, Downstream.

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may affect reputation, licences to operate, intellectual property or other intangible value.
  2. The topic may create provisions, penalties, remediation costs, claims or other liabilities.
  3. The topic may change operating costs through resource use, controls, remediation or ongoing management.
  4. The topic may affect asset useful lives, impairment assumptions, valuations or stranded-asset exposure.

Questions to test

  • What evidence supports both the impact and financial materiality pathways?
  • Which own operations, assets or decisions create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Which products, services, customers or end uses create or concentrate the pathway?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on affected communities?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on workers?
  • What civil-society scrutiny or campaigns could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Community engagement, grievance and impact records
  • Workforce, health and safety, engagement and grievance records
  • Emergency-response plans, incident logs and responder feedback
  • Reputation, licence-to-operate, intellectual-property and other intangible-value evidence
  • Provision, claim, penalty, remediation and contingent-liability records
  • Operating-cost records and budgets linked to the topic
  • Asset valuations, useful-life assumptions, impairment tests and stranded-asset analysis
  • Process-map item (external_impacts): Agricultural impacts from barley, maize, rice, grapes, apples, agave and sugarcane cultivation, including fertiliser runoff and pesticide use
  • Process-map item (external_impacts): Odour, noise, traffic and vapour emissions affecting neighbours around breweries, distilleries, wineries and maturation warehouses
  • Process-map item (external_impacts): Community harms associated with harmful drinking, antisocial behaviour, drink-driving, domestic violence and alcohol dependence
  • Process-map item (impact_channels): Brewery, winery, distillery and packaging workers exposed to hot liquids, confined spaces, carbon dioxide, caustic chemicals, noise and moving equipment
  • Process-map item (impact_channels): Communities near production sites affected by odour, tanker traffic, noise, water use, fire risk and tourism pressure

It may be less material when…

  • The organisation's scale, exposure or effects are below the threshold set for further assessment.
  • The relevant business model, activity, asset or product is not present or is not significant.
  • The organisation has no meaningful exposure to or influence over the relevant downstream pathway.

Affected stakeholders

  • Affected communities

Users of the information

  • Board / management
  • Local authorities
  • Media
  • Regulators

Standards to check

See how companies report it →

Your preliminary screening decision

Saved in this browser. Your notes leave it only when you export the screening.

  • Social
  • Business-model dependent
  • Moderate industry signal
  • Double materiality

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Local amenity and social licence impacts around beverage bottling plants, warehouses and distribution depots, including traffic, noise, odour, light and grievance responsiveness.

How it shows up in this industry

Beverage bottling plants, warehouses and distribution depots generate high-volume lorry movements, pallet handling, refrigeration noise, odour from wastewater treatment, lighting, loading activity and traffic around local road networks. Sites near residential areas or industrial clusters can affect local amenity even where permitted emissions remain within limits.

Why it may be material

Community amenity issues can delay site expansion, increase operating constraints, trigger complaints and weaken trust around water abstraction, traffic and industrial activity. The issue is locally material where plants or depots are close to homes, schools or congested routes.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach affected communities.
  2. Potential effects may reach workers.
  3. Potential effects may reach contractors.
  4. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Affected communities.
  5. The source places the pathway in Own operations, Downstream.

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may create provisions, penalties, remediation costs, claims or other liabilities.
  2. The topic may change operating costs through resource use, controls, remediation or ongoing management.
  3. The topic may require capital expenditure to adapt assets, processes or infrastructure.
  4. The topic may affect reputation, licences to operate, intellectual property or other intangible value.
  5. The topic may affect demand, pricing, market access or product and service revenue.

Questions to test

  • What evidence supports both the impact and financial materiality pathways?
  • Which own operations, assets or decisions create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Which products, services, customers or end uses create or concentrate the pathway?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on affected communities?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on workers?
  • What civil-society scrutiny or campaigns could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Community engagement, grievance and impact records
  • Workforce, health and safety, engagement and grievance records
  • Contractor working-condition, incident and engagement records
  • Provision, claim, penalty, remediation and contingent-liability records
  • Operating-cost records and budgets linked to the topic
  • Capital plans, asset adaptation budgets and investment approvals
  • Reputation, licence-to-operate, intellectual-property and other intangible-value evidence
  • Revenue, demand, pricing and market-access analysis linked to the topic
  • Process-map item (assets): Returnable bottle crates, kegs, vending machines, coolers, fountains and dispensing equipment placed at customer sites
  • Process-map item (customers): Consumers of carbonated soft drinks, bottled water, juices, energy drinks, sports drinks, mixers, ready-to-drink tea and coffee, kombucha and plant-based drinks
  • Process-map item (customers): Industrial beverage blenders or co-packers buying concentrates, syrups or semi-finished bases
  • Process-map item (external_impacts): High local water abstraction for bottled water, soft drinks and rinsing operations, affecting aquifers, rivers and competing community uses
  • Process-map item (external_impacts): Agricultural land, water and pesticide impacts from sugar beet, sugar cane, fruit, tea, coffee, stevia, agave and botanical ingredient supply chains

It may be less material when…

  • The organisation's scale, exposure or effects are below the threshold set for further assessment.
  • The relevant business model, activity, asset or product is not present or is not significant.
  • The organisation has no meaningful exposure to or influence over the relevant downstream pathway.

Affected stakeholders

  • Affected communities

Users of the information

  • Board / management
  • Local authorities
  • Media
  • Regulators

Standards to check

See how companies report it →

Your preliminary screening decision

Saved in this browser. Your notes leave it only when you export the screening.

  • Social
  • Business-model dependent
  • Moderate industry signal
  • Double materiality
  • Cross-cutting

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Safety and emergency controls for hazardous, pressurised and heavy beverage logistics, including customer-site dispensing equipment and returnable packaging loops.

How it shows up in this industry

Beverage logistics move bulk liquid sugar, juice concentrates, dry ingredients, carbon dioxide cylinders, finished heavy pallets, returnable glass, crates, kegs, bag-in-box syrups, fountain equipment, coolers and sanitising materials to retailers, venues, restaurants and vending operators. Loading, unloading, pressurised gas handling, temperature abuse, glass breakage and route incidents create distinct safety and emergency-response pathways beyond factory operations.

Why it may be material

Beverage distribution is high-volume and involves heavy loads, pressurised gases and customer-site equipment servicing. Incidents can injure hauliers, warehouse workers, retail staff or emergency responders and can create liability, insurance and customer relationship impacts.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach workers.
  2. Potential effects may reach contractors.
  3. Potential effects may reach downstream users.
  4. Potential effects may reach affected communities.
  5. Potential effects may reach emergency responders.
  6. Potential effects may reach water bodies.
  7. Potential effects may reach soil and groundwater.
  8. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Affected communities, Business partners, Contractors, Customers / end-users, Employees.
  9. The source places the pathway in Upstream, Own operations, Downstream, Cross value chain.

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may change operating costs through resource use, controls, remediation or ongoing management.
  2. The topic may create provisions, penalties, remediation costs, claims or other liabilities.
  3. The topic may affect insurance availability, coverage terms, premiums or claims.
  4. The topic may affect demand, pricing, market access or product and service revenue.
  5. The topic may affect reputation, licences to operate, intellectual property or other intangible value.

Questions to test

  • What evidence supports both the impact and financial materiality pathways?
  • Which upstream activities, suppliers or inputs create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Which own operations, assets or decisions create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Which products, services, customers or end uses create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Where across the value chain is the pathway most significant?
  • What current or proposed regulation could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Workforce, health and safety, engagement and grievance records
  • Contractor working-condition, incident and engagement records
  • Downstream-user outcome, complaint and product-use evidence
  • Community engagement, grievance and impact records
  • Emergency-response plans, incident logs and responder feedback
  • Water withdrawal, discharge, quality and catchment-impact records
  • Soil and groundwater monitoring, incident and remediation records
  • Operating-cost records and budgets linked to the topic
  • Provision, claim, penalty, remediation and contingent-liability records
  • Insurance coverage, premium, exclusion and claims records
  • Revenue, demand, pricing and market-access analysis linked to the topic
  • Reputation, licence-to-operate, intellectual-property and other intangible-value evidence
  • Process-map item (assets): Water treatment plants using filtration, activated carbon, reverse osmosis, UV and ozone systems
  • Process-map item (assets): PET bottle blowing machines, aluminium can fillers, glass bottling lines, carton fillers and pouch filling equipment
  • Process-map item (assets): Cold stores, ambient finished-goods warehouses, palletisers, stretch-wrapping lines and automated storage systems
  • Process-map item (assets): Returnable bottle crates, kegs, vending machines, coolers, fountains and dispensing equipment placed at customer sites
  • Process-map item (customers): Food-service operators, quick-service restaurants, cafés, cinemas, hotels and contract caterers using packaged and fountain beverages

It may be less material when…

  • The organisation's scale, exposure or effects are below the threshold set for further assessment.
  • The relevant business model, activity, asset or product is not present or is not significant.
  • The organisation has no meaningful exposure to or influence over the relevant upstream or downstream pathway.

Affected stakeholders

  • Affected communities
  • Business partners
  • Contractors
  • Customers / end-users
  • Employees

Users of the information

  • Regulators

Standards to check

See how companies report it →

Your preliminary screening decision

Saved in this browser. Your notes leave it only when you export the screening.

  • Social
  • Business-model dependent
  • Moderate industry signal
  • Double materiality
  • Cross-cutting

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Safety and emergency controls for high-consequence alcoholic beverage logistics, including bulk spirit movements, pressurised gases, kegs, glass and loading or unloading interfaces.

How it shows up in this industry

Alcoholic beverage logistics include bulk liquid movement of wine, neutral spirit, beer base and cider by tanker or flexitank, high-strength spirit movements under excise bond, returnable kegs and casks, pressurised carbon dioxide, broken glass hazards and heavy pallet distribution through wholesalers, retailers and hospitality depots.

Why it may be material

Transport incidents can harm drivers, warehouse staff, hospitality workers, neighbours and emergency responders, while spills or fires can create environmental damage and supply interruption. The issue is especially material for companies moving high-strength spirit, carbon dioxide cylinders or large keg fleets.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach workers.
  2. Potential effects may reach contractors.
  3. Potential effects may reach affected communities.
  4. Potential effects may reach emergency responders.
  5. Potential effects may reach soil and groundwater.
  6. Potential effects may reach water bodies.
  7. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Affected communities, Business partners, Contractors, Employees.
  8. The source places the pathway in Own operations, Downstream, Cross value chain.

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may create provisions, penalties, remediation costs, claims or other liabilities.
  2. The topic may affect insurance availability, coverage terms, premiums or claims.
  3. The topic may change operating costs through resource use, controls, remediation or ongoing management.
  4. The topic may affect demand, pricing, market access or product and service revenue.
  5. The topic may affect reputation, licences to operate, intellectual property or other intangible value.

Questions to test

  • What evidence supports both the impact and financial materiality pathways?
  • Which own operations, assets or decisions create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Which products, services, customers or end uses create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Where across the value chain is the pathway most significant?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on workers?
  • What current or proposed regulation could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Workforce, health and safety, engagement and grievance records
  • Contractor working-condition, incident and engagement records
  • Community engagement, grievance and impact records
  • Emergency-response plans, incident logs and responder feedback
  • Soil and groundwater monitoring, incident and remediation records
  • Water withdrawal, discharge, quality and catchment-impact records
  • Provision, claim, penalty, remediation and contingent-liability records
  • Insurance coverage, premium, exclusion and claims records
  • Operating-cost records and budgets linked to the topic
  • Revenue, demand, pricing and market-access analysis linked to the topic
  • Reputation, licence-to-operate, intellectual-property and other intangible-value evidence
  • Process-map item (assets): Distilleries with mash houses, washbacks, pot stills, column stills, condensers and spirit receivers
  • Process-map item (assets): Maturation warehouses, bonded stores, rack houses and cask or barrel inventories
  • Process-map item (assets): Refrigeration plants, steam boilers, compressed air systems, carbon dioxide recovery units and clean-in-place systems
  • Process-map item (assets): Effluent treatment plants handling high biochemical oxygen demand streams, lees, trub, yeast and wash waters
  • Process-map item (emerging_pressures): Investor and customer demand for Scope 3 emissions reduction across agriculture, glass, aluminium, logistics and refrigeration

It may be less material when…

  • The organisation's scale, exposure or effects are below the threshold set for further assessment.
  • The relevant business model, activity, asset or product is not present or is not significant.
  • The organisation has no meaningful exposure to or influence over the relevant downstream pathway.

Affected stakeholders

  • Affected communities
  • Business partners
  • Contractors
  • Employees

Users of the information

  • Local authorities
  • Regulators

Standards to check

See how companies report it →

Your preliminary screening decision

Saved in this browser. Your notes leave it only when you export the screening.

  • Social
  • Business-model dependent
  • Moderate industry signal
  • Double materiality

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Human impact on seasonal, agency and migrant workers from insecure scheduling, pay practices, accommodation arrangements, grievance barriers and dependence on labour intermediaries.

How it shows up in this industry

Processed food plants often operate seasonal peaks linked to crop availability, promotional cycles, chilled short shelf-life production and 24-hour distribution. Agency, temporary and migrant workers may be used in packing, sanitation, warehousing, production line work and peak-order fulfilment, sometimes through third-party labour providers.

Why it may be material

Seasonal, agency and migrant workers can be affected by shift patterns, pay practices, accommodation arrangements and grievance access. Impacts are heightened where labour demand fluctuates quickly and workers depend on intermediaries for work allocation, transport or housing.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach workers.
  2. Potential effects may reach contractors.
  3. Potential effects may reach supply-chain workers.
  4. Potential effects may reach affected communities.
  5. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Affected communities, Contractors, Employees, Trade unions, Value chain workers.
  6. The source places the pathway in Own operations, Upstream.

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may change operating costs through resource use, controls, remediation or ongoing management.
  2. The topic may create provisions, penalties, remediation costs, claims or other liabilities.
  3. The topic may affect demand, pricing, market access or product and service revenue.
  4. The topic may affect reputation, licences to operate, intellectual property or other intangible value.

Questions to test

  • What evidence supports both the impact and financial materiality pathways?
  • Which own operations, assets or decisions create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Which upstream activities, suppliers or inputs create or concentrate the pathway?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on workers?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on contractors?
  • What current or proposed regulation could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Workforce, health and safety, engagement and grievance records
  • Contractor working-condition, incident and engagement records
  • Supplier workforce, audit, grievance and remediation records
  • Community engagement, grievance and impact records
  • Operating-cost records and budgets linked to the topic
  • Provision, claim, penalty, remediation and contingent-liability records
  • Revenue, demand, pricing and market-access analysis linked to the topic
  • Reputation, licence-to-operate, intellectual-property and other intangible-value evidence
  • Process-map item (assets): Food safety management systems, batch traceability platforms, enterprise resource planning, recipe control and production scheduling software
  • Process-map item (customers): Industrial food manufacturers buying intermediate products such as fillings, coatings, flavour bases, frozen vegetables, dried mixes and oils
  • Process-map item (customers): Pet food and animal feed manufacturers using suitable food by-products and downgraded edible material
  • Process-map item (emerging_pressures): Increasing food fraud risks linked to commodity price spikes, including adulteration of oils, spices, honey, meat and premium ingredients
  • Process-map item (emerging_pressures): Water scarcity and discharge limits in food-processing clusters, especially for washing, blanching, cooling and cleaning operations

It may be less material when…

  • The organisation's scale, exposure or effects are below the threshold set for further assessment.
  • The relevant business model, activity, asset or product is not present or is not significant.
  • The organisation has no meaningful exposure to or influence over the relevant upstream pathway.

Affected stakeholders

  • Affected communities
  • Contractors
  • Employees
  • Trade unions
  • Value chain workers

Users of the information

  • Regulators

Standards to check

See how companies report it →

Your preliminary screening decision

Saved in this browser. Your notes leave it only when you export the screening.

  • Social
  • Emerging issue
  • Moderate industry signal
  • Double materiality
  • Cross-cutting

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Chemical safety governance for beverage packaging and food contact materials, focusing on migration of substances of concern from containers, caps, liners, inks, adhesives, coatings and recycled-content contaminants into drinks.

How it shows up in this industry

Non-alcoholic beverages are filled into PET bottles, aluminium cans, glass bottles, cartons, pouches and caps after processes such as hot filling, pasteurisation, carbonation and aseptic filling. Acidic drinks, carbonated products, high-temperature filling and recycled packaging can influence migration from inks, liners, coatings, adhesives, plasticisers and other food contact materials into waters, juices, energy drinks, ready-to-drink tea and functional beverages.

Why it may be material

Food contact material rules are established, but scrutiny of PFAS, bisphenols, phthalates, mineral oils and recycled-content contamination is accelerating. Beverage companies are exposed because packaging is in direct contact with high-volume consumer products and supplier declarations may lag evolving scientific and regulatory expectations.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach consumers.
  2. Potential effects may reach downstream users.
  3. Potential effects may reach workers.
  4. Potential effects may reach supply-chain workers.
  5. Potential effects may reach ecosystems.
  6. Potential effects may reach water bodies.
  7. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Customers / end-users, Suppliers.
  8. The source places the pathway in Upstream, Own operations, Downstream, Cross value chain.

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may create provisions, penalties, remediation costs, claims or other liabilities.
  2. The topic may change operating costs through resource use, controls, remediation or ongoing management.
  3. The topic may require capital expenditure to adapt assets, processes or infrastructure.
  4. The topic may affect demand, pricing, market access or product and service revenue.
  5. The topic may affect reputation, licences to operate, intellectual property or other intangible value.

Questions to test

  • What evidence supports both the impact and financial materiality pathways?
  • Which upstream activities, suppliers or inputs create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Which own operations, assets or decisions create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Which products, services, customers or end uses create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Where across the value chain is the pathway most significant?
  • What current or proposed regulation could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Consumer outcome, complaint and product-impact records
  • Downstream-user outcome, complaint and product-use evidence
  • Workforce, health and safety, engagement and grievance records
  • Supplier workforce, audit, grievance and remediation records
  • Biodiversity, habitat and ecosystem-impact evidence
  • Water withdrawal, discharge, quality and catchment-impact records
  • Provision, claim, penalty, remediation and contingent-liability records
  • Operating-cost records and budgets linked to the topic
  • Capital plans, asset adaptation budgets and investment approvals
  • Revenue, demand, pricing and market-access analysis linked to the topic
  • Reputation, licence-to-operate, intellectual-property and other intangible-value evidence
  • Process-map item (assets): Clean-in-place systems, caustic and acid chemical stores, compressed air plants, boilers, chillers and refrigeration systems
  • Process-map item (assets): Quality laboratories for microbiology, brix, pH, carbonation, sensory testing and packaging migration checks
  • Process-map item (customers): Food-service operators, quick-service restaurants, cafés, cinemas, hotels and contract caterers using packaged and fountain beverages
  • Process-map item (customers): Industrial beverage blenders or co-packers buying concentrates, syrups or semi-finished bases
  • Process-map item (emerging_pressures): Rising recycled PET demand, food-grade rPET shortages and price premiums driven by mandatory recycled content targets

It may be less material when…

  • The organisation's scale, exposure or effects are below the threshold set for further assessment.
  • The organisation has no meaningful exposure to or influence over the relevant upstream or downstream pathway.
  • The emerging signal has not yet created a relevant exposure, impact or financial effect for the organisation.

Affected stakeholders

  • Customers / end-users
  • Suppliers

Users of the information

  • Board / management
  • Investors / creditors
  • NGOs / civil society
  • Regulators

Standards to check

See how companies report it →

Your preliminary screening decision

Saved in this browser. Your notes leave it only when you export the screening.

  • Social
  • Emerging issue
  • Moderate industry signal
  • Double materiality

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Management of emerging chemical migration and substance phase-out concerns in food-contact packaging, coatings, inks and processing interfaces used for packaged processed foods.

How it shows up in this industry

Processed foods are packed in trays, pouches, cartons, cans, jars, films, labels and printed materials after cooking, retorting, freezing, drying or modified-atmosphere packing. Product risks include migration of bisphenols, phthalates, mineral oils, per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances and inks into food, especially where packaging changes are being made for circularity.

Why it may be material

Chemical restrictions, retailer blacklists, consumer campaigns and litigation can force rapid packaging substitution while maintaining shelf life, barrier performance, tamper evidence and food safety. The issue can create liability and brand exposure even where packaging performs well on recyclability.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach consumers.
  2. Potential effects may reach ecosystems.
  3. Potential effects may reach water bodies.
  4. Potential effects may reach future generations.
  5. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Customers / end-users, Suppliers.
  6. The source places the pathway in Upstream, Own operations, Downstream, Cross value chain.

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may affect demand, pricing, market access or product and service revenue.
  2. The topic may change operating costs through resource use, controls, remediation or ongoing management.
  3. The topic may require capital expenditure to adapt assets, processes or infrastructure.
  4. The topic may create provisions, penalties, remediation costs, claims or other liabilities.
  5. The topic may affect insurance availability, coverage terms, premiums or claims.
  6. The topic may affect reputation, licences to operate, intellectual property or other intangible value.

Questions to test

  • What evidence supports both the impact and financial materiality pathways?
  • Which upstream activities, suppliers or inputs create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Which own operations, assets or decisions create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Which products, services, customers or end uses create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Where across the value chain is the pathway most significant?
  • What current or proposed regulation could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Consumer outcome, complaint and product-impact records
  • Biodiversity, habitat and ecosystem-impact evidence
  • Water withdrawal, discharge, quality and catchment-impact records
  • Long-term scenario, cumulative-impact and intergenerational analysis
  • Revenue, demand, pricing and market-access analysis linked to the topic
  • Operating-cost records and budgets linked to the topic
  • Capital plans, asset adaptation budgets and investment approvals
  • Provision, claim, penalty, remediation and contingent-liability records
  • Insurance coverage, premium, exclusion and claims records
  • Reputation, licence-to-operate, intellectual-property and other intangible-value evidence
  • Process-map item (assets): Food safety management systems, batch traceability platforms, enterprise resource planning, recipe control and production scheduling software
  • Process-map item (assets): Brands, private-label supply contracts, product formulations, recipes, sensory panels and consumer insight data
  • Process-map item (customers): Industrial food manufacturers buying intermediate products such as fillings, coatings, flavour bases, frozen vegetables, dried mixes and oils
  • Process-map item (customers): Pet food and animal feed manufacturers using suitable food by-products and downgraded edible material
  • Process-map item (emerging_pressures): Extended producer responsibility, deposit return and plastic packaging taxes increasing the cost of multilayer films, pouches and difficult-to-recycle formats

It may be less material when…

  • The organisation's scale, exposure or effects are below the threshold set for further assessment.
  • The organisation has no meaningful exposure to or influence over the relevant upstream or downstream pathway.
  • The emerging signal has not yet created a relevant exposure, impact or financial effect for the organisation.

Affected stakeholders

  • Customers / end-users
  • Suppliers

Users of the information

  • Board / management
  • Investors / creditors
  • NGOs / civil society
  • Regulators

Standards to check

See how companies report it →

Your preliminary screening decision

Saved in this browser. Your notes leave it only when you export the screening.

  • Social
  • Emerging issue
  • Moderate industry signal
  • Double materiality

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Responsible growth of low and no alcohol products, including claim integrity, residual alcohol control, nutrition disclosure, flavour-system transparency and safeguards against using moderation products to reinforce harmful high-strength brand consumption.

How it shows up in this industry

Breweries, wineries, cideries and spirits producers are adding dealcoholised beers, wines, ciders, spirits alternatives and ready-to-drink variants using filtration, dealcoholisation, flavour adjustment and carbonation. These products create integrity questions around residual alcohol, sugar, flavour systems and whether brand positioning supports lower-harm choices.

Why it may be material

Growth in low and no alcohol ranges is reshaping alcoholic beverage portfolios and requiring new assets, formulations and claims controls. Poor governance of residual alcohol or wellness claims can attract scrutiny from regulators, retailers and public-health groups.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach consumers.
  2. Potential effects may reach downstream users.
  3. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Customers / end-users.
  4. The source places the pathway in Own operations, Downstream, Cross value chain.

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may affect demand, pricing, market access or product and service revenue.
  2. The topic may require capital expenditure to adapt assets, processes or infrastructure.
  3. The topic may create provisions, penalties, remediation costs, claims or other liabilities.
  4. The topic may affect reputation, licences to operate, intellectual property or other intangible value.

Questions to test

  • What evidence supports both the impact and financial materiality pathways?
  • Which own operations, assets or decisions create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Which products, services, customers or end uses create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Where across the value chain is the pathway most significant?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on consumers?
  • What evidence shows that customer demand is changing?

Evidence to collect

  • Consumer outcome, complaint and product-impact records
  • Downstream-user outcome, complaint and product-use evidence
  • Revenue, demand, pricing and market-access analysis linked to the topic
  • Capital plans, asset adaptation budgets and investment approvals
  • Provision, claim, penalty, remediation and contingent-liability records
  • Reputation, licence-to-operate, intellectual-property and other intangible-value evidence
  • Process-map item (assets): Quality laboratories for microbiology, sensory testing, alcohol strength, methanol, sulphites and contaminant analysis
  • Process-map item (customers): Export distributors and local market brand owners in regulated alcohol markets
  • Process-map item (customers): Consumers of beer, cider, wine, spirits, liqueurs, ready-to-drink cocktails and low or no alcohol variants
  • Process-map item (emerging_pressures): Tighter alcohol health labelling, calorie disclosure, ingredient disclosure and pregnancy warning requirements
  • Process-map item (emerging_pressures): Growth in low and no alcohol products requiring new dealcoholisation assets, flavour systems and separate brand positioning

It may be less material when…

  • The organisation's scale, exposure or effects are below the threshold set for further assessment.
  • The organisation has no meaningful exposure to or influence over the relevant downstream pathway.
  • The emerging signal has not yet created a relevant exposure, impact or financial effect for the organisation.

Affected stakeholders

  • Customers / end-users

Users of the information

  • Board / management
  • Investors / creditors
  • NGOs / civil society
  • Regulators

Standards to check

See how companies report it →

Your preliminary screening decision

Saved in this browser. Your notes leave it only when you export the screening.

  • Governance
  • Industry baseline
  • Strong industry signal
  • Financial materiality

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Governance of alcohol duty, customs, bonded stock, licensing, wholesaler registration and anti-bribery controls that underpin legal market access and brand value.

How it shows up in this industry

Alcoholic beverage companies operate under excise duty regimes, customs controls, bonded warehouse rules, duty stamps, licensing systems, wholesaler registration and market-specific export documentation. Long-maturation spirits and seasonal wine or cider inventories can hold substantial working capital under regulatory control.

Why it may be material

Failures in excise, customs, licensing or bonded warehouse controls can block market access, accelerate duty payments, create penalties, disrupt exports and damage brand value. Bribery or facilitation-payment weaknesses are material where licences, customs clearance, distribution approvals and market access are tightly regulated.

Impact pathway

  1. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Business partners, Customers / end-users, Suppliers.
  2. The source places the pathway in Own operations, Downstream, Cross value chain.

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may affect demand, pricing, market access or product and service revenue.
  2. The topic may create provisions, penalties, remediation costs, claims or other liabilities.
  3. The topic may change operating costs through resource use, controls, remediation or ongoing management.
  4. The topic may affect asset useful lives, impairment assumptions, valuations or stranded-asset exposure.
  5. The topic may affect reputation, licences to operate, intellectual property or other intangible value.
  6. The topic may affect access to finance, funding terms or the cost of capital.

Questions to test

  • What evidence shows current or anticipated financial effects on the organisation?
  • Which own operations, assets or decisions create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Which products, services, customers or end uses create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Where across the value chain is the pathway most significant?
  • Could this topic affect demand, pricing, market access or revenue?
  • What current or proposed regulation could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Revenue, demand, pricing and market-access analysis linked to the topic
  • Provision, claim, penalty, remediation and contingent-liability records
  • Operating-cost records and budgets linked to the topic
  • Asset valuations, useful-life assumptions, impairment tests and stranded-asset analysis
  • Reputation, licence-to-operate, intellectual-property and other intangible-value evidence
  • Funding terms, lender or investor requirements and cost-of-capital analysis
  • Process-map item (assets): Maturation warehouses, bonded stores, rack houses and cask or barrel inventories
  • Process-map item (assets): Quality laboratories for microbiology, sensory testing, alcohol strength, methanol, sulphites and contaminant analysis
  • Process-map item (customers): Duty-free retailers, airlines, cruise operators and travel retail concessions
  • Process-map item (customers): Export distributors and local market brand owners in regulated alcohol markets
  • Process-map item (customers): Consumers of beer, cider, wine, spirits, liqueurs, ready-to-drink cocktails and low or no alcohol variants

It may be less material when…

  • Organisation-specific evidence does not support significant scale, severity, likelihood or financial effect.
  • The organisation has no meaningful exposure to or influence over the relevant downstream pathway.

Affected stakeholders

  • Business partners
  • Customers / end-users
  • Suppliers

Users of the information

  • Board / management
  • Investors / creditors
  • Regulators

Standards to check

See how companies report it →

Your preliminary screening decision

Saved in this browser. Your notes leave it only when you export the screening.

  • Governance
  • Industry baseline
  • Strong industry signal
  • Financial materiality

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Governance of ethical commercial conduct in non-alcoholic beverage manufacturing and route-to-market activities, focused on anti-bribery, corruption prevention, fraud controls, conflicts of interest, competition-law compliance, whistleblowing and investigation processes.

How it shows up in this industry

Non-alcoholic beverage producers sell high-volume branded and private-label drinks through grocery retailers, wholesalers, food service channels, vending operators, bottling partners and distributors. Commercial teams negotiate shelf space, promotional funding, rebates, exclusivity, sponsorships and route-to-market arrangements, creating exposure to bribery, conflicts of interest, fraud and anti-competitive conduct in customer, distributor and procurement relationships.

Why it may be material

The industry’s reliance on large retail accounts, distributor networks, promotional allowances and brand-sensitive consumer markets makes failures in anti-bribery, competition-law compliance, fraud controls or whistleblowing financially material. Misconduct can lead to fines, investigations, contract loss, retailer delisting and reputational damage, even where product safety and environmental permits remain separately well controlled.

Impact pathway

  1. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Business partners, Customers / end-users, Employees.
  2. The source places the pathway in Own operations, Downstream, Cross value chain.

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may affect demand, pricing, market access or product and service revenue.
  2. The topic may change operating costs through resource use, controls, remediation or ongoing management.
  3. The topic may create provisions, penalties, remediation costs, claims or other liabilities.
  4. The topic may affect access to finance, funding terms or the cost of capital.
  5. The topic may affect reputation, licences to operate, intellectual property or other intangible value.

Questions to test

  • What evidence shows current or anticipated financial effects on the organisation?
  • Which own operations, assets or decisions create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Which products, services, customers or end uses create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Where across the value chain is the pathway most significant?
  • Could this topic affect demand, pricing, market access or revenue?
  • What current or proposed regulation could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Revenue, demand, pricing and market-access analysis linked to the topic
  • Operating-cost records and budgets linked to the topic
  • Provision, claim, penalty, remediation and contingent-liability records
  • Funding terms, lender or investor requirements and cost-of-capital analysis
  • Reputation, licence-to-operate, intellectual-property and other intangible-value evidence
  • Process-map item (financial_channels): Packaging extended producer responsibility fees, deposit return scheme obligations and recycled-content compliance costs
  • Process-map item (logistics): Bulk liquid sugar, glucose-fructose syrup and juice concentrates delivered by food-grade tanker, tote or drum with temperature and contamination controls
  • Process-map item (logistics): Hazard controls for glass breakage, pressurised containers, forklift movements, pallet collapse, spill containment and temperature abuse
  • Process-map item (product_risks): Glass fragments, sharp can edges, damaged caps or foreign bodies causing physical injury if controls fail

It may be less material when…

  • Organisation-specific evidence does not support significant scale, severity, likelihood or financial effect.
  • The organisation has no meaningful exposure to or influence over the relevant downstream pathway.

Affected stakeholders

  • Business partners
  • Customers / end-users
  • Employees

Users of the information

  • Board / management
  • Investors / creditors
  • Regulators

Standards to check

See how companies report it →

Your preliminary screening decision

Saved in this browser. Your notes leave it only when you export the screening.

  • Governance
  • Industry baseline
  • Strong industry signal
  • Financial materiality

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Governance of ethical conduct and regulatory compliance in processed food operations, including food law compliance systems, audit integrity, anti-bribery controls, whistleblowing, competition law, accurate records and management accountability for customer and regulator requirements.

How it shows up in this industry

Processed food businesses operate under Codex Alimentarius and HACCP principles, EU and UK food law, hygiene and food information rules, contaminant and food-contact material requirements, export market checks and GFSI-benchmarked certification schemes. They also manage retailer audits, private-label tenders, brokers, import routes, co-manufacturers and pricing interactions that require strong internal controls and ethical conduct.

Why it may be material

Compliance failures can lead to enforcement notices, fines, import holds, delisting, tender exclusion, product withdrawals and litigation. Anti-bribery, audit integrity, whistleblowing and competition controls are material because food processors operate in tightly audited supply chains with high retailer bargaining power, certification requirements and sensitive pricing or procurement practices.

Impact pathway

  1. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Business partners, Customers / end-users, Employees.
  2. The source places the pathway in Own operations, Upstream, Downstream, Cross value chain.

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may affect demand, pricing, market access or product and service revenue.
  2. The topic may change operating costs through resource use, controls, remediation or ongoing management.
  3. The topic may require capital expenditure to adapt assets, processes or infrastructure.
  4. The topic may create provisions, penalties, remediation costs, claims or other liabilities.
  5. The topic may affect access to finance, funding terms or the cost of capital.
  6. The topic may affect reputation, licences to operate, intellectual property or other intangible value.

Questions to test

  • What evidence shows current or anticipated financial effects on the organisation?
  • Which own operations, assets or decisions create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Which upstream activities, suppliers or inputs create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Which products, services, customers or end uses create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Where across the value chain is the pathway most significant?
  • What current or proposed regulation could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Revenue, demand, pricing and market-access analysis linked to the topic
  • Operating-cost records and budgets linked to the topic
  • Capital plans, asset adaptation budgets and investment approvals
  • Provision, claim, penalty, remediation and contingent-liability records
  • Funding terms, lender or investor requirements and cost-of-capital analysis
  • Reputation, licence-to-operate, intellectual-property and other intangible-value evidence
  • Process-map item (assets): High-care and high-risk production rooms with controlled hygiene zoning, air handling, positive pressure and temperature control
  • Process-map item (assets): Food safety management systems, batch traceability platforms, enterprise resource planning, recipe control and production scheduling software
  • Process-map item (customers): Industrial food manufacturers buying intermediate products such as fillings, coatings, flavour bases, frozen vegetables, dried mixes and oils
  • Process-map item (customers): Pet food and animal feed manufacturers using suitable food by-products and downgraded edible material
  • Process-map item (emerging_pressures): Tighter rules on high fat, salt and sugar foods, including advertising restrictions, placement controls and reformulation targets

It may be less material when…

  • Organisation-specific evidence does not support significant scale, severity, likelihood or financial effect.
  • The organisation has no meaningful exposure to or influence over the relevant upstream or downstream pathway.

Affected stakeholders

  • Business partners
  • Customers / end-users
  • Employees

Users of the information

  • Board / management
  • Investors / creditors
  • Regulators

Standards to check

See how companies report it →

Your preliminary screening decision

Saved in this browser. Your notes leave it only when you export the screening.

  • Governance
  • Industry baseline
  • Strong industry signal
  • Double materiality

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Governance of high-risk beverage ingredient supply chains where labour, land-use, water, pesticide, climate, origin or certification failures can affect people, ecosystems, input continuity, cost and market access.

How it shows up in this industry

Non-alcoholic beverage recipes depend on climate-sensitive agricultural inputs and processed ingredient streams, including sugar beet, sugar cane, glucose-fructose syrup, fruit concentrates, purées, tea, coffee, cocoa, stevia, agave, botanical extracts, flavours and colours. These ingredients are sourced through growers, mills, cooperatives, traders, ingredient houses and sometimes co-packers, often across long shipping, port, rail and road routes. Supply chains can involve seasonal agricultural labour, pesticide application, irrigation, land-use pressure, crop disease, harvest variability and origin or certification claims for priority ingredients.

Why it may be material

Ingredient availability, cost and credibility are central to beverage formulation, production planning and retailer relationships. Climate disruption, poor labour practices, pesticide concerns or weak origin evidence can raise input costs, interrupt production, jeopardise retailer mandates and damage brand trust, particularly for sugar, fruit, tea, coffee, cocoa, botanical and naturally positioned drink portfolios.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach supply-chain workers.
  2. Potential effects may reach ecosystems.
  3. Potential effects may reach water bodies.
  4. Potential effects may reach affected communities.
  5. Potential effects may reach Indigenous peoples.
  6. Potential effects may reach future generations.
  7. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Business partners, Customers / end-users, Suppliers, Value chain workers.
  8. The source places the pathway in Upstream, Cross value chain.

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may affect demand, pricing, market access or product and service revenue.
  2. The topic may change operating costs through resource use, controls, remediation or ongoing management.
  3. The topic may require capital expenditure to adapt assets, processes or infrastructure.
  4. The topic may create provisions, penalties, remediation costs, claims or other liabilities.
  5. The topic may affect access to finance, funding terms or the cost of capital.
  6. The topic may affect reputation, licences to operate, intellectual property or other intangible value.

Questions to test

  • What evidence supports both the impact and financial materiality pathways?
  • Which upstream activities, suppliers or inputs create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Where across the value chain is the pathway most significant?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on supply-chain workers?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on ecosystems?
  • What geopolitical developments could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Supplier workforce, audit, grievance and remediation records
  • Biodiversity, habitat and ecosystem-impact evidence
  • Water withdrawal, discharge, quality and catchment-impact records
  • Community engagement, grievance and impact records
  • Indigenous engagement, consent, grievance and impact records
  • Long-term scenario, cumulative-impact and intergenerational analysis
  • Revenue, demand, pricing and market-access analysis linked to the topic
  • Operating-cost records and budgets linked to the topic
  • Capital plans, asset adaptation budgets and investment approvals
  • Provision, claim, penalty, remediation and contingent-liability records
  • Funding terms, lender or investor requirements and cost-of-capital analysis
  • Reputation, licence-to-operate, intellectual-property and other intangible-value evidence
  • Process-map item (assets): Syrup rooms with bulk sugar silos, high-fructose syrup tanks, ingredient dosing skids and flavour concentrate stores
  • Process-map item (assets): Quality laboratories for microbiology, brix, pH, carbonation, sensory testing and packaging migration checks
  • Process-map item (assets): Enterprise resource planning, batch traceability, recipe management, allergen control and retailer order systems
  • Process-map item (customers): Industrial beverage blenders or co-packers buying concentrates, syrups or semi-finished bases
  • Process-map item (emerging_pressures): PFAS, bisphenol, phthalate and mineral oil migration concerns in packaging inks, liners, caps and processing aids

It may be less material when…

  • Organisation-specific evidence does not support significant scale, severity, likelihood or financial effect.
  • The organisation has no meaningful exposure to or influence over the relevant upstream pathway.

Affected stakeholders

  • Business partners
  • Customers / end-users
  • Suppliers
  • Value chain workers

Users of the information

  • Investors / creditors
  • NGOs / civil society
  • Regulators

Standards to check

See how companies report it →

Your preliminary screening decision

Saved in this browser. Your notes leave it only when you export the screening.

  • Governance
  • Industry baseline
  • Strong industry signal
  • Double materiality

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Governance of high-risk ingredient provenance and supplier controls, including supplier approval, commodity procurement, farm-to-factory traceability, certification evidence, authenticity testing, deforestation-free sourcing, food fraud prevention, supplier-specific data and audit readiness for retailer and export requirements.

How it shows up in this industry

Processed food manufacturers buy grains, potatoes, tomatoes, fruit, vegetables, nuts, cocoa, coffee, sugar, meat, fish, dairy, palm oil, rapeseed oil, sunflower oil, spices, honey and functional ingredients through farmers, brokers, traders, ports, bonded warehouses, co-packers and primary processors. Commodity price spikes and complex origins increase exposure to adulteration, species substitution, unsupported sustainability claims and failure to meet retailer, certification or import requirements.

Why it may be material

Weak traceability can lead to import holds, retailer delisting, private-label tender losses, claims challenges, financing scrutiny and liabilities under food law, deforestation-related regimes or customer contracts. Strong provenance controls protect revenue by supporting audits, export market access, certification claims, recall precision and continuity of supply for priority commodities.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach ecosystems.
  2. Potential effects may reach supply-chain workers.
  3. Potential effects may reach affected communities.
  4. Potential effects may reach Indigenous peoples.
  5. Potential effects may reach consumers.
  6. Potential effects may reach downstream users.
  7. Potential effects may reach future generations.
  8. Potential effects may reach the atmosphere.
  9. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Affected communities, Business partners, Customers / end-users, Suppliers.
  10. The source places the pathway in Upstream, Own operations, Downstream, Cross value chain.

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may affect demand, pricing, market access or product and service revenue.
  2. The topic may change operating costs through resource use, controls, remediation or ongoing management.
  3. The topic may require capital expenditure to adapt assets, processes or infrastructure.
  4. The topic may create provisions, penalties, remediation costs, claims or other liabilities.
  5. The topic may affect access to finance, funding terms or the cost of capital.
  6. The topic may affect asset useful lives, impairment assumptions, valuations or stranded-asset exposure.
  7. The topic may affect reputation, licences to operate, intellectual property or other intangible value.

Questions to test

  • What evidence supports both the impact and financial materiality pathways?
  • Which upstream activities, suppliers or inputs create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Which own operations, assets or decisions create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Which products, services, customers or end uses create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Where across the value chain is the pathway most significant?
  • What current or proposed regulation could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Biodiversity, habitat and ecosystem-impact evidence
  • Supplier workforce, audit, grievance and remediation records
  • Community engagement, grievance and impact records
  • Indigenous engagement, consent, grievance and impact records
  • Consumer outcome, complaint and product-impact records
  • Downstream-user outcome, complaint and product-use evidence
  • Long-term scenario, cumulative-impact and intergenerational analysis
  • Emissions, air-quality and atmospheric-impact records linked to the topic
  • Revenue, demand, pricing and market-access analysis linked to the topic
  • Operating-cost records and budgets linked to the topic
  • Capital plans, asset adaptation budgets and investment approvals
  • Provision, claim, penalty, remediation and contingent-liability records
  • Funding terms, lender or investor requirements and cost-of-capital analysis
  • Asset valuations, useful-life assumptions, impairment tests and stranded-asset analysis
  • Reputation, licence-to-operate, intellectual-property and other intangible-value evidence
  • Process-map item (assets): Ingredient intake bays, silos, chilled stores and frozen stores for grains, oils, dairy ingredients, meat, fruit, vegetables, sugar, salt and additives
  • Process-map item (assets): Food safety management systems, batch traceability platforms, enterprise resource planning, recipe control and production scheduling software
  • Process-map item (assets): Brands, private-label supply contracts, product formulations, recipes, sensory panels and consumer insight data
  • Process-map item (customers): Industrial food manufacturers buying intermediate products such as fillings, coatings, flavour bases, frozen vegetables, dried mixes and oils
  • Process-map item (customers): Pet food and animal feed manufacturers using suitable food by-products and downgraded edible material

It may be less material when…

  • Organisation-specific evidence does not support significant scale, severity, likelihood or financial effect.
  • The organisation has no meaningful exposure to or influence over the relevant upstream or downstream pathway.
  • The emerging signal has not yet created a relevant exposure, impact or financial effect for the organisation.

Affected stakeholders

  • Affected communities
  • Business partners
  • Customers / end-users
  • Suppliers

Users of the information

  • Board / management
  • Investors / creditors
  • NGOs / civil society
  • Regulators

Standards to check

See how companies report it →

Your preliminary screening decision

Saved in this browser. Your notes leave it only when you export the screening.

  • Governance
  • Industry baseline
  • Strong industry signal
  • Double materiality

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Controls over alcohol promotion across digital, retail, hospitality, sponsorship and influencer channels to prevent underage targeting, harmful-drinking cues and misleading wellness or lifestyle claims.

How it shows up in this industry

Alcohol brands rely on pubs, bars, retailers, duty-free, e-commerce, subscription clubs, taprooms, sports sponsorship, music venues, social media and influencer campaigns. Marketing, price promotions and weak age controls can shape underage drinking, binge drinking, drinking during pregnancy and wider alcohol-related harm.

Why it may be material

Alcohol harm scrutiny can affect volumes, brand equity, advertising access, sponsorship rights, e-commerce channels and litigation exposure. Digital channels and influencer marketing can move faster than traditional codes, creating regulatory, reputational and revenue consequences.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach consumers.
  2. Potential effects may reach affected communities.
  3. Potential effects may reach emergency responders.
  4. Potential effects may reach future generations.
  5. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Affected communities, Customers / end-users.
  6. The source places the pathway in Downstream, Cross value chain.

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may affect demand, pricing, market access or product and service revenue.
  2. The topic may create provisions, penalties, remediation costs, claims or other liabilities.
  3. The topic may affect reputation, licences to operate, intellectual property or other intangible value.
  4. The topic may change operating costs through resource use, controls, remediation or ongoing management.
  5. The topic may affect access to finance, funding terms or the cost of capital.

Questions to test

  • What evidence supports both the impact and financial materiality pathways?
  • Which products, services, customers or end uses create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Where across the value chain is the pathway most significant?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on consumers?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on affected communities?
  • What current or proposed regulation could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Consumer outcome, complaint and product-impact records
  • Community engagement, grievance and impact records
  • Emergency-response plans, incident logs and responder feedback
  • Long-term scenario, cumulative-impact and intergenerational analysis
  • Revenue, demand, pricing and market-access analysis linked to the topic
  • Provision, claim, penalty, remediation and contingent-liability records
  • Reputation, licence-to-operate, intellectual-property and other intangible-value evidence
  • Operating-cost records and budgets linked to the topic
  • Funding terms, lender or investor requirements and cost-of-capital analysis
  • Process-map item (assets): Quality laboratories for microbiology, sensory testing, alcohol strength, methanol, sulphites and contaminant analysis
  • Process-map item (customers): Export distributors and local market brand owners in regulated alcohol markets
  • Process-map item (customers): Consumers of beer, cider, wine, spirits, liqueurs, ready-to-drink cocktails and low or no alcohol variants
  • Process-map item (emerging_pressures): Tighter alcohol health labelling, calorie disclosure, ingredient disclosure and pregnancy warning requirements
  • Process-map item (emerging_pressures): Expansion of minimum unit pricing, excise reform, advertising restrictions and digital age-gating rules

It may be less material when…

  • Organisation-specific evidence does not support significant scale, severity, likelihood or financial effect.
  • The organisation has no meaningful exposure to or influence over the relevant downstream pathway.

Affected stakeholders

  • Affected communities
  • Customers / end-users

Users of the information

  • Board / management
  • Local authorities
  • Media
  • NGOs / civil society
  • Regulators

Standards to check

See how companies report it →

Your preliminary screening decision

Saved in this browser. Your notes leave it only when you export the screening.

  • Governance
  • Industry baseline
  • Strong industry signal
  • Double materiality

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Governance of beverage marketing, labelling and claim substantiation to prevent misleading nutrition, health, functional, caffeine, environmental and carbon-related communication.

How it shows up in this industry

Beverage brands market energy drinks, sports drinks, fortified functional drinks, kombucha, flavoured waters, juices, plant-based drinks and ready-to-drink teas and coffees through retailers, food-service channels, schools, hospitals, event venues, online platforms and vending. Claims about health, hydration, caffeine, naturalness, vitamins, probiotics, performance, recyclability and product carbon can influence consumption behaviour and purchasing decisions.

Why it may be material

Regulatory and litigation scrutiny is tightening around high-sugar and high-caffeine drinks, child and youth marketing, functional claims, naturalness claims, green claims and product carbon evidence. Weak claims governance can trigger advertising rulings, product relabelling, retailer penalties, litigation and brand erosion.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach consumers.
  2. Potential effects may reach downstream users.
  3. Potential effects may reach affected communities.
  4. Potential effects may reach future generations.
  5. Potential effects may reach the atmosphere.
  6. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Customers / end-users.
  7. The source places the pathway in Own operations, Downstream, Cross value chain.

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may affect demand, pricing, market access or product and service revenue.
  2. The topic may create provisions, penalties, remediation costs, claims or other liabilities.
  3. The topic may affect reputation, licences to operate, intellectual property or other intangible value.
  4. The topic may change operating costs through resource use, controls, remediation or ongoing management.
  5. The topic may affect access to finance, funding terms or the cost of capital.

Questions to test

  • What evidence supports both the impact and financial materiality pathways?
  • Which own operations, assets or decisions create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Which products, services, customers or end uses create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Where across the value chain is the pathway most significant?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on consumers?
  • What current or proposed regulation could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Consumer outcome, complaint and product-impact records
  • Downstream-user outcome, complaint and product-use evidence
  • Community engagement, grievance and impact records
  • Long-term scenario, cumulative-impact and intergenerational analysis
  • Emissions, air-quality and atmospheric-impact records linked to the topic
  • Revenue, demand, pricing and market-access analysis linked to the topic
  • Provision, claim, penalty, remediation and contingent-liability records
  • Reputation, licence-to-operate, intellectual-property and other intangible-value evidence
  • Operating-cost records and budgets linked to the topic
  • Funding terms, lender or investor requirements and cost-of-capital analysis
  • Process-map item (assets): Syrup rooms with bulk sugar silos, high-fructose syrup tanks, ingredient dosing skids and flavour concentrate stores
  • Process-map item (assets): Water treatment plants using filtration, activated carbon, reverse osmosis, UV and ozone systems
  • Process-map item (assets): Clean-in-place systems, caustic and acid chemical stores, compressed air plants, boilers, chillers and refrigeration systems
  • Process-map item (assets): Enterprise resource planning, batch traceability, recipe management, allergen control and retailer order systems
  • Process-map item (customers): Export distributors and importers handling regional soft drink, juice, bottled water and functional drink brands

It may be less material when…

  • Organisation-specific evidence does not support significant scale, severity, likelihood or financial effect.
  • The organisation has no meaningful exposure to or influence over the relevant downstream pathway.

Affected stakeholders

  • Customers / end-users

Users of the information

  • Board / management
  • Investors / creditors
  • Media
  • NGOs / civil society
  • Regulators

Standards to check

See how companies report it →

Your preliminary screening decision

Saved in this browser. Your notes leave it only when you export the screening.

  • Governance
  • Industry baseline
  • Moderate industry signal
  • Financial materiality

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Governance of beverage industry public policy engagement, lobbying, political contributions and trade association alignment on regulation affecting nutrition, packaging, water and marketing.

How it shows up in this industry

Non-alcoholic beverage companies are directly affected by sugar taxes, marketing rules for high-sugar and high-caffeine products, deposit return schemes, packaging extended producer responsibility, recycled-content rules, food labelling requirements and water abstraction policies. The industry may engage with regulators, local authorities and trade associations on the design, timing and scope of these regimes.

Why it may be material

Policy engagement can influence material cost and revenue drivers, but misalignment between lobbying positions and public commitments on health, packaging or water can create reputational, investor and regulatory scrutiny. Transparent governance is especially important because the industry lobbies on rules that affect consumer health and packaging waste.

Impact pathway

  1. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Customers / end-users.
  2. The source places the pathway in Own operations, Cross value chain.

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may affect demand, pricing, market access or product and service revenue.
  2. The topic may change operating costs through resource use, controls, remediation or ongoing management.
  3. The topic may create provisions, penalties, remediation costs, claims or other liabilities.
  4. The topic may affect reputation, licences to operate, intellectual property or other intangible value.
  5. The topic may affect access to finance, funding terms or the cost of capital.

Questions to test

  • What evidence shows current or anticipated financial effects on the organisation?
  • Which own operations, assets or decisions create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Where across the value chain is the pathway most significant?
  • Could this topic affect demand, pricing, market access or revenue?
  • Could this topic change operating costs or the cost of controls and remediation?
  • What current or proposed regulation could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Revenue, demand, pricing and market-access analysis linked to the topic
  • Operating-cost records and budgets linked to the topic
  • Provision, claim, penalty, remediation and contingent-liability records
  • Reputation, licence-to-operate, intellectual-property and other intangible-value evidence
  • Funding terms, lender or investor requirements and cost-of-capital analysis
  • Process-map item (assets): Syrup rooms with bulk sugar silos, high-fructose syrup tanks, ingredient dosing skids and flavour concentrate stores
  • Process-map item (assets): Water treatment plants using filtration, activated carbon, reverse osmosis, UV and ozone systems
  • Process-map item (assets): Quality laboratories for microbiology, brix, pH, carbonation, sensory testing and packaging migration checks
  • Process-map item (customers): Export distributors and importers handling regional soft drink, juice, bottled water and functional drink brands
  • Process-map item (customers): Consumers of carbonated soft drinks, bottled water, juices, energy drinks, sports drinks, mixers, ready-to-drink tea and coffee, kombucha and plant-based drinks

It may be less material when…

  • The organisation's scale, exposure or effects are below the threshold set for further assessment.

Affected stakeholders

  • Customers / end-users

Users of the information

  • Board / management
  • Investors / creditors
  • Local authorities
  • Media
  • NGOs / civil society
  • Regulators

Standards to check

See how companies report it →

Your preliminary screening decision

Saved in this browser. Your notes leave it only when you export the screening.

  • Governance
  • Business-model dependent
  • Moderate industry signal
  • Double materiality

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Governance and transparency of corporate and trade association engagement on alcohol excise, pricing, labelling, licensing, advertising, sponsorship and public-health regulation.

How it shows up in this industry

Alcoholic beverage producers operate in policy-sensitive markets shaped by excise reform, minimum unit pricing, licensing hours, advertising restrictions, health warnings, digital age-gating, sponsorship rules and responsible retailing obligations. Companies and trade associations may engage directly with governments, regulators and public-health debates that influence both revenue models and social harm outcomes.

Why it may be material

Public-policy engagement can materially affect pricing, advertising access, route to market and labelling obligations, while misalignment with harm-reduction commitments can trigger reputational damage and investor scrutiny. The topic is distinct from compliance because it concerns how companies seek to shape the rules governing alcohol.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach consumers.
  2. Potential effects may reach affected communities.
  3. Potential effects may reach future generations.
  4. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Affected communities.
  5. The source places the pathway in Own operations, Downstream, Cross value chain.

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may affect demand, pricing, market access or product and service revenue.
  2. The topic may create provisions, penalties, remediation costs, claims or other liabilities.
  3. The topic may affect reputation, licences to operate, intellectual property or other intangible value.
  4. The topic may affect access to finance, funding terms or the cost of capital.

Questions to test

  • What evidence supports both the impact and financial materiality pathways?
  • Which own operations, assets or decisions create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Which products, services, customers or end uses create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Where across the value chain is the pathway most significant?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on consumers?
  • What current or proposed regulation could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Consumer outcome, complaint and product-impact records
  • Community engagement, grievance and impact records
  • Long-term scenario, cumulative-impact and intergenerational analysis
  • Revenue, demand, pricing and market-access analysis linked to the topic
  • Provision, claim, penalty, remediation and contingent-liability records
  • Reputation, licence-to-operate, intellectual-property and other intangible-value evidence
  • Funding terms, lender or investor requirements and cost-of-capital analysis
  • Process-map item (assets): Quality laboratories for microbiology, sensory testing, alcohol strength, methanol, sulphites and contaminant analysis
  • Process-map item (customers): On-trade customers such as pubs, bars, restaurants, hotels, clubs and music venues
  • Process-map item (customers): Off-trade retailers including supermarkets, convenience stores, bottle shops and specialist wine merchants
  • Process-map item (customers): Export distributors and local market brand owners in regulated alcohol markets
  • Process-map item (customers): Consumers of beer, cider, wine, spirits, liqueurs, ready-to-drink cocktails and low or no alcohol variants

It may be less material when…

  • The organisation's scale, exposure or effects are below the threshold set for further assessment.
  • The relevant business model, activity, asset or product is not present or is not significant.
  • The organisation has no meaningful exposure to or influence over the relevant downstream pathway.

Affected stakeholders

  • Affected communities

Users of the information

  • Board / management
  • Investors / creditors
  • Media
  • NGOs / civil society
  • Regulators

Standards to check

See how companies report it →

Your preliminary screening decision

Saved in this browser. Your notes leave it only when you export the screening.

  • Governance
  • Business-model dependent
  • Moderate industry signal
  • Double materiality

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Cybersecurity and digital resilience of beverage production, recipe, traceability, quality, order and packaging return systems where failures can affect product safety, recall readiness and customer supply.

How it shows up in this industry

Beverage producers rely on enterprise resource planning, batch traceability, recipe management, allergen control, quality laboratories, coding systems, automated storage, retailer order platforms and increasingly digital deposit return or refill infrastructure. Cyber disruption or data manipulation can impair recall execution, allergen controls, production scheduling, customer orders and the integrity of sustainability or packaging return data.

Why it may be material

Digital systems underpin food safety, recall speed, retailer service levels and packaging return records. Cyber incidents can therefore create product safety, operational, liability, insurance and customer trust consequences rather than only information technology downtime.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach consumers.
  2. Potential effects may reach workers.
  3. Potential effects may reach downstream users.
  4. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Business partners, Customers / end-users, Employees.
  5. The source places the pathway in Own operations, Downstream, Cross value chain.

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may affect demand, pricing, market access or product and service revenue.
  2. The topic may change operating costs through resource use, controls, remediation or ongoing management.
  3. The topic may require capital expenditure to adapt assets, processes or infrastructure.
  4. The topic may create provisions, penalties, remediation costs, claims or other liabilities.
  5. The topic may affect insurance availability, coverage terms, premiums or claims.
  6. The topic may affect reputation, licences to operate, intellectual property or other intangible value.

Questions to test

  • What evidence supports both the impact and financial materiality pathways?
  • Which own operations, assets or decisions create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Which products, services, customers or end uses create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Where across the value chain is the pathway most significant?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on consumers?
  • What technology changes could alter the topic's impacts or financial effects?

Evidence to collect

  • Consumer outcome, complaint and product-impact records
  • Workforce, health and safety, engagement and grievance records
  • Downstream-user outcome, complaint and product-use evidence
  • Revenue, demand, pricing and market-access analysis linked to the topic
  • Operating-cost records and budgets linked to the topic
  • Capital plans, asset adaptation budgets and investment approvals
  • Provision, claim, penalty, remediation and contingent-liability records
  • Insurance coverage, premium, exclusion and claims records
  • Reputation, licence-to-operate, intellectual-property and other intangible-value evidence
  • Process-map item (assets): Enterprise resource planning, batch traceability, recipe management, allergen control and retailer order systems
  • Process-map item (emerging_pressures): Expansion of deposit return schemes and digital return infrastructure for PET bottles, aluminium cans and glass containers
  • Process-map item (emerging_pressures): Increased use of reusable packaging, refill stations and concentrate formats that change hygiene, traceability and reverse logistics requirements
  • Process-map item (financial_channels): Packaging extended producer responsibility fees, deposit return scheme obligations and recycled-content compliance costs
  • Process-map item (financial_channels): Retailer listing access tied to nutrition profiles, packaging recyclability, responsible sourcing and traceability evidence

It may be less material when…

  • The organisation's scale, exposure or effects are below the threshold set for further assessment.
  • The relevant business model, activity, asset or product is not present or is not significant.
  • The organisation has no meaningful exposure to or influence over the relevant downstream pathway.
  • The emerging signal has not yet created a relevant exposure, impact or financial effect for the organisation.

Affected stakeholders

  • Business partners
  • Customers / end-users
  • Employees

Users of the information

  • Board / management
  • Investors / creditors
  • Regulators

Standards to check

See how companies report it →

Your preliminary screening decision

Saved in this browser. Your notes leave it only when you export the screening.

  • Governance
  • Business-model dependent
  • Moderate industry signal
  • Double materiality
  • Cross-cutting

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Governance and control of cyber threats affecting digitally enabled processed food factories, warehouses and co-manufacturing interfaces, with emphasis on the security, availability and recoverability of operational technology and factory information systems that support production continuity, refrigeration, automated storage, dispatch and operational record availability.

How it shows up in this industry

Processed food manufacturers rely on digitally connected mixing, cooking, baking, filling, packaging, in-line inspection, refrigeration, automated storage and dispatch systems, often linked with enterprise resource planning, manufacturing execution and retailer audit platforms. Cyber compromise can halt lines, disrupt chilled and frozen logistics, disable factory scheduling, affect automated equipment states and undermine the availability or integrity of operational records needed during customer audits or incident response.

Why it may be material

Automation, robotics, connected refrigeration, remote maintenance and digital links with co-packers and retailers increase cyber exposure in processed food factories and warehouses. A material incident can cause production stoppages, spoilage, missed retailer service levels, ransom or recovery costs, higher insurance deductibles and liabilities where operational records or system availability are compromised.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach workers.
  2. Potential effects may reach contractors.
  3. Potential effects may reach consumers.
  4. Potential effects may reach downstream users.
  5. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Business partners, Contractors, Customers / end-users, Employees.
  6. The source places the pathway in Own operations, Downstream, Cross value chain.

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may affect demand, pricing, market access or product and service revenue.
  2. The topic may change operating costs through resource use, controls, remediation or ongoing management.
  3. The topic may require capital expenditure to adapt assets, processes or infrastructure.
  4. The topic may create provisions, penalties, remediation costs, claims or other liabilities.
  5. The topic may affect insurance availability, coverage terms, premiums or claims.
  6. The topic may affect reputation, licences to operate, intellectual property or other intangible value.

Questions to test

  • What evidence supports both the impact and financial materiality pathways?
  • Which own operations, assets or decisions create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Which products, services, customers or end uses create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Where across the value chain is the pathway most significant?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on workers?
  • What technology changes could alter the topic's impacts or financial effects?

Evidence to collect

  • Workforce, health and safety, engagement and grievance records
  • Contractor working-condition, incident and engagement records
  • Consumer outcome, complaint and product-impact records
  • Downstream-user outcome, complaint and product-use evidence
  • Revenue, demand, pricing and market-access analysis linked to the topic
  • Operating-cost records and budgets linked to the topic
  • Capital plans, asset adaptation budgets and investment approvals
  • Provision, claim, penalty, remediation and contingent-liability records
  • Insurance coverage, premium, exclusion and claims records
  • Reputation, licence-to-operate, intellectual-property and other intangible-value evidence
  • Process-map item (assets): High-care and high-risk production rooms with controlled hygiene zoning, air handling, positive pressure and temperature control
  • Process-map item (assets): Quality control laboratories for microbiology, allergen testing, water activity, shelf-life testing and contaminant screening
  • Process-map item (assets): Food safety management systems, batch traceability platforms, enterprise resource planning, recipe control and production scheduling software
  • Process-map item (customers): Industrial food manufacturers buying intermediate products such as fillings, coatings, flavour bases, frozen vegetables, dried mixes and oils
  • Process-map item (emerging_pressures): Automation, robotics and digital traceability changing workforce skills, maintenance needs and cyber-risk exposure

It may be less material when…

  • The organisation's scale, exposure or effects are below the threshold set for further assessment.
  • The relevant business model, activity, asset or product is not present or is not significant.
  • The organisation has no meaningful exposure to or influence over the relevant downstream pathway.
  • The emerging signal has not yet created a relevant exposure, impact or financial effect for the organisation.

Affected stakeholders

  • Business partners
  • Contractors
  • Customers / end-users
  • Employees

Users of the information

  • Board / management
  • Investors / creditors
  • Regulators

Standards to check

See how companies report it →

Your preliminary screening decision

Saved in this browser. Your notes leave it only when you export the screening.

  • Governance
  • Business-model dependent
  • Moderate industry signal
  • Double materiality

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Traceability and control systems that substantiate origin, protected geographical indication, organic and premium provenance claims while reducing counterfeit, refilled, diverted or adulterated alcohol in regulated markets.

How it shows up in this industry

Alcoholic beverage value chains include protected designation and protected geographical indication wines and spirits, origin-sensitive inputs such as grapes, agave, botanicals and oak, organic ingredients, premium regional claims and high-value branded products exposed to diversion or refilling. Traceability expectations are rising for export, e-commerce, travel retail and premium spirits markets.

Why it may be material

Provenance and anti-counterfeit controls protect premium pricing, customer confidence, tax compliance and protected regional brands. Failures can expose consumers to adulterated products, trigger geographical indication disputes and weaken retailer or export market access.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach consumers.
  2. Potential effects may reach downstream users.
  3. Potential effects may reach affected communities.
  4. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Business partners, Customers / end-users, Suppliers.
  5. The source places the pathway in Upstream, Own operations, Downstream, Cross value chain.

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may affect demand, pricing, market access or product and service revenue.
  2. The topic may create provisions, penalties, remediation costs, claims or other liabilities.
  3. The topic may affect reputation, licences to operate, intellectual property or other intangible value.
  4. The topic may affect asset useful lives, impairment assumptions, valuations or stranded-asset exposure.
  5. The topic may change operating costs through resource use, controls, remediation or ongoing management.

Questions to test

  • What evidence supports both the impact and financial materiality pathways?
  • Which upstream activities, suppliers or inputs create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Which own operations, assets or decisions create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Which products, services, customers or end uses create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Where across the value chain is the pathway most significant?
  • What current or proposed regulation could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Consumer outcome, complaint and product-impact records
  • Downstream-user outcome, complaint and product-use evidence
  • Community engagement, grievance and impact records
  • Revenue, demand, pricing and market-access analysis linked to the topic
  • Provision, claim, penalty, remediation and contingent-liability records
  • Reputation, licence-to-operate, intellectual-property and other intangible-value evidence
  • Asset valuations, useful-life assumptions, impairment tests and stranded-asset analysis
  • Operating-cost records and budgets linked to the topic
  • Process-map item (assets): Quality laboratories for microbiology, sensory testing, alcohol strength, methanol, sulphites and contaminant analysis
  • Process-map item (assets): Brand portfolios, geographical indications, recipes, yeast strains, maturation know-how and consumer data platforms
  • Process-map item (customers): Export distributors and local market brand owners in regulated alcohol markets
  • Process-map item (customers): Consumers of beer, cider, wine, spirits, liqueurs, ready-to-drink cocktails and low or no alcohol variants
  • Process-map item (emerging_pressures): Tighter alcohol health labelling, calorie disclosure, ingredient disclosure and pregnancy warning requirements

It may be less material when…

  • The organisation's scale, exposure or effects are below the threshold set for further assessment.
  • The relevant business model, activity, asset or product is not present or is not significant.
  • The organisation has no meaningful exposure to or influence over the relevant upstream or downstream pathway.
  • The emerging signal has not yet created a relevant exposure, impact or financial effect for the organisation.

Affected stakeholders

  • Business partners
  • Customers / end-users
  • Suppliers

Users of the information

  • Board / management
  • Investors / creditors
  • Regulators

Standards to check

See how companies report it →

Your preliminary screening decision

Saved in this browser. Your notes leave it only when you export the screening.

  • Governance
  • Business-model dependent
  • Moderate industry signal
  • Financial materiality

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Governance of processed food public policy engagement, including lobbying, political contributions, trade association alignment and policy positions on nutrition, labelling, advertising, packaging, sourcing and trade rules.

How it shows up in this industry

Processed food companies and trade associations engage with public policy on high fat, salt and sugar restrictions, advertising and placement rules, food information, nutrition labelling, additives, packaging EPR, deposit return, plastic taxes, sanitary and phytosanitary rules, deforestation-free sourcing and trade access. These policy choices directly affect product portfolios, line investment, customer contracts and consumer health outcomes.

Why it may be material

Public policy engagement is material where companies seek to shape rules that affect core processed food categories, packaging costs and sourcing requirements. Misalignment between lobbying positions and public nutrition, climate, packaging or responsible sourcing commitments can create reputational, investor and regulatory scrutiny.

Impact pathway

  1. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Customers / end-users.
  2. The source places the pathway in Own operations, Cross value chain.

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may affect demand, pricing, market access or product and service revenue.
  2. The topic may change operating costs through resource use, controls, remediation or ongoing management.
  3. The topic may require capital expenditure to adapt assets, processes or infrastructure.
  4. The topic may create provisions, penalties, remediation costs, claims or other liabilities.
  5. The topic may affect access to finance, funding terms or the cost of capital.
  6. The topic may affect reputation, licences to operate, intellectual property or other intangible value.

Questions to test

  • What evidence shows current or anticipated financial effects on the organisation?
  • Which own operations, assets or decisions create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Where across the value chain is the pathway most significant?
  • Could this topic affect demand, pricing, market access or revenue?
  • Could this topic change operating costs or the cost of controls and remediation?
  • What current or proposed regulation could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Revenue, demand, pricing and market-access analysis linked to the topic
  • Operating-cost records and budgets linked to the topic
  • Capital plans, asset adaptation budgets and investment approvals
  • Provision, claim, penalty, remediation and contingent-liability records
  • Funding terms, lender or investor requirements and cost-of-capital analysis
  • Reputation, licence-to-operate, intellectual-property and other intangible-value evidence
  • Process-map item (assets): Food safety management systems, batch traceability platforms, enterprise resource planning, recipe control and production scheduling software
  • Process-map item (customers): Industrial food manufacturers buying intermediate products such as fillings, coatings, flavour bases, frozen vegetables, dried mixes and oils
  • Process-map item (customers): Public procurement bodies buying shelf-stable, chilled or frozen foods for institutions
  • Process-map item (customers): Pet food and animal feed manufacturers using suitable food by-products and downgraded edible material
  • Process-map item (emerging_pressures): Extended producer responsibility, deposit return and plastic packaging taxes increasing the cost of multilayer films, pouches and difficult-to-recycle formats

It may be less material when…

  • The organisation's scale, exposure or effects are below the threshold set for further assessment.
  • The relevant business model, activity, asset or product is not present or is not significant.

Affected stakeholders

  • Customers / end-users

Users of the information

  • Board / management
  • Investors / creditors
  • Local authorities
  • Media
  • NGOs / civil society
  • Regulators

Standards to check

See how companies report it →

Your preliminary screening decision

Saved in this browser. Your notes leave it only when you export the screening.

  • Governance
  • Business-model dependent
  • Moderate industry signal
  • Double materiality

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Governance of human rights and labour due diligence across agricultural, ingredient, co-manufacturing and logistics suppliers, including supplier assessment, corrective action, grievance access, modern slavery controls and purchasing practices affecting vulnerable value chain workers.

How it shows up in this industry

Processed food supply chains include farms, fisheries, plantations, primary processors, labour providers, brokers, ports, cold stores, co-packers and logistics partners. Inputs such as cocoa, coffee, palm oil, sugar, fruit, vegetables, fish, meat and spices can be associated with vulnerable workers, seasonal labour, recruitment intermediaries, price volatility and purchasing specifications that affect livelihoods and working conditions.

Why it may be material

Retailers, investors and regulators increasingly expect due diligence for modern slavery, forced labour and vulnerable workers in food supply chains. Failures can lead to tender loss, import restrictions, litigation, financing scrutiny and reputational damage, while fair purchasing practices can improve continuity and supplier quality.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach supply-chain workers.
  2. Potential effects may reach affected communities.
  3. Potential effects may reach Indigenous peoples.
  4. Potential effects may reach workers.
  5. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Business partners, Customers / end-users, Suppliers, Value chain workers.
  6. The source places the pathway in Upstream, Cross value chain.

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may affect demand, pricing, market access or product and service revenue.
  2. The topic may change operating costs through resource use, controls, remediation or ongoing management.
  3. The topic may create provisions, penalties, remediation costs, claims or other liabilities.
  4. The topic may affect access to finance, funding terms or the cost of capital.
  5. The topic may affect reputation, licences to operate, intellectual property or other intangible value.

Questions to test

  • What evidence supports both the impact and financial materiality pathways?
  • Which upstream activities, suppliers or inputs create or concentrate the pathway?
  • Where across the value chain is the pathway most significant?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on supply-chain workers?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on affected communities?
  • What current or proposed regulation could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Supplier workforce, audit, grievance and remediation records
  • Community engagement, grievance and impact records
  • Indigenous engagement, consent, grievance and impact records
  • Workforce, health and safety, engagement and grievance records
  • Revenue, demand, pricing and market-access analysis linked to the topic
  • Operating-cost records and budgets linked to the topic
  • Provision, claim, penalty, remediation and contingent-liability records
  • Funding terms, lender or investor requirements and cost-of-capital analysis
  • Reputation, licence-to-operate, intellectual-property and other intangible-value evidence
  • Process-map item (assets): Brands, private-label supply contracts, product formulations, recipes, sensory panels and consumer insight data
  • Process-map item (customers): End consumers purchasing ready meals, canned foods, snacks, cereals, bakery products, condiments, confectionery and frozen foods
  • Process-map item (emerging_pressures): Climate-related supplier disruption affecting cocoa, coffee, grains, vegetable oils, tomatoes, potatoes, fruit and sugar crops
  • Process-map item (emerging_pressures): Growing retailer and investor demands for Scope 3 emissions data, farm-level traceability and deforestation-free commodity sourcing
  • Process-map item (emerging_pressures): Increasing food fraud risks linked to commodity price spikes, including adulteration of oils, spices, honey, meat and premium ingredients

It may be less material when…

  • The organisation's scale, exposure or effects are below the threshold set for further assessment.
  • The relevant business model, activity, asset or product is not present or is not significant.
  • The organisation has no meaningful exposure to or influence over the relevant upstream pathway.

Affected stakeholders

  • Business partners
  • Customers / end-users
  • Suppliers
  • Value chain workers

Users of the information

  • Investors / creditors
  • NGOs / civil society
  • Regulators

Standards to check

See how companies report it →

Your preliminary screening decision

Saved in this browser. Your notes leave it only when you export the screening.

An initial screening — not a materiality assessment

To turn a shortlist into a defensible result, you still need to:

  • engage affected stakeholders
  • assess severity and likelihood
  • evaluate financial effects
  • define thresholds
  • document governance and approval
  • keep an audit trail
Certified Materiality Assessment for ESG Reporters Course →
How this screening is built, and what it is not

Candidate topics come from the LRA materiality topic catalogue (53 topics for this industry that passed quality checks), aligned to GRI sector numbering and the SASB SICS classification.

Topics, rationales, impact and financial channels, stakeholders and standard hints come from the reviewed catalogue. Workcards and activity matches are generated from it by fixed rules; where LRA has written a workcard or a disclosure mapping by hand, it is labelled as curated.

Your selections, decisions and notes stay in this browser. They are sent to LRA only to build an Excel file when you choose to export, and are not stored.

This is an educational screening aid. It is not issued or endorsed by GRI, the IFRS Foundation, EFRAG or SASB, and it is not a materiality assessment of any organisation.

Initial screening summary

Food and Beverage Processing

Organisation profile

    Include for further assessment

      More evidence required

        Provisionally lower priority

          Important limitation. These are screening decisions only. They have not been validated through stakeholder engagement, severity assessment, financial-effect analysis or formal approval.

          The link carries only the sub-industry and the activities you ticked — never your decisions or notes.

          An .xlsx file with your screening, the workcards and the sources for the chosen sub-industry.