Skip to the screening
Courses

Materiality Navigator·Public Agencies

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.

The arched brick courtyard facade of a government building.
Step 1 Choose the business model you are screening

Candidate topics — Public Agencies

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

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Preparedness of public estates, digital systems, emergency co-ordination and service delivery for physical climate hazards that can disrupt critical administration and public support during heatwaves, floods, storms, wildfire or water stress.

How it shows up in this industry

Public agencies manage civic buildings, depots, archives, emergency operations rooms, public communications channels, records repositories and service counters. Heatwaves, floods, storms, wildfire and water stress can impair public warnings, benefit payments, relief distribution, counter services, data systems and support for older people, disabled people and low-income households.

Why it may be material

Climate hazards can close civic buildings, damage records, disrupt digital and counter services, strain emergency command rooms and impair services relied on by vulnerable residents during extreme weather. Financial effects include adaptation capital expenditure, repair costs, insurance escalation, liability after inadequate preparation and access to resilience-linked finance.

Impact pathway

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

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may require capital expenditure to adapt assets, processes or infrastructure.
  2. The topic may change operating costs through resource use, controls, remediation or ongoing management.
  3. The topic may affect insurance availability, coverage terms, premiums or claims.
  4. The topic may affect asset useful lives, impairment assumptions, valuations or stranded-asset exposure.
  5. The topic may affect access to finance, funding terms or the cost of capital.
  6. 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?
  • 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 affected communities?
  • What scientific evidence or consensus could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Community engagement, grievance and impact records
  • Consumer outcome, complaint and product-impact records
  • Emergency-response plans, incident logs and responder feedback
  • Workforce, health and safety, engagement and grievance records
  • Contractor working-condition, incident and engagement records
  • Long-term scenario, cumulative-impact and intergenerational analysis
  • Water withdrawal, discharge, quality and catchment-impact 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
  • Funding terms, lender or investor requirements and cost-of-capital analysis
  • Provision, claim, penalty, remediation and contingent-liability records
  • Process-map item (assets): Administrative offices, town halls, courts, service counters and call centres used for public-facing transactions
  • Process-map item (assets): Data centres, cloud tenancies, case-management systems, digital identity platforms and public records repositories
  • Process-map item (assets): Vehicle fleets for inspections, social care visits, policing support, waste oversight, emergency response and field maintenance
  • Process-map item (assets): Public communications channels including websites, mobile applications, hotlines, broadcast alerts and notice systems
  • Process-map item (assets): Specialist facilities such as laboratories, archives, depots, evidence stores, training centres and emergency operations rooms

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
  • Contractors
  • Customers / end-users
  • 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
  • Industry baseline
  • Strong industry signal
  • Double materiality

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, energy demand and routine local air pollutants from public buildings, laboratories, depots, data centres, fleets, staff travel and outsourced public service delivery.

How it shows up in this industry

Public agencies occupy offices, town halls, courts, service counters, call centres, depots, laboratories, archives, emergency operations rooms and data processing infrastructure, and operate fleets for inspections, social care visits, enforcement and field maintenance. Purchased electricity, heat, fuels, staff travel and outsourced service contracts create direct and value-chain emissions.

Why it may be material

Energy, heat, fuel and building maintenance costs are material operating expenses, while net zero plans, fleet replacement and building upgrades require capital expenditure. Public agencies are also visible stewards of public sector climate commitments and may depend on climate grants, green bonds or municipal borrowing for estate renewal.

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 future generations.
  5. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Affected communities, Employees, Suppliers.
  6. 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 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 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?
  • Where across the value chain is the pathway most significant?
  • 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

  • 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
  • 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
  • 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): Administrative offices, town halls, courts, service counters and call centres used for public-facing transactions
  • Process-map item (assets): Data centres, cloud tenancies, case-management systems, digital identity platforms and public records repositories
  • Process-map item (assets): Public communications channels including websites, mobile applications, hotlines, broadcast alerts and notice systems
  • Process-map item (assets): Land, rights of way, public buildings, parks, civic spaces and heritage assets under agency stewardship
  • Process-map item (assets): Intangible mandates including statutory powers, licences to operate public registers, enforcement authority and public trust

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

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Reduction, secure handling, reuse, recycling and lawful disposal of public agency waste streams, including electronic equipment, confidential records, office materials, uniforms, laboratory residues, depot materials and refurbishment waste.

How it shows up in this industry

Public agencies generate waste from offices, secure printing, public notices, uniforms, personal protective equipment, obsolete electronics, laboratories, depots, public estate refurbishment and confidential shredding. Waste and hazardous residues move through licensed contractors and contractor-managed stockrooms, making secure, lawful and traceable handling important.

Why it may be material

Waste is less central than service delivery or integrity, but it is a recurring operational impact across offices, laboratories, depots and IT refresh cycles. Mismanaged e-waste, hazardous residues or confidential paper can create environmental harm, data breaches, contractor non-compliance liabilities and public criticism of avoidable waste.

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 workers.
  6. Potential effects may reach contractors.
  7. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Affected communities, Contractors, Employees, Suppliers.
  8. 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 create provisions, penalties, remediation costs, claims or other liabilities.
  3. The topic may require capital expenditure to adapt assets, processes or infrastructure.

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 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
  • Soil and groundwater monitoring, incident and remediation records
  • Community engagement, grievance and impact records
  • Workforce, health and safety, engagement and grievance records
  • Contractor working-condition, incident and engagement records
  • Operating-cost records and budgets linked to the topic
  • Provision, claim, penalty, remediation and contingent-liability records
  • Capital plans, asset adaptation budgets and investment approvals
  • Process-map item (assets): Administrative offices, town halls, courts, service counters and call centres used for public-facing transactions
  • Process-map item (assets): Data centres, cloud tenancies, case-management systems, digital identity platforms and public records repositories
  • Process-map item (assets): Vehicle fleets for inspections, social care visits, policing support, waste oversight, emergency response and field maintenance
  • Process-map item (assets): Public communications channels including websites, mobile applications, hotlines, broadcast alerts and notice systems
  • Process-map item (assets): Land, rights of way, public buildings, parks, civic spaces and heritage assets under agency stewardship

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
  • Suppliers

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.

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

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Management of ecological and community impacts from public land, parks, verges, waterways, drainage assets, heritage spaces, contaminated land duties and planning or infrastructure approvals.

How it shows up in this industry

Many public agencies steward land, rights of way, parks, civic spaces, heritage assets, public forests, waterways and drainage assets, while also issuing planning permissions, infrastructure approvals and compulsory purchase decisions. These activities can shape habitats, urban green space, water quality, contaminated land responsibilities and community access for decades.

Why it may be material

Nature and land stewardship can drive maintenance budgets, remediation liabilities, heritage restoration costs, asset valuations and eligibility for infrastructure or nature funding. Materiality depends on the agency mandate and estate footprint, but weak assessment of land decisions can create legal challenge, project delay, compensation claims and reputational damage.

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 Indigenous peoples.
  7. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Affected communities, Customers / end-users.
  8. The source places the pathway in Own operations, Downstream, Cross value chain.

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may require capital expenditure to adapt assets, processes or infrastructure.
  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 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 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
  • Soil and groundwater monitoring, incident and remediation records
  • Community engagement, grievance and impact records
  • Long-term scenario, cumulative-impact and intergenerational analysis
  • Indigenous engagement, consent, grievance and impact records
  • Capital plans, asset adaptation budgets and investment approvals
  • Operating-cost records and budgets linked to the topic
  • Provision, claim, penalty, remediation and contingent-liability records
  • 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): Administrative offices, town halls, courts, service counters and call centres used for public-facing transactions
  • Process-map item (assets): Data centres, cloud tenancies, case-management systems, digital identity platforms and public records repositories
  • Process-map item (assets): Public communications channels including websites, mobile applications, hotlines, broadcast alerts and notice systems
  • Process-map item (assets): Land, rights of way, public buildings, parks, civic spaces and heritage assets under agency stewardship
  • Process-map item (assets): Intangible mandates including statutory powers, licences to operate public registers, enforcement authority and public trust

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
  • 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
  • Optional / niche
  • Entity-specific validation required
  • Double materiality

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Management of routine water withdrawal, consumption, efficiency, leakage and discharge quality across public estates, laboratories, depots, data facilities and public amenities.

How it shows up in this industry

Public agencies consume water in offices, courts, town halls, laboratories, depots, data processing facilities, parks amenities and, where relevant, custodial, residential or public-facing facilities. Water use is usually not the largest agency impact, but it can become material in water-stressed areas, specialised laboratories, cooling-intensive digital infrastructure or public amenities with high visitor use.

Why it may be material

The issue is context-dependent because many administrative agencies have modest water intensity, while agencies with laboratories, large public estates, data centres, parks, depots or residential facilities can face meaningful water bills, efficiency capital needs, discharge obligations and public scrutiny during droughts.

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.
  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 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 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
  • Asset valuations, useful-life assumptions, impairment tests and stranded-asset analysis
  • Process-map item (assets): Administrative offices, town halls, courts, service counters and call centres used for public-facing transactions
  • Process-map item (assets): Data centres, cloud tenancies, case-management systems, digital identity platforms and public records repositories
  • Process-map item (assets): Public communications channels including websites, mobile applications, hotlines, broadcast alerts and notice systems
  • Process-map item (assets): Land, rights of way, public buildings, parks, civic spaces and heritage assets under agency stewardship
  • Process-map item (assets): Intangible mandates including statutory powers, licences to operate public registers, enforcement authority and public trust

It may be less material when…

  • Entity-specific evidence does not show meaningful scale, exposure or effects.
  • The optional or niche activity linked to the topic is not present.

Affected stakeholders

  • Affected communities

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.

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

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Fair, timely and accessible delivery of public decisions and services, including benefit eligibility, permits, licences, housing, grants, complaints and appeals, with emphasis on real-world hardship from delay, inaccessible channels, poor reasons for decisions or unequal treatment.

How it shows up in this industry

Public agencies issue benefits, grants, housing allocations, permits, licences, identity documents, registrations, certificates, compliance orders and complaint decisions through portals, contact centres, service counters, post and case-management systems. Delays, inaccessible digital-only routes, weak language provision or poor appeals handling can affect residents' income, housing, immigration status, business activity and access to public support.

Why it may be material

Service access and administrative justice are central to public agency mandates. Backlogs and unlawful decisions increase overtime, call-centre costs, appeals handling, legal defence, compensation and ombudsman remedies, while also causing hardship for residents and disruption for businesses before remedies are available.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach affected communities.
  2. Potential effects may reach consumers.
  3. Potential effects may reach downstream users.
  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, 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 demand, pricing, market access or product and service revenue.
  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 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 consumers?
  • What current or proposed regulation could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Community engagement, 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
  • 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
  • Funding terms, lender or investor requirements and cost-of-capital analysis
  • Process-map item (assets): Administrative offices, town halls, courts, service counters and call centres used for public-facing transactions
  • Process-map item (assets): Data centres, cloud tenancies, case-management systems, digital identity platforms and public records repositories
  • Process-map item (assets): Public communications channels including websites, mobile applications, hotlines, broadcast alerts and notice systems
  • Process-map item (assets): Land, rights of way, public buildings, parks, civic spaces and heritage assets under agency stewardship
  • Process-map item (assets): Intangible mandates including statutory powers, licences to operate public registers, enforcement authority and public trust

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
  • 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

Physical safety, mental health, workload, violence prevention, skills, retention and fair working conditions for public agency employees and contractors delivering administrative, field, enforcement and emergency functions.

How it shows up in this industry

Public agencies depend on civil servants, regulators, inspectors, social workers, planners, engineers, analysts, audit staff, call-centre teams, enforcement officers, depot staff, laboratory personnel and emergency co-ordination teams. Their work includes field visits, home visits, public counters, emergency duties, laboratory activities, complaint handling and politically scrutinised casework.

Why it may be material

Skills shortages, ageing workforces, workload pressure and safety failures increase overtime, agency labour spend, sickness absence, workers' compensation, employment disputes, equal pay settlements and pension-related obligations. Reduced workforce capacity also drives backlogs, poorer inspection quality, delayed approvals and weaker grant or fee recovery.

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 consumers.
  5. Potential effects may reach emergency responders.
  6. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Contractors, Customers / end-users, Employees, Trade unions.
  7. 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 demand, pricing, market access or product and service revenue.
  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 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
  • Consumer outcome, complaint and product-impact 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
  • Revenue, demand, pricing and market-access analysis linked to the topic
  • 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): Administrative offices, town halls, courts, service counters and call centres used for public-facing transactions
  • Process-map item (assets): Data centres, cloud tenancies, case-management systems, digital identity platforms and public records repositories
  • Process-map item (assets): Vehicle fleets for inspections, social care visits, policing support, waste oversight, emergency response and field maintenance
  • Process-map item (assets): Public communications channels including websites, mobile applications, hotlines, broadcast alerts and notice systems
  • Process-map item (assets): Land, rights of way, public buildings, parks, civic spaces and heritage assets under agency stewardship

It may be less material when…

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

Affected stakeholders

  • Contractors
  • Customers / end-users
  • 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
  • Emerging issue
  • Moderate industry signal
  • Double materiality

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Quality, accessibility, representativeness and evidential integrity of public consultation, notices, hearings and engagement processes used to shape agency decisions.

How it shows up in this industry

Public agencies run consultations, hearings, notices, planning processes, policy development and statutory guidance for elected bodies. Consultation quality affects decisions on service closures, planning approvals, zoning, enforcement priorities, procurement, emergency planning, parks and public assets.

Why it may be material

Poor consultation can exclude residents affected by planning approvals, service closures, enforcement priorities, zoning, procurement and emergency planning. It can also undermine administrative fairness, increase challenge rates and force costly remaking of decisions after legal or ombudsman findings.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach affected communities.
  2. Potential effects may reach Indigenous peoples.
  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, 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 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 affected communities?
  • What is the scale, scope, likelihood and remediability of effects on Indigenous peoples?
  • What litigation or claims could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Community engagement, grievance and impact records
  • Indigenous engagement, consent, 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
  • Provision, claim, penalty, remediation and contingent-liability records
  • Reputation, licence-to-operate, intellectual-property and other intangible-value evidence
  • Process-map item (assets): Administrative offices, town halls, courts, service counters and call centres used for public-facing transactions
  • Process-map item (assets): Data centres, cloud tenancies, case-management systems, digital identity platforms and public records repositories
  • Process-map item (assets): Public communications channels including websites, mobile applications, hotlines, broadcast alerts and notice systems
  • Process-map item (assets): Land, rights of way, public buildings, parks, civic spaces and heritage assets under agency stewardship
  • Process-map item (assets): Intangible mandates including statutory powers, licences to operate public registers, enforcement authority and public trust

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

  • Affected communities
  • Customers / end-users

Users of the information

  • 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.

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

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Governance, explainability, bias testing, human oversight and challenge mechanisms for AI or automated tools used in public eligibility, licensing, grant, inspection and enforcement decisions.

How it shows up in this industry

Public agencies increasingly use digital identity platforms, automated eligibility scoring, fraud analytics, risk scoring and predictive enforcement across benefits, grants, licensing, permits, inspections and public safety duties. These tools operate within administrative law, data protection and equality duties, and can materially affect people who may not understand or challenge the decision logic.

Why it may be material

Automated public decision-making has been identified across financial, impact and emerging materiality routes. Incorrect, biased or unexplained automated decisions can wrongly deny support or target enforcement, while agencies face judicial review, equality claims, ombudsman criticism, remediation costs and write-off of contested technology programmes.

Impact pathway

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

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may require capital expenditure to adapt assets, processes or infrastructure.
  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 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?
  • 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
  • Consumer outcome, complaint and product-impact records
  • Downstream-user outcome, complaint and product-use evidence
  • Capital plans, asset adaptation budgets and investment approvals
  • 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
  • Revenue, demand, pricing and market-access analysis linked to the topic
  • Process-map item (assets): Administrative offices, town halls, courts, service counters and call centres used for public-facing transactions
  • Process-map item (assets): Data centres, cloud tenancies, case-management systems, digital identity platforms and public records repositories
  • Process-map item (assets): Public communications channels including websites, mobile applications, hotlines, broadcast alerts and notice systems
  • Process-map item (assets): Land, rights of way, public buildings, parks, civic spaces and heritage assets under agency stewardship
  • Process-map item (assets): Intangible mandates including statutory powers, licences to operate public registers, enforcement authority and public trust

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

  • Affected communities
  • Customers / end-users

Users of the information

  • Board / management
  • 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
  • Cross-cutting

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Protection and recovery of critical digital public services, citizen records, payment systems, open registers and emergency communication channels from cyber compromise, ransomware and unauthorised access.

How it shows up in this industry

Public agencies operate citizen databases, public records repositories, digital identity platforms, case-management systems, treasury payment routes, open registers, websites, hotlines and emergency alert channels across data centres, cloud tenancies and shared service platforms. Ransomware or hostile activity can interrupt benefit payments, licensing, inspections, public warnings and inter-agency referrals while exposing sensitive records.

Why it may be material

Cyber resilience has direct financial channels through emergency IT expenditure, cloud and security tools, incident response, data protection penalties, litigation, cyber insurance pricing and loss of statutory fee income when portals or payment systems are unavailable. It also affects privacy, essential service continuity and the public trust needed for digital administration.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach affected communities.
  2. Potential effects may reach consumers.
  3. Potential effects may reach downstream users.
  4. Potential effects may reach emergency responders.
  5. Potential effects may reach future generations.
  6. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Affected communities, Customers / end-users.
  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 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.
  6. 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?
  • 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
  • Consumer outcome, complaint and product-impact records
  • Downstream-user outcome, complaint and product-use evidence
  • Emergency-response plans, incident logs and responder feedback
  • 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
  • Insurance coverage, premium, exclusion and claims records
  • 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): Administrative offices, town halls, courts, service counters and call centres used for public-facing transactions
  • Process-map item (assets): Data centres, cloud tenancies, case-management systems, digital identity platforms and public records repositories
  • Process-map item (assets): Public communications channels including websites, mobile applications, hotlines, broadcast alerts and notice systems
  • Process-map item (assets): Land, rights of way, public buildings, parks, civic spaces and heritage assets under agency stewardship
  • Process-map item (assets): Intangible mandates including statutory powers, licences to operate public registers, enforcement authority and public trust

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
  • 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

Integrity, anti-corruption, anti-fraud, conflict-of-interest, whistleblowing and public finance controls over grants, benefits, fees, penalties, procurement awards, supplier payments, audit responses and agency powers.

How it shows up in this industry

Public agencies administer budgets, grants, benefits, subsidies, service fees, fines, penalties, procurement awards, supplier payments, licences, inspections and enforcement powers under public finance, audit, administrative law and integrity rules. They are subject to oversight by auditors, ombudsmen, integrity bodies, legislatures, courts and the public.

Why it may be material

Integrity failures divert public funds, distort access to services and undermine the legitimacy of official decisions. Financial effects include repayment exposure, compensation, litigation, audit qualifications, funding restrictions, leadership disruption and weakened public support for statutory fees, fines and programmes.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach affected communities.
  2. Potential effects may reach consumers.
  3. Potential effects may reach downstream users.
  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, 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 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 reputation, licences to operate, intellectual property or other intangible value.
  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 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 affected communities?
  • What current or proposed regulation could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Community engagement, 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
  • Provision, claim, penalty, remediation and contingent-liability records
  • Operating-cost records and budgets linked to the topic
  • Revenue, demand, pricing and market-access analysis linked to the topic
  • Funding terms, lender or investor requirements and cost-of-capital analysis
  • Reputation, licence-to-operate, intellectual-property and other intangible-value evidence
  • Asset valuations, useful-life assumptions, impairment tests and stranded-asset analysis
  • Process-map item (assets): Administrative offices, town halls, courts, service counters and call centres used for public-facing transactions
  • Process-map item (assets): Data centres, cloud tenancies, case-management systems, digital identity platforms and public records repositories
  • Process-map item (assets): Vehicle fleets for inspections, social care visits, policing support, waste oversight, emergency response and field maintenance
  • Process-map item (assets): Public communications channels including websites, mobile applications, hotlines, broadcast alerts and notice systems
  • Process-map item (assets): Land, rights of way, public buildings, parks, civic spaces and heritage assets under agency stewardship

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
  • 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
  • Strong industry signal
  • Double materiality

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Governance of public procurement and outsourced service contracts, including supplier due diligence, contract performance, labour and human rights requirements, supplier emissions, whole-life value and social value delivery.

How it shows up in this industry

Public agencies buy construction, facilities management, cleaning, catering, security, waste handling, translation, social service delivery, IT hardware, cloud services, software licences, vehicles, legal advice, audit and consultancy through regulated procurement frameworks and supplier panels. Specifications and monitoring influence labour conditions, emissions, service quality and local social value beyond the agency's own workforce.

Why it may be material

Procurement governs a large share of controllable expenditure and service delivery capacity. Weak supplier due diligence or contract management can cause supplier failure, contract variation claims, procurement challenges, service interruption, modern slavery exposure, wage underpayment findings and failure to meet supplier emissions or social value requirements tied to funding approvals.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach supply-chain workers.
  2. Potential effects may reach workers.
  3. Potential effects may reach contractors.
  4. Potential effects may reach affected communities.
  5. Potential effects may reach consumers.
  6. Potential effects may reach the atmosphere.
  7. Potential effects may reach ecosystems.
  8. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Affected communities, Business partners, Contractors, Customers / end-users, Suppliers, Value chain workers.
  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 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 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 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

  • Supplier workforce, audit, grievance and remediation records
  • Workforce, health and safety, engagement and grievance records
  • Contractor working-condition, incident and engagement records
  • Community engagement, grievance and impact records
  • Consumer outcome, complaint and product-impact records
  • Emissions, air-quality and atmospheric-impact records linked to the topic
  • 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
  • Revenue, demand, pricing and market-access analysis linked to the topic
  • 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): Administrative offices, town halls, courts, service counters and call centres used for public-facing transactions
  • Process-map item (assets): Data centres, cloud tenancies, case-management systems, digital identity platforms and public records repositories
  • Process-map item (assets): Public communications channels including websites, mobile applications, hotlines, broadcast alerts and notice systems
  • Process-map item (assets): Land, rights of way, public buildings, parks, civic spaces and heritage assets under agency stewardship
  • Process-map item (assets): Intangible mandates including statutory powers, licences to operate public registers, enforcement authority and public trust

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

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.

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

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Governance of public record, spending, contract, register and freedom of information publication so that transparency, accountability, privacy, commercial confidentiality and security are balanced.

How it shows up in this industry

Public agencies produce public registers, open datasets, statistics, maps, freedom of information responses, contract notices, supplier payments and grant records. Rising demand for real-time public spending, beneficial ownership and lobbying-related disclosure sits alongside data protection, records retention, commercial confidentiality and security duties.

Why it may be material

Agencies must meet transparency expectations while preventing re-identification, disclosure of commercially sensitive information and exposure of security-relevant records. Poor governance can create data protection penalties and compensation claims, while excessive opacity weakens accountability and public scrutiny of spending and decisions.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach affected communities.
  2. Potential effects may reach consumers.
  3. Potential effects may reach downstream users.
  4. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Customers / end-users, Suppliers.
  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 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 affected communities?
  • 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

  • Community engagement, grievance and impact records
  • Consumer outcome, complaint and product-impact records
  • Downstream-user outcome, complaint and product-use evidence
  • 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
  • Process-map item (assets): Administrative offices, town halls, courts, service counters and call centres used for public-facing transactions
  • Process-map item (assets): Data centres, cloud tenancies, case-management systems, digital identity platforms and public records repositories
  • Process-map item (assets): Public communications channels including websites, mobile applications, hotlines, broadcast alerts and notice systems
  • Process-map item (assets): Land, rights of way, public buildings, parks, civic spaces and heritage assets under agency stewardship
  • Process-map item (assets): Intangible mandates including statutory powers, licences to operate public registers, enforcement authority and public trust

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

  • Customers / end-users
  • Suppliers

Users of the information

  • Board / management
  • 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

Transparency and controls over how public agencies develop policy advice, statutory guidance and regulatory positions, including disclosure of interest-group engagement, lobbying, trade association participation, conflicts of interest and political neutrality safeguards.

How it shows up in this industry

Public agencies prepare policy advice, statutory guidance, standards, consultations, impact assessments and implementation plans for ministers, councillors, governing boards and legislative committees. Regulated entities, suppliers, advocacy bodies, community groups and trade associations may seek to influence rules, enforcement priorities, procurement specifications or planning decisions.

Why it may be material

Policy influence governance is material where agencies shape regulation, enforcement and public spending. Opaque or one-sided influence can undermine public trust, trigger legal challenge or oversight scrutiny, and produce decisions that fail to reflect community, environmental or equality impacts.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach affected communities.
  2. Potential effects may reach consumers.
  3. Potential effects may reach future generations.
  4. Potential effects may reach ecosystems.
  5. Affected stakeholder groups identified in the source include Affected communities, Business partners.
  6. 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 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 affected communities?
  • What current or proposed regulation could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Community engagement, grievance and impact records
  • Consumer outcome, complaint and product-impact records
  • Long-term scenario, cumulative-impact and intergenerational analysis
  • Biodiversity, habitat and ecosystem-impact evidence
  • 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): Administrative offices, town halls, courts, service counters and call centres used for public-facing transactions
  • Process-map item (assets): Data centres, cloud tenancies, case-management systems, digital identity platforms and public records repositories
  • Process-map item (assets): Public communications channels including websites, mobile applications, hotlines, broadcast alerts and notice systems
  • Process-map item (assets): Land, rights of way, public buildings, parks, civic spaces and heritage assets under agency stewardship
  • Process-map item (assets): Intangible mandates including statutory powers, licences to operate public registers, enforcement authority and public trust

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

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
  • Emerging issue
  • Entity-specific validation required
  • Double materiality

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Controls that allow residents, businesses and other agencies to verify the authenticity, provenance and integrity of official public communications, records, certificates and emergency notices.

How it shows up in this industry

Public agencies issue case letters, licences, permits, emergency warnings, public health advice, grant payments, certificates, public notices, registers and secure digital messages through websites, mobile applications, hotlines and broadcast alert systems. Generative AI, spoofing and forged records can make it harder for residents, businesses and other public bodies to verify official instructions during high-stakes situations.

Why it may be material

The issue is still a weak but growing signal, most material for agencies issuing high-consequence alerts, identity documents, licences, certificates, public health advice or emergency notices. Failure to prove authenticity can support fraud, delay protective action and damage trust in official records.

Impact pathway

  1. Potential effects may reach affected communities.
  2. Potential effects may reach consumers.
  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 Own operations, Downstream.

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 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 affected communities?
  • 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

  • Community engagement, grievance and impact records
  • Consumer outcome, complaint and product-impact records
  • Emergency-response plans, incident logs and responder feedback
  • 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
  • Reputation, licence-to-operate, intellectual-property and other intangible-value evidence
  • Process-map item (assets): Administrative offices, town halls, courts, service counters and call centres used for public-facing transactions
  • Process-map item (assets): Data centres, cloud tenancies, case-management systems, digital identity platforms and public records repositories
  • Process-map item (assets): Public communications channels including websites, mobile applications, hotlines, broadcast alerts and notice systems
  • Process-map item (assets): Land, rights of way, public buildings, parks, civic spaces and heritage assets under agency stewardship
  • Process-map item (assets): Intangible mandates including statutory powers, licences to operate public registers, enforcement authority and public trust

It may be less material when…

  • Entity-specific evidence does not show meaningful scale, exposure or effects.
  • The organisation has no meaningful exposure to or influence over the relevant downstream pathway.
  • The weak signal is not supported by organisation-specific evidence or a credible monitoring trigger.

Affected stakeholders

  • Affected communities
  • 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.

  • Governance
  • Emerging issue
  • Entity-specific validation required
  • Double materiality

Workcard generated from the catalogue

What this topic covers

Necessity, proportionality, bias, privacy, retention and public challenge controls for surveillance, biometric and location-tracking technologies used in public administration, building security and enforcement.

How it shows up in this industry

Public agencies may use facial recognition, location data, access control, CCTV analytics, fraud detection feeds and inter-agency data sharing in enforcement, public safety support, service eligibility and building security. These uses sit under human rights, equality and data protection regimes and can change how residents experience services and public spaces.

Why it may be material

Materiality depends on the agency mandate, but surveillance tools can trigger substantial rights impacts and legal challenge where necessity, proportionality or bias controls are weak. Public concern is increasing as biometric, location and monitoring technologies become cheaper and more integrated with public administration systems.

Impact pathway

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

Financial pathway

  1. The topic may require capital expenditure to adapt assets, processes or infrastructure.
  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.

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 consumers?
  • What current or proposed regulation could change the topic's relevance?

Evidence to collect

  • Community engagement, grievance and impact records
  • Consumer outcome, complaint and product-impact records
  • Indigenous engagement, consent, grievance and impact records
  • Capital plans, asset adaptation budgets and investment approvals
  • 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
  • Process-map item (assets): Administrative offices, town halls, courts, service counters and call centres used for public-facing transactions
  • Process-map item (assets): Data centres, cloud tenancies, case-management systems, digital identity platforms and public records repositories
  • Process-map item (assets): Public communications channels including websites, mobile applications, hotlines, broadcast alerts and notice systems
  • Process-map item (assets): Land, rights of way, public buildings, parks, civic spaces and heritage assets under agency stewardship
  • Process-map item (assets): Intangible mandates including statutory powers, licences to operate public registers, enforcement authority and public trust

It may be less material when…

  • Entity-specific evidence does not show meaningful scale, exposure or effects.
  • 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

  • Affected communities
  • Customers / end-users

Users of the information

  • Board / management
  • 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 (16 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

Public Agencies

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.