Intent

Identify the participating entity. The entity name will be used to identify the entity on the GRESB portal and will be displayed in the entity’s Benchmark Report.

Requirements

Complete all applicable fields.

Prefill: This indicator has remained the same as the 2019 Assessment and has been prefilled with 2019 Assessment answers. Review the response and/or evidence carefully.

Terminology

Entity name: Name of the asset for which the Assessment is submitted. For example, 'Big City Airport'.

Organization name: Name of the organization that manages the asset. For example, ‘Big City Airport Management Limited’ or ‘Big Global Asset Manager LLC’.

Intent

Describe the ownership status and structure of the participating entity.

Requirements

Select the nature of the participating entity. If applicable, select the relevant sub-options and provide details.

The Revenue Basis aligns with the EDHECInfra TICCS classification for Business Risk.

Prefill: This indicator has remained the same as the 2019 Assessment and has been prefilled with 2019 Assessment answers. Review the response and/or evidence carefully.

2020 changes: Ticker and exchange information removed. Scope of service moved to RC5.

Other: Other answers must be outside the options listed in the indicator to be valid.

Terminology

ISIN: International Securities Identification Number. ISINs are assigned to securities to facilitate unambiguous clearing and settlement procedures. They are composed of a 12-digit alphanumeric code and act to unify different ticker symbols, which can vary by exchange and currency for the same security. In the United States, ISINs are extended versions of 9-character CUSIP codes.

Non-profit organization: An organization that uses its earnings and/or donations to pursue the organization's objectives. Usually these organizations are listed as charities or other public service organizations.

Public Entity: A company that is publicly listed and traded on a recognized stock exchange such as Nasdaq or NYSE.

Public-Private Partnerships (PPP): A long-term contract between a private party and a government entity, for providing a public asset or service, in which the private party bears significant risk and management responsibility, and remuneration is linked to performance.

References

EDHECInfra, The Infrastructure Company Classification Standards (TICCS™️), 2018

IPWEA, International Infrastructure Management Manual, 2015

World Bank Group, Public-Private Partnership in Infrastructure Resource Centre

Intent

Establish the age of the entity.

Requirements

State the year when the entity first commenced or is expected to commence operation.

Prefill: This indicator has remained the same as the 2019 Assessment and has been prefilled with 2019 Assessment answers. Review the response and/or evidence carefully.

If the reporting entity represents a single facility, then the year entered should reflect when that facility commenced operation. If the reporting entity represents a portfolio of facilities being assessed as one asset (i.e. multi-facility asset) then it should be when the first facility in the portfolio commenced operation.

If the entity is still under construction (sometimes known as a greenfield asset), then enter the expected year when operations will commence.

If the entity is both in construction and operational, then enter the year when the first part of the project commenced operations.

Intent

Set the entity’s annual reporting year. This information is used in combination with the Sector & Geography (RC3) and Ancillary Activities (RC4) descriptions to describe the entity’s reporting boundary. Exceptions to the described reporting boundary must be described in the Performance Component indicators. Clear understanding of reporting boundaries will provide for their standardisation in future and therefore accurate like for like comparisons to be made.

Requirements

Complete all applicable fields.

The table below details the period for which information throughout the Assessment would be expected, for a selected starting month:

Starting month	Reporting Year
January	Select "Calendar Year"
February	Feb 2019 - Jan 2020
March	Mar 2019 - Feb 2020
April	Apr 2019 - Mar 2020
May	May 2019 - Apr 2020
June	Jun 2019 - May 2020
July	Jul 2018 - Jun 2019
August	Aug 2018 - Jul 2019
September	Sept 2018 - Aug 2019
October	Oct 2018 - Sept 2019
November	Nov 2018 - Oct 2019
December	Dec 2018 - Nov 2019

Prefill: This indicator is similar to the one included in the 2019 assessment and some sections have been prefilled from the 2019 assessment. Review the response and/or evidence carefully.

Terminology

Calendar year: January 1 – December 31.

Fiscal year: The period used for annual financial statements. Depending on the jurisdiction the fiscal year can start on April 1, July 1, October 1, etc.

Reporting year: Answers must refer to the reporting year identified in EC4 (Reporting year) in the Infrastructure Assessment. A response to an indicator must be true at the close of the reporting period; however, the response does not need to have been true for the entire reporting year. GRESB does not favour the use of calendar year over fiscal year or viceversa, as long as the chosen reporting year is used consistently throughout the Assessment.

Intent

Set the currency for which the entity is denominated.

Requirements

State the currency used by the entity for Assessment indicators that require a monetary value as a response.

Prefill: This indicator has remained the same as the 2019 Assessment and has been prefilled with 2019 Assessment answers. Review the response and/or evidence carefully.

2020 changes: Chilean Peso (CLP)) and Columbian Peso (COP) have now been added to the list of currencies.

Other: Other answer must be outside the options listed in the indicator to be valid. Participants should state a currency.

Intent

Establish the economic size and number of Full Time Equivalent (FTE) workers of the entity. The number of Full Time Equivalent (FTE) workers and contractors influence materiality (see guidance in RC7 and the GRESB Materiality Tool for more details).

The number of Full Time Equivalent (FTE) workers and contractors influence materiality (see guidance in RC7 and the

GRESB Materiality Matrix for more details).

Requirements

Complete the measures of the economic size of the entity GAV and Revenue, both in millions (e.g. $75,000,000 must be reported as 75). GAV should be provided as at the end of the reporting year, and should include development and construction projects (if any). Revenue should be for the reporting year. It is mandatory to provide both the GAV and revenue. Estimates are acceptable (for example annual operating costs may be used instead of revenue). Like all information provided to GRESB, this information will be kept confidential to just you and any investors for which you give permission. This information is used (as denominators) to calculate intensity performance metrics which are comparable between assets.

Do not include a currency, as this has been reported in indicator RC1 above, but make sure the currency applied is consistent with indicator RC1.

Prefill: This indicator is similar to the one included in the 2019 assessment and some sections have been prefilled from the 2019 assessment. Review the response and/or evidence carefully.

2020 changes: Economic size has been standardised to the mandatory metrics of Gross Asset Value (GAV) and Revenue so there is no need for‘Otherʼ answer. Number of FTE employees and contractors has been added as new size metrics relevant to materiality, peer grouping and insights.

Terminology

Gross Asset Value (GAV): The gross infrastructure value owned by the entity being the 'tangible fixed assets' or 'property, plant and equipment' associated with the infrastructure asset.

Revenue: The annual income generated by the entity in exchange for providing the asset service.

Intent

Describe the sectors and locations of the facility or facilities that comprise the asset. Select the lifecycle stage and reporting boundaries applicable to each facility. This information is used for materiality-based scoring and to determine peers for benchmarking and reporting purposes. It is also used in combination with the Ancillary Activities (RC4) and Reporting Year (EC4) descriptions to describe the entity’s reporting boundary. Exceptions to the described reporting boundary must be described in the Performance Component indicators. Clear understanding of reporting boundaries will provide for their standardisation in future and therefore accurate like for like comparisons to be made. This information is for reporting purposes only.

Requirements

It is up to the participant to determine the best structure for reporting of facilities since they have the best understanding of their facilities. Multiple small facilities may be grouped into a facility network or similar, particularly if the core sector is the same for the grouped facilities. For example, a network of water pipelines and pumping stations might be grouped into a single sewerage pipeline network. Another grouped facility might be a group of rooftop solar installations within a certain region or country. Please note that the selected structure may affect your peer grouping based on the outcome of the primary sector and location.

List all significant facilities that comprise the asset and complete details for each as follows:

• Weight GAV: Assign a relative weight for each facility based on the actual or estimated proportion it comprises of the total asset GAV. The total weights of facilities must sum to 100%.
• Country: The full list of countries aligns to the UN Standard Country or Area Codes for Statistical Use.
• Address Coordinates: Type the address of the facility. Suggestions will appear in a drop-down. Select the relevant address. Latitude and longitude coordinates will be automatically prefilled if the address is valid. In the case the typed address is not found, please provide the latitude and longitude coordinates in the appropriate fields or provide an approximate location (e.g: street name).
• Latitude and Longitude Coordinates: Type in the latitude and longitude of the facility in the relevant fields. The address coordinates will automatically prefill based on the coordinates reported. Coordinates should be provided in decimal degrees.
• Sector: Sector: Select the appropriate sector by clicking on the drop-down list or by typing in a keyword. Only list the facility’s core sector (its main infrastructure service). If there is more than one core sector for the facility then consider splitting it up into multiple facilities with one core sector per facility. The full list of sectors aligns to the EDHECInfra TICCS™ standard Industrial Classifications and is provided in Appendix 3.

The asset’s primary sector and primary location will be determined from, and shown below, the facility table.

• The primary sector is determined based on the mix of facility sectors, using a three-tier system as follows:
• Sub-class: If 75% or more of the facilities belong to a single sub-class then the primary sector will be that sub-class, otherwise move to the class level;
• Class: If 75% or more of the facilities belong to a single class then the primary sector will be that class, otherwise move to the super-class level;
• Super-class If 75% or more of the facilities belong to a single super-class then the primary sector will be that super-class, otherwise the primary sector is ‘Diversified’.
• Similarly, the primary location is determined based on the mix of facility locations, using a three-tier system as follows:
• Country: If 59% or more of the facilities are located in a single country, then the primary location is that country, otherwise move to the sub-region level;
• Sub-region: If 59% or more of the facilities are located in a single sub-region, then the primary location is that sub-region, otherwise move to the region level;
• Region: If 59% or more of the facilities are located in a single region, then the primary location is that region, otherwise the location is ‘globally diversified’

This information will be used to identify peers from the same or similar sectors and locations, and also are factors in the materiality -based scoring for the asset (see RC7 for more details). Select the appropriate lifecycle stage, whether in operation or development, and select whether the data provided in the performance component is included or not in the reporting boundaries.

Note: The country, subregion, region are defined using the UN country classification guidelines available here. The only Super-region used is Asia Pacific, grouped from Asia (code 142 in the UN classification) and Oceania (code 142 in the UN classification).

Prefill: This indicator is similar to the one included in the 2019 assessment and some sections have been prefilled from the 2019 assessment. Review the response and/or evidence carefully.

2020 changes: Added lifecycle stage of facility i.e. whether in Operation or in Development. Embedded google maps software in the address bar for facility locations.

Other: For sectors that do not appear in the drop-down list, “Other” can be selected.

Terminology

Address: The address should include the number, street, town/city, and region/state.

Facility: A site, structure or installation for engaging in an activity that provides infrastructure services.

GPS coordinates: Location based on the latitude and longitude in decimal degrees DD. eg: Latitude (“52.336424”) - Longitude (“4.884971”). Coordinates can be generated using GPS Coordinates.org

Gross Asset Value (GAV): The gross infrastructure value owned by the entity being the 'tangible fixed assets' or 'property, plant and equipment' associated with the infrastructure asset.

In development: The facility is under development and is not yet ‘in operation’.

In operation: The facility is providing its core service (output) and has commenced earning revenue.

Sector: A group of specific industrial activities and types of physical assets and technologies.

References

EDHECInfra - The Infrastructure Company Classification Standards (TICCS™), 2018

UN - Standard Country or Area Codes for Statistical Use (M49)

Intent

Describe the ancillary activities engaged in by the entity. This information is used in combination with the Sector & Geography (RC3) and Reporting Year (EC4) descriptions to describe the entity’s reporting boundary. Exceptions to the described reporting boundary must be described in the Performance Component indicators. Clear understanding of reporting boundaries will provide for their standardisation in future and therefore accurate like for like comparisons to be made.

Requirements

• Select all significant activities engaged in by the entity, outside of its main activity. Insignificant activities typically make up less than 1% of the entity’s budget, resourcing or revenue, so excluding them from ESG reporting still provides a complete picture to stakeholders.
• Select all of the ancillary activities that are included within the boundary of ESG reporting of the entity. This must be a sub-set (or all) of the activities listed in the previous section (in other words only select from the activities that were selected in the previous list).

Terminology

Ancillary activity: The activities engaged in by the entity that assist it in providing its core service(s) but that are not its main activity.

Main activity: The activity engaged in by the entity that are associated with its sector and the core service that the entity provides.

References

Infrastructure as an asset class, Second edition, by Barbara Weber, Mirjam Staub-Bisang and Hans Wilhelm Alfen, 2016.

Intent

Describe the structure and business risk of the participating entity. The scope of service of the entity influences materiality (see guidance in RC7 and the

GRESB Materiality Matrixfor more details).

Requirements

Select the nature of the participating entity and relevant sub-options as follows:

Structure: Select whether the entity’s structure is that of a Corporate, a Special Purpose Vehicle or some other structure (if so, then please describe).

Business Risk (Revenue basis): Select the most significant business risks (or revenue basis) borne by the entity being Merchant, Concessionary/Contracted, Regulated, or Other. This aligns with the EDHECinfra™TICCS™ classification for Business Risk. Multiple answers are possible. For ‘Other’ answer, describe the business risk borne.

Scope of Service: Select whether the entity provides associated services in addition to providing the asset itself. The associated services may be Asset Maintenance and/or Asset Operation. This section then determines whether the Scope of Service provided by the entity is:

• Asset provision
• Asset provision and maintenance
• Asset provision and operation
• Asset provision, maintenance and operation.

This information is used for materiality-based scoring and to determine peers for benchmarking and reporting purposes.

Prefill: This indicator is similar to the one included in the 2019 assessment and some sections have been prefilled from the 2019 assessment. Review the response and/or evidence carefully.

Terminology

Asset maintenance: All actions necessary for retaining an asset as near as practicable to its original condition, but excluding rehabilitation or renewal. Maintenance does not increase the service potential of the asset or keep it in its original condition, it slows down deterioration and delays when rehabilitation or replacement is necessary.

Asset operation: The active process of utilizing an asset, which will consume resources such as manpower, energy, chemicals and materials.

Asset provision: The act of owning and making an asset physically available for operational and maintenance activities by the organization’s private parties or any other third-party (e.g contractors). Asset provision can also include design & construction, work typically done on Greenfield Assets. For classification purposes, Greenfield Asset developers should see themselves as Asset providers.

Concessionary/Contracted: A contracted infrastructure organization that enters into a long-term contract to presell all or most of its output at a pre-agreed price. All or the majority of market risk (price and/or demand) is transferred to a third party. The contract is for a significant period of the investment’s life, typically one or several decades.

Corporate: A corporate structure is that of a legal entity that is separate and distinct from its owners. Corporations have limited liability, which means that shareholders may take part in the profits through dividends and stock appreciation but are not personally liable for the company's debts.

Merchant: An organization that collects fees and tariffs from end users as a function of the effective demand for the provided service. The organization is mostly or fully exposed to market risks (price and demand risk).

Public Entity: A company that is publicly listed and traded on a recognized stock exchange such as Nasdaq or NYSE.

Regulated: An organization whose business is regulated by government agencies via limits on tariffs, rate of returns, or revenues. Also referred to as discretionary regulation.

Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV): A subsidiary entity with an asset/liability structure and legal status that makes its obligations secure.

References

EDHECInfra, The Infrastructure Company Classification Standards (TICCS™️), 2018

IPWEA, International Infrastructure Management Manual, 2015

World Bank Group, Public-Private Partnership in Infrastructure Resource Centre

Intent

Provide a description and image of the entity.

Requirements

The description may include:

• Purpose of the entity's operations;
• The service(s) provided by the asset
• Ownership and governance
• Market position of the entity
• Link to website

It is not necessary to re-state information that has already been provided, such as the entity's sector focus or location of operations.

Upload a logo for the entity or the organisation that manages it. This is used for promotional purposes.

Prefill: This indicator is similar to the one included in the 2019 Assessment and some sections have been prefilled from the 2019 Assessment. Review the response and/or evidence carefully.

2020 changes: Added upload of entity’s logo.

Intent

Infrastructure is a diverse asset class, where the relevance (materiality) of ESG issues can vary between assets due to a range of factors. The intent of this indicator is to determine the materiality of a range of ESG issues covered by the GRESB Assessment.

Requirements

It is mandatory to complete the GRESB Materiality Assessment as this forms an essential part of the materiality-based scoring applied in this Assessment.

Prefill: This indicator is similar to the one included in the 2019 Assessment and some sections have been prefilled from the 2019 Assessment. Review the response and/or evidence carefully.

Specific materiality weightings are assigned to the entity based on fifteen Materiality factors comprising the Number of Employees and Contractors (from RC2), Primary Sector and Primary Location (from RC3), the Scope of Service (from EC2) and the answers to the nine questions in this indicator. Answer each of the nine questions. Where the answer is somewhat uncertain, it is recommended to err on the conservative side and select the response with the higher relevance.

Based on the fifteen Materiality factors, scoring weightings are assigned to ESG issuesset at one of four possible materiality levels, and these directly translate to a scoring weighting in the Assessment, as follows:

Materiality	Weighting
No relevance	0
Low relevance	0
Medium relevance	1
High relevance	2

These entity specific weightings are used in several subsequent indicators for scoring (this is noted within each relevant indicator).

The outcome of completing this indicator is an entity specific materiality weighting for each of the ESG issues. These weightings are displayed at the bottom of the indicator in the portal. For more details refer to the section on Materiality Based Scoring in this Reference Guide or download the Materiality Tool.

Terminology

Factor	Question	Answers	Guidance
Primary Sector (RC3)	What is the entity's Primary Sector?	See Sector Matrix
Primary Location (RC3)	Is the entity's Primary Location in developed countries, developing countries or mixed?	Developed	Developed countries are Japan, Canada, United States, Australia, New Zealand, Israel and Europe. See RC3 for more details.
		Developing	Developing countries are any that are not developed.
		Mixed	Mixed means that the entity is located in locations that are a mix of developed and developing countries.
Biodiversity and habitat	What is the entity's proximity to ecological habitat?	Containing,overlapping,adjacent	Ecological habitat means terrestrial or aquatic areas distinguished by geographic, abiotic and biotic features, whether entirely natural or semi-naturale.g. as per the classifications in Annex I of the EU Habitat Directive. The distance should be measured as the closest point of any part of the asset to any part of an ecological habitat. Adjacent means directly bordering or where habitat is within the asset facility boundary.
		Close (<100m)
		Asset provision and operation
Contaminated Land	Does the entity have contamination on site?	Yes	Contaminated land contains substances that are causing or could cause (a) significant harm to people, property or protected species; or (b) significant pollution of surface waters (for example lakes and rivers) or groundwater. Land contamination can result from a variety of intended, accidental, or naturally occurring activities and events such as manufacturing, mineral extraction, abandonment of mines, national defense activities, waste disposal, accidental spills, illegal dumping, leaking underground storage tanks, hurricanes, floods, pesticide use, and fertilizer application.
		No
Resilience and climate change adaptation	Is the entity located in an area close to the sea, prone to earthquakes, droughts, floods, cyclones, wildlandfires or other natural disasters?	Yes and is in a coastal area	In a coastal area' means that the asset has at least 50 % of its surface area within a distance of 10 km from the line of mean high tide between land and water.
		Yes but is not in a coastal area
		No
Water inflows/withdrawals	What is the scale of the entity's water use/withdrawal and scarcity of water in the location?	High consumption (Greater that 1 Megalitre per US$) in location with high water stress	High consumption means greater than 1 Megalitre per US$ in Gross Asset Value. High water stress means High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress as classified by the World Resources Institute's (WRI) Water Risk Atlas tool, Aqueduct. Low consumption means less than 1 Megalitre per US$ in Gross Asset Value. Low water stress means not High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress
		High consumption (Greater that 1 Megalitre per US$) in locations with low water stress
		Low consumption (Lower than 1 Megalitre per US$) in locations with high water stress
		Low consumption (Lower than 1 Megalitre per US$ in locations with low water stress
		No consumption
Water outflows/discharges	Is there a risk of pollution from discharges to waterways (including groundwater)?	Yes and waterways are in locations with high water stress	Risk of pollution means there are measurable pollutants in the discharge that if their levels were elevated could cause negative impact. High water stress means High or Extremely High Baseline Water Stress as classified by the World Resources Institute's (WRI) Water Risk Atlas tool, Aqueduct.
		Yes but waterways are not in locations with high water stress
		No
Light pollution	Does the entity use significant external lighting at night?	Yes and the location is densely populated	Densely populated means greater than 2000 people per square kilometer.
		Yes but the location is not densely populated
		No
Noise pollution	Does the entity emit noise externally?	Yes and the location is densely populated	Densely populated means greater than 2000 people per square kilometer.
		Yes but the location is not densely populated
		No
Number of customers	What is the number of customers?	>100	Customers are people or organisations that purchase the service(s) provided by the asset. This can include business (B2B) and retail customers.
		10-100
		<10
Number of users	What is the number of users that physically interact with the asset?	>1000	Users are people that interact physically with the asset when they use its services.Interaction means using one or more of their physical senses e.g. a mass transit passenger service. There is typically a safety risk associated with the users physical interaction.
		100-1000
		10-100
		<10
Number of employees (RC)	What is the number of FTE employees?	>100	(FTE) Full Time Equivalent of the entity's employees. FTE is calculated by adding all hours paid to employees (full-time, part-time, or any other) and dividing them by the number of hours that a full-time employee should work in that given period.
		20-100
		<20
Number of contractors (RC)	What is the number of FTE contractors?	>100	(FTE) Full Time Equivalent of the entity's contractors FTE is calculated by adding all hours paid to contractors(full-time, part-time, or any other) and dividing them by the number of hours that a full-time contractor should work in that given period.
		10-100
		<20
Number of workers (RC) calculated	What is the number of FTE workers (employees and contractors)?	100 20-100 <20	(FTE) Full Time Equivalent of the entity's employees and contractors FTE is calculated by adding all hours paid to workers (full-time, part-time, or any other) and dividing them by the number of hours that a full-time workers should work in that given period.
Number of employees and scope of service (RC5)	What is the entity's number of employees and scope of service?	Number of employees >100 - Asset provision	(FTE) Full Time Equivalent of the entity's employees combined with its scope of service (see RC5).
		Number of employees >100 - Asset provision and maintenance
		Number of employees >100 - Asset provision and operation
		Number of employees >100 - Asset provision, maintenance and operation
		Number of employees 20-100 -Asset provision
		Number of employees 20-100 - Asset provision and maintenance
		Number of employees 20-100 - Asset provision and operation
		Number of employees 20-100 - Asset provision, maintenance and operation
		Number of employees <20 - Asset provision
		Number of employees <20 - Asset provision and operation
		Number of employees <20 - Asset provision, maintenance and operation

Environmental issues: The impact on living and non-living natural systems, including land, air, water and ecosystems. This includes, but is not limited to, biodiversity, transport and product and service-related impacts, as well as environmental compliance and expenditures. Full reference to listed environmental issues can be found in Appendix 2.

Governance issues: Governance structure and composition of the organization. This includes how the highest governance body is established and structured in support of the organization’s purpose, and how this purpose relates to economic, environmental and social dimensions. Full reference to listed governance issues can be found in the Appendix 2.

High relevance: An issue is of high relevance if it is of high importance for (a) reflecting an entity's environmental, social or governance impacts; or (b) substantively influencing the assessments and decisions of stakeholders.

Low relevance: An issue is of low relevance if it is of low importance for (a) reflecting an entity's environmental, social or governance impacts; or (b) substantively influencing the assessments and decision of stakeholders

Material: An issue is material if it may reasonably be considered important for reflecting an entity's relevant environmental, social or governance impacts; or substantively influencing the assessments and decisions of stakeholders.

Materiality assessment: The process for determining which ESG issues are material to an entity.

Medium relevance: An issue is of medium relevance if it is of medium importance for (a) reflecting an entity's environmental, social or governance impacts; or (b) substantively influencing the assessments and decisions of stakeholders.

No relevance: An issue is of no relevance if it is of no importance for (a) reflecting an entity's environmental, social or governance impacts; or (b) substantively influencing the assessments and decisions of stakeholders.

Primary sector: The main infrastructure sector of the entity as provided in RC3 ("Sector & geography").

Social issues: Concerns the impacts the organization has on the social systems within which it operates. Full reference to listed social issues can be found in Appendix 2.

References

Columbia University/NASA Socioeconomic Data and Applications Center’s (SEDAC) Gridded Population of the World (GPW), v4

Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (2013)

Eurostat Glossary - Coastal area 2018

UK Environmental Protection Act

United Nations Standard Country or Area Codes for Statistical Use (M49)

World Resources Institute - Aqueduct Water Risk Atlas

Alignment with External Frameworks

DJSI CSA 2019 - 3.2 Materiality

GRI Standards 2016 - 101-1.3: The Materiality Principle

Intent

The intent of this indicator is to assess whether the entity has undertaken a materiality assessment. A materiality assessment is a common exercise adopted to inform sustainability reporting and communication strategies.

As well as guiding the issues for ESG reporting, a materiality assessment should also be used as a strategic business tool. A materiality process delivers greatest benefits when used as an opportunity to apply an ESG lens to business risk, opportunity, trend-spotting and enterprise risk management processes, and as an engagement tool with stakeholders.

Requirements

Select Yes or No: If selecting Yes, select applicable sub-options.

Prefill: This indicator has remained the same as the 2019 Assessment and has been prefilled with 2019 Assessment answers. Review the response and/or evidence carefully.

Validation

This indicator is not subject to automatic or manual validation.

See Appendix 4 of the reference guide for additional information about GRESB Validation.

Scoring

This indicator is scored as a One Section Indicator. Evidence is not required. The score of this indicator is based on the materiality assessment i.) identifying material ESG issues assessed and ii.) engaging with stakeholders to identify material issues. Selecting both checkboxes is required in order to score maximum points.

Terminology

Material: An issue is material if it may reasonably be considered important for reflecting an entity's relevant environmental, social or governance impacts; or substantively influencing the assessments and decisions of stakeholders.

Materiality assessment: The process for determining which ESG issues are material to an entity.

Relevant impacts: Are those that are a subject of established concern for expert communities, or that have been identified using established tools, such as impact assessment methodologies or life cycle assessments. Impacts that are considered important enough to require active management or engagement by the entity are likely to be considered relevant.

References

Good practice example: Please refer to pages from 4 to 9 at this link.

Alignment with External Frameworks

DJSI CSA 2019 - 3.2 Materiality

GRI Standards 2016 - 101-1.3: The Materiality Principle

Relevant UN Sustainable Development Goals

Intent

The intent of this indicator is to assess the entity's commitment to ESG leadership standards or principles. By making a commitment to ESG leadership standards or principles, an entity publicly demonstrates its commitment to ESG, uses organizational standards and/or frameworks that are universally accepted and may have obligations to comply with the standards and/or frameworks.

Requirements

Select Yes or No: If selecting Yes, select applicable sub-options.

Public commitment:Commitment must be public (e.g via public register) and the entity a member/signatory.

Requires action:The commitment requires the entity to take action (where participant has indicated that it does).

Validation

This indicator is not subject to automatic or manual validation.

See Appendix 4 of the reference guide for additional information about GRESB Validation.

Scoring

This indicator is not scored and is for reporting purposes only.

Terminology

EV100:

A global initiative bringing together forward looking companies committed to accelerating the transition to electric vehicles (EVs) and making electric transport the new normal by 2030.

RE100:

RE100 is a global initiative uniting businesses committed to 100% renewable electricity, working to massively increase demand for and delivery of renewable energy. RE100 is convened by The Climate Group in partnership with CDP.

Powering PastCoal Alliance (PPCA):

A coalition of countries, states and business working towards the global phase-out of unabated coal power.

Science Based Targets Initiative:

The initiative is a collaboration between CDP, the United Nations Global Compact, World Resources Institute, and the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) which has a goal of enabling companies setting science based targets to reduce GHG emissions.

Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures:

The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures will develop voluntary, consistent climate-related financial risk disclosures for use by companies in providing information to investors, lenders, insurers, and other stakeholders.

The Responsible Labor Initiative (RLI):

A multi-industry, multi-stakeholder collaboration stemming out of the forced labor commitments and programs of the Responsible Business Alliance (RBA), formerly the Electronic Industry Citizenship Coalition (EICC).

UNFCCC Climate Neutral Now Pledge

A pledge representing a group of signatory companies and governments taking the lead on reducing emissions and accelerating the global journey to a climate-neutral future.

UN Global Compact:

The UN Global Compact is a voluntary initiative based on CEO commitments to implement universal sustainability principles and to take steps to support UN goals.

UN Global Compact Our Only Future:

A global movement of leading companies aligning their businesses with the most ambitious aim of the Paris Agreement, to limit global temperature rise to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels.

World Business Council for Sustainable Development’s Call to Action:

A global, CEO-led organization of over 200 leading businesses working together to accelerate the transition to a sustainable world and helping member companies become more successful and sustainable by focusing on the maximum positive impact for shareholders, the environment and societies.

WorldGBC’s Net Zero Carbon Buildings Commitment:

The Net Zero Carbon Buildings Commitment (the Commitment) challenges companies, cities, states and regions to reach Net Zero operating emissions in their portfolios by 2030, and to advocate for all buildings to be Net Zero in operation by 2050.

30% Club:

A campaign group of Chairs and CEOs taking action to increase gender diversity on boards and senior management teams.

Intent

Clear Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) objectives help participants identify material issues and integrate them into overall day-to-day management practices. Integrating ESG practices into the overall business strategy fosters alignment between management of sustainability issues and the overall strategy of the entity. Having clear ESG objectives also demonstrates commitment to monitoring and improving ESG performance.

Requirements

Select Yes or No: If selecting Yes, select applicable sub-options.

Prefill: This indicator is similar to the one included in the 2019 Assessment and some sections have been prefilled from the 2019 Assessment. Review the response and/or evidence carefully.

Validation

Evidence: Document upload or hyperlink. The evidence should sufficiently support all the items selected for this question. If a hyperlink is provided, ensure that it is not outdated and the relevant page can be accessed within two steps.

The provided evidence should cover the following elements:

• Specific, actionable ESG objective(s) that relate to each of the selected criteria (i.e. Evidence of implementation or formal adoption of the objectives).
• The public availability of the objectives (if applicable).

Acceptable evidence may include illustrative portions of business plans, annual report, strategic developments, target documents, company presentations, etc.

Hyperlink: Hyperlink is mandatory for this indicator when publicly available is selected. Ensure that the hyperlink is not outdated and the relevant page can be accessed within two steps. The URL should demonstrate the existence of publicly available commitment(s) selected.

Document upload: Participants may upload several documents. When providing a document upload, it is mandatory to indicate where relevant information can be found within the document.

See Appendix 4 of the reference guide for additional information about GRESB Validation.

Scoring

This indicator is scored as a Two Section Indicator (i.e. Section 1: 'Elements' response and, Section 2: 'Evidence' response).

Section 1:Fractional points are awarded to each objective type and then aggregated to calculate the final fractional score. It is not necessary to select all checkboxes in order to obtain the maximum score for this indicator. The objectives are not all assigned equal weights.

Section 2:‘Evidence’ is mandatory for this indicator. Therefore, no points will be awarded unless the hyperlink and/or the uploaded document is considered valid, based on the evidence criteria stated above. Non-publicly available evidence will score lower. The evidence is validated which determines a multiplier, according to the table below:

Evidence: The evidence is manually validated and assigned a multiplier, according to the table below. The evidence must support the validation requirements. If any requirements are not met, the evidence may be partially accepted or not accepted depending on the level of alignment with the requirements.

Validation status	Score
Accepted	2/2
Partially accepted	1/2
Not accepted/not provided	0

Terminology

Environmental objectives: Overall environmental goals, arising from policies, that an entity sets itself to achieve. The objectives should be quantifiable and correlated with the entity’s ambition.

Formally adopted: To set and communicate a strategy/target/program, at least internally, and having implemented or prepared actions to achieve this.

General sustainability objectives: Strategic or cross-cutting objectives to improve overall ESG performance that are not specific to environmental, social or governance issues. For example, relative position on sustainability indices or rankings.

Governance objectives: Overall governance goals, arising from policies, that an entity sets itself to achieve. The objectives should be quantifiable and correlated with the entity’s ambitions.

Overall business strategy: The entity's long-term strategy for meeting its objectives.

Social objectives: Overall social goals, arising from policies, that an entity sets itself to achieve. The objectives should be quantifiable and correlated with the entity’s ambitions.

References

DISO14001: Environmental Management

UNPRI, PRI Reporting Framework, 2018

Intent

The intent of this indicator is to identify resources allocated to ESG management and their scope of responsibilities. Having personnel dedicated to ESG issues increases the likelihood that the entity’s ESG objectives will be properly managed and targets will be met.

Requirements

Select Yes or No: If selecting Yes, select applicable sub-options.

Details of employee: Participants must provide the name and job title of the relevant employee. This information will be used for reporting purposes only.

Validation

This indicator is not subject to automatic or manual validation.

See Appendix 4 of the reference guide for additional information about GRESB Validation.

Scoring

This indicator is scored as a One Section Indicator. Evidence is not required. The score of this indicator is based on the level of responsibility of the selected person(s). Selecting all checkboxes is not required in order to score maximum points.

Terminology

Dedicated employee(s) for whom ESG is the core responsibility: The employee(s)’ main responsibility is defining, implementing and monitoring the ESG objectives at entity level.

Employee(s) for whom ESG is among their responsibilities: The implementation and monitoring of ESG is part of the employee’s role, but is not necessarily their main responsibility.

ESG objectives: Strategic priorities and key topics for the management and/or improvement of ESG issues.

Investment partners (co-investor/JV partners): A General Partner that co-owns and operates (part of) the entity’s assets and is responsible for implementing ESG objectives at asset level.

Persons responsible: A person or group of people who work on the implementation and completion of the task, project or strategy.

References

Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures June 2017: Governance A&B

Alignment with External Frameworks

GRI Standards 2016 - 102-20: Executive-level responsibility for economic, environmental, and social topics

Intent

The presence of senior management dedicated to ESG increases the likelihood that the objectives will be met. A structured process to keep the most senior decision-maker informed on the entity’s ESG performance increases accountability and encourages continuous improvement.

Requirements

Select Yes or No: If selecting Yes, select all applicable checkbox(es).

Senior decision-maker: The entity’s most senior decision-maker on ESG is expected to be actively involved in the process of defining the ESG objectives and should approve associated strategic decisions regarding ESG. This person can be the same as the individual identified in LE3.

Details of employee: Participants must provide the name and job title of the relevant employee. This information will be used for reporting purposes only.

Open text box: The content of this open text box is not used for scoring, but will be included in the Benchmark Report. Participants may use this open text box to communicate on:

• Means of communication. Examples can include, but are not limited to: written memos, formal reports, presentations or meeting minutes;
• Frequency of reporting. Examples can include, but are not limited to: monthly, quarterly or annually;
• Contents of reporting. Examples can include, but are not limited to: (i) an overview of asset performance (quantitative), (ii) realized ESG performance against objectives, (iii) updates regarding long-term strategic objectives, (iv) updates/notifications regarding regulatory changes or (v) updates regarding proposed actions to improve the performance of the assets.

Validation

Other: State the other senior decision-maker on ESG issues. The answer should only refer to the department or governance body of which the senior decision maker is part of. Report only one other answer.

See Appendix 4 of the reference guide for additional information about GRESB Validation.

Scoring

This indicator is scored as a One Section Indicator. Evidence is not required. Points are awarded based on the level of seniority of the responsible senior decision-maker. Checkboxes are equally weighted.

Other:Any ‘other’ answer provided will be manually validated and must be accepted before achieving the respective fractional score. If multiple ‘other’ answers are listed, more than one may be accepted in manual validation, but only one will be counted towards the score.

Terminology

Asset manager: A person or group of people responsible for developing and overseeing financial and strategic developments of investments at asset level.

Board of Directors: A body of elected or appointed members who jointly oversee the activities of a company or organization as detailed in the corporate charter. Boards normally comprise both executive and non-executive directors.

C-suite level staff: A team of individuals who have the day-to-day responsibility of managing the entity. C-suite level staff are sometimes referred to, within corporations, as senior management, executive management, executive leadership team, top management, upper management, higher management, or simply seniors.

ESG strategy: Strategy that (1) sets out the participant’s procedures and (2) sets the direction and guidance for the entity’s implementation of ESG measures.

Fund/portfolio manager: A person or a group who manages a portfolio of investments and the deployment of investor capital by creating and implementing asset level strategies across the entire portfolio or fund.

Investment Committee: A group of individuals who oversee the entity’s investment strategy, evaluates investment proposals and maintains the investment policies, subject to the Board’s approval.

Person accountable: A person with sign off (approval) authority over the deliverable task, project or strategy. The accountable person can delegate the work to other responsible people who will work on the implementation and completion of the task, project or strategy.

Senior decision-maker accountable for ESG issues: A senior individual with sign off (approval) authority for approving strategic ESG objectives and steps undertaken to achieve these objectives. The accountable person can delegate the work to other responsible people who will work on the implementation and completion of the task, project or strategy.

References

Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures June 2017: Governance A&B

Alignment with External Frameworks

CDP Climate Change 2020 - C1 Governance

GRI Standards 2016 - 102-20: Executive-level responsibility for economic, environmental, and social topics

Intent

This indicator intends to identify whether and to what extent, ESG issues are addressed in personnel performance targets. Including ESG factors in annual performance targets for all personnel can increase the entity’s capacity to achieve improved ESG performance.

Requirements

Select Yes or No: If selecting Yes, select applicable sub-options.

Validation

Evidence: Document upload or hyperlink. The evidence should sufficiently support all the items selected for this question. If a hyperlink is provided, ensure that it is not outdated and the relevant page can be accessed within two steps.

Evidence requirements:

• Existence of employee performance targets on ESG related issues to each of the selected personnel groups.
• Clearly demonstrated financial and/or non-financial consequences for the selected personnel groups.
• Targets must relate to all members within the selected personnel groups. If the target relates to a single employee, that employee should be listed as an Other.

Evidence examples may include but are not limited to:

• Official documents from the entity describing rewards, penalties, or support associated with specific ESG-related targets.
• Examples of financial consequence include employee KPI and bonus schemes. Examples of non- financial consequence include targets being covered in performance reviews, 'employee of the month' awards and recognition schemes.

Other: State the other employee type. Other answers should relate to groups of employees such as acquisition, development, or facilities teams, or specific personnel who have ESG targets assigned to them. Ensure that the other answer provided is not a duplicate of a selected option above (e.g., sustainability team when ‘dedicated staff on ESG issues’ is selected). It is possible to report multiple other answers.

Document upload: Participants may upload several documents. When providing a document upload, it is mandatory to indicate where relevant information can be found within the document.

See Appendix 4 of the reference guide for additional information about GRESB Validation.

Scoring

This indicator is scored as a Two Section Indicator (i.e. Section 1: 'Elements' response and, Section 2: 'Evidence' response).

Section 1:Fractional points are awarded depending on the participant having i.) financial or non-financial consequence of ESG targets and ii.) the selected group(s) of employees. Employee groups are not equally scored. Fractional points are then aggregated to calculate the indicator’s final score. It is not necessary to select all checkboxes to receive maximum points.

Other:Any ‘other’ answer provided will be manually validated and must be accepted before achieving the respective fractional score. If multiple ‘other’ answers are listed, more than one may be accepted in manual validation, but only one will be counted towards the score.

Section 2:‘Evidence’ is mandatory for this indicator. Therefore, no points will be awarded unless the hyperlink and/or the uploaded document is considered valid, based on the evidence criteria stated above. The evidence is validated which determines a multiplier, according to the table below:

Evidence: The evidence is manually validated and assigned a multiplier, according to the table below. The evidence must support the validation requirements. If any requirements are not met, the evidence may be partially accepted or not accepted depending on the level of alignment with the requirements.

Validation status	Score
Accepted	2/2
Partially accepted	1/2
Not accepted/not provided	0

Terminology

Annual performance targets: Targets set in annual performance reviews based on assessments of employee performance.

Asset manager: A person or group of people responsible for developing and overseeing financial and strategic developments of investments at asset level.

Board of Directors: A body of elected or appointed members who jointly oversee the activities of a company or organization as detailed in the corporate charter. Boards normally comprise both executive and non-executive directors.

C-suite level staff: A team of individuals who have the day-to-day responsibility of managing the entity. C-suite level staff are sometimes referred to, within corporations, as senior management, executive management, executive leadership team, top management, upper management, higher management, or simply seniors.

Dedicated employee(s) for whom ESG is the core responsibility: The employee(s)’ main responsibility is defining, implementing and monitoring the ESG objectives at entity level.

ESG manager: A person or a group who manages the ESG strategy and implementation of the entity.

External manager or service provider: Organizations, businesses or individuals that offer services to others in exchange for payment. These include, but are not limited to, consultants, agents and brokers.

Financial consequences: Monetary benefits (or detriments) incorporated into employee compensation structures. Financial consequences are contingent upon the achievement of the annual performance targets.

Fund/portfolio manager: A person or a group who manages a portfolio of investments and the deployment of investor capital by creating and implementing asset level strategies across the entire portfolio or fund.

Investment analysts: A person or group with expertise in evaluating financial and investment information, typically for the purpose of making buy, sell and hold recommendations for securities.

Investment Committee: A group of individuals who oversee the entity’s investment strategy, evaluates investment proposals and maintains the investment policies, subject to the Board’s approval.

Investor relations: A person or a group that provides investors with an accurate account of company affairs so investors can make better informed decisions.

Non-financial consequences: Non-financial benefits (or detriments), such as verbal or written recognition, non-financial rewards or opportunities. Non-financial consequences are contingent upon the achievement of the annual performance targets.

References

Alignment with External Frameworks

CDP Climate Change 2020 - C1.3 Employee Incentives

DJSI CSA 2019 - 4.3.1 Management Incentives

GRI Standards 2016 - 102-35: Remuneration policies

Good practice example: Please refer to page 27 at this link.

Intent

The intent of this indicator is to identify the existence and scope of policies that address environmental issues. Policies on environmental issues assist organizations with incorporating environmental criteria into their business practices and managing environmental risks.

Requirements

Select Yes or No: If selecting Yes, select applicable sub-options.

Prefill: This indicator is similar to the one included in the 2019 Assessment and some sections have been prefilled from the 2019 Assessment. Review the response and/or evidence carefully.

2020 changes: i).‘Hazardous substances’ was added as an environmental issue. ii.) Section on which stakeholder(s) the policy applied to has been removed.

Note: The policy or policies must be existing and valid policies during the Reporting Year identified in EC 4.

Validation

Evidence: Document upload or hyperlink. The evidence should sufficiently support all the items selected for this question. If a hyperlink is provided, ensure that it is not outdated and the relevant page can be accessed within two steps.

Evidence requirements:

1. Demonstrate that there is a formal policy document in place and not simply a list of general goals and/or commitments.
2. Specifically addresses each Environmental issue selected. For example, a policy on issues such as energy or air pollution.

Acceptable evidence may include a formal policy that is in place such as an Environmental Policy document, official documents or links to online resources describing the entity's environmental policies. Reference can be provided, such as bullets or passages within a policy, to describe the goals or ambition for each issue.

Other: State the other environmental issue. Ensure that the other answer provided is not a duplicate of a selected option above (e.g. recycling when ‘waste management’ is selected). It is possible to report multiple other answers. If valid, the issue will be assigned Medium Relevance.

Document upload: Participants may upload several documents. When providing a document upload, it is mandatory to indicate where relevant information can be found within the document.

See Appendix 4 of the reference guide for additional information about GRESB Validation.

Scoring

This indicator is scored as a Two Section Indicator (i.e. Section 1: 'Elements' response and, Section 2: 'Evidence' response).

Section 1: For section 1 of the indicator, fractional points are awarded depending on the participant selecting the issues deemed material by the GRESB Materiality Assessment (see output in RC7 which will automatically populate once the indicators RC3 and RC7 of the Asset Assessment have been fully completed). It is therefore not necessary to select all checkboxes to receive maximum points. Fractional points are then aggregated to calculate the indicator’s final score.

Other: Any ‘other’ answer provided will be manually validated and must be accepted before achieving the respective fractional score. If multiple ‘other’ answers are listed, more than one may be accepted in manual validation, but only one will be counted towards the score.

Materiality-based scoring:

The scoring of this indicator links to the materiality for the entity, as determined by the GRESB Materiality Assessment (RC7).

Specific materiality weightings are assigned to the entity for each ESG issue as described in (RC7). The weightings are set at one of four levels for each of the ESG issues:

• No relevance (weighting: 0)
• Low relevance (weighting: 0)
• Medium relevance (weighting: 1)
• High relevance (weighting: 2)

Where an issue is of 'No relevance' or ‘Low relevance’ it is not considered in scoring (i.e. it has a weighting of 0). If an issue is of 'Medium relevance' the issue counts towards the score with ‘standard’ weighting (i.e. 1). If an issue is of 'High relevance' the issue counts towards the score with higher than ‘standard’ weighting (i.e. 2).

All issues of ‘Medium relevance’ and ‘High relevance’ need to be selected and addressed in the evidence to obtain the maximum score. For more details on how materiality is determined, download the GRESB Materiality & Scoring Tool.

Section 2: ‘Evidence’ is mandatory for this indicator. Therefore, no points will be awarded unless the hyperlink and/or the uploaded document is considered valid, based on the evidence criteria stated above. The evidence is validated which determines a multiplier, according to the table below:

Evidence: The evidence is manually validated and assigned a multiplier, according to the table below. The evidence must support the validation requirements. If any requirements are not met, the evidence may be partially accepted or not accepted depending on the level of alignment with the requirements.

Validation status	Score
Accepted	2/2
Partially accepted	1/2
Not accepted/not provided	0

Materiality-based scoring: The scoring of this indicator links to the Materiality for the entity, as determined by the GRESB Materiality Assessment (RC7).

Specific materiality weightings are assigned to the entity for each ESG issue as described in (RC7). The weightings are set at one of four levels for each of the ESG issues: No Relevance, Low Relevance, Medium Relevance, and High Relevance. Where an issue is of 'No relevance' or ‘Low relevance’ then the issue is not considered in scoring (i.e. there is no impact on score whether or not the issue is addressed). If an issue is of 'Medium relevance' then the issue counts towards the score with ‘standard’ weighting. If an issue is of 'High relevance' then the issue counts towards the score with higher than ‘standard’ weighting.

All issues of “Medium relevance” and “High relevance” need to be selected and addressed in the evidence to obtain the maximum score.

Terminology

Air pollution: Air pollutants are particles and gases released into the atmosphere that may adversely affect living organisms. Additionally, some pollutants contribute to climate change or exacerbate the effects of climate change locally.

Biodiversity and habitat: Issues related to wildlife, endangered species, ecosystem services, habitat management, and invasive species. Biodiversity refers to the variety of all plant and animal species. Habitat refers to the natural environment in which these plant and animal species live and function.

Climate change adaptation: Preparation for long-term change in climatic conditions or climate related events. Example of climate change adaptation measures can include, but are not limited to: building flood defenses, xeriscaping and using tree species resistant to storms and fires, adapting building codes to extreme weather events.

Contamination: Land that contains substances in or under it that are actually or potentially hazardous to human health or the environment.

Energy: Energy refers to energy consumption and generation from non-renewable and renewable sources (e.g. electricity, heating, cooling, steam).

Environmental issues: The impact on living and non-living natural systems, including land, air, water and ecosystems. This includes, but is not limited to, biodiversity, transport and product and service-related impacts, as well as environmental compliance and expenditures.

Greenhouse gas emissions: GHGs refers to the seven gases listed in the Kyoto Protocol: carbon dioxide (CO₂); methane (CH₄); nitrous oxide (N₂O); hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs); perfluorocarbons (PFCs); nitrogen trifluoride (NF₃) and sulphur hexafluoride (SF₆).

Hazardous substances: Any substance or chemical which is a "health hazard" or "physical hazard," including: chemicals which are carcinogens, toxic agents, irritants, corrosives, sensitizers; agents which act on the hematopoietic system; agents which damage the lungs, skin, eyes, or mucous membranes; chemicals which are combustible, explosive, flammable, oxidizers, pyrophorics, unstable-reactive or water-reactive; and chemicals which in the course of normal handling, use, or storage may produce or release dusts, gases, fumes, vapors, mists or smoke which may have any of the previously mentioned characteristics. (Full definitions can be found at 29 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 1910.1200.) Ref US OSHA's definition includes any substance or chemical which is a "health hazard" or "physical hazard," including: chemicals which are carcinogens, toxic agents, irritants, corrosives, sensitizers; agents which act on the hematopoietic system; agents which damage the lungs, skin, eyes, or mucous membranes; chemicals which are combustible, explosive, flammable, oxidizers, pyrophorics, unstable-reactive or water-reactive; and chemicals which in the course of normal handling, use, or storage may produce or release dusts, gases, fumes, vapors, mists or smoke which may have any of the previously mentioned characteristics. (Full definitions can be found at 29 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 1910.1200.)

Light pollution: Excessive or obtrusive artificial light also known as photo pollution or luminous pollution. Examples of light pollution and reflection include: spilled light from construction zones and parking lots which may impact breeding grounds or resting areas; highly reflective towers which may affect bird flight.

Materials sourcing and resource efficiency: Responsible sourcing of materials considers the environmental, social and economic impacts of the procurement and production of products and materials. Resource efficiency means using those products and materials in an efficient and sustainable manner while minimizing impacts on the environment and society.

Noise pollution: Refers to noise pollution, also known as environmental noise, which is the propagation of noise with harmful impact on the activity of human or animal life.

Policy: Defines an organizational commitment, direction or intention as formally adopted by the organization.

Resilience to catastrophe/disaster: Preparedness of the built environment towards existing and future threats of natural disasters (e.g., the ability to absorb disturbances such as increased precipitation or flooding while maintaining its structure). This can be achieved by management policies, informational technologies, educating tenant, community, suppliers and physical measures at the asset level.

Waste: Entity's consideration of waste disposal methods and whether waste minimization strategies emphasize prioritizing options for reuse, recycling, and then recovery over other disposal options to minimize ecological impact.

Water outflows/discharges: Discharge of water to water bodies (e.g. lakes, rivers, oceans, aquifers and groundwater) or to third-parties for treatment or use.

Water inflows/withdrawals: Water drawn into the boundaries of the entity from all sources (including surface water, ground water, rainwater, and municipal water supply) as well as water reuse, efficiency, and recycling, including the entity's consideration of whether water sources are significantly affected by withdrawal of water.

References

Supply Chain Sustainability School (UK and Australia), 2012

Alignment with External Frameworks

GRI Standards 2016 - 103-2: The management approach and its components

GRI Standards 2016 - 300 series: Environmental Standards

Intent

The intent of this indicator is to describe the existence and scope of policies that address social issues. Policies on social issues assist organizations with incorporating social criteria into their business practices and managing social risks.

Requirements

Select Yes or No: If selecting Yes, select applicable sub-options.

Prefill: This indicator is similar to the one included in the 2019 Assessment and some sections have been prefilled from the 2019 Assessment. Review the response and/or evidence carefully.

2020 changes: i). ‘Local employment’ was added as a social issue. ii.) Section on which stakeholder(s) the policy applied to has been removed.

Note: The policy or policies must be existing and valid policies during the Reporting Year identified in EC 4.

Validation

Evidence: Document upload or hyperlink. The evidence should sufficiently support all the items selected for this question. If a hyperlink is provided, ensure that it is not outdated and the relevant page can be accessed within two steps.

Evidence requirements:

1. Demonstrate that there is a formal policy document in place and not simply a list of general goals and/or commitments.
2. Specifically addresses each Social issue selected. For example, a policy on issues such as local employment or child labor.

Acceptable evidence may include a formal policy that is in place such as an Social Policy document, official documents or links to online resources describing the entity's Social policies. Reference can be provided, such as bullets or passages within a policy, to describe the goals or ambition for each issue.

Note: If certain social issues are embedded in law and/or regulation in the countries of operation, the entity may select the relevant checkbox and evidence can be provided as a reference to the specific law or regulation on the provided Document Upload Cover Page (see Appendix 12).

Other: State the other social issue. Ensure that the other answer provided is not a duplicate of a selected option above (e.g., modern slavery when ‘forced or compulsory labor’ is selected). It is possible to report multiple other answers.If valid, the issue will be assigned Medium Relevance.

Document upload: Participants may upload several documents. When providing a document upload, it is mandatory to indicate where relevant information can be found within the document.

See Appendix 4 of the reference guide for additional information about GRESB Validation.

Scoring

This indicator is scored as a Two Section Indicator (i.e. Section 1: 'Elements' response and, Section 2: 'Evidence' response).

Section 1: Fractional points are awarded depending on the participant selecting the issues deemed material by the GRESB Materiality Assessment (see output in RC7 which will automatically populate once the indicators RC3 and RC7 of the Asset Assessment have been fully completed). It is therefore not necessary to select all checkboxes to receive maximum points. Fractional points are then aggregated to calculate the indicator’s final score.

Other: Any ‘other’ answer provided will be manually validated and must be accepted before achieving the respective fractional score. If multiple ‘other’ answers are listed, more than one may be accepted in manual validation, but only one will be counted towards the score.

Materiality-based scoring:

The scoring of this indicator links to the materiality for the entity, as determined by the GRESB Materiality Assessment (RC7).

Specific materiality weightings are assigned to the entity for each ESG issue as described in (RC7). The weightings are set at one of four levels for each of the ESG issues:

• No relevance (weighting: 0)
• Low relevance (weighting: 0)
• Medium relevance (weighting: 1)
• High relevance (weighting: 2)

Where an issue is of 'No relevance' or ‘Low relevance’ it is not considered in scoring (i.e. it has a weighting of 0). If an issue is of 'Medium relevance' the issue counts towards the score with ‘standard’ weighting (i.e. 1). If an issue is of 'High relevance' the issue counts towards the score with higher than ‘standard’ weighting (i.e. 2).

All issues of ‘Medium relevance’ and ‘High relevance’ need to be selected and addressed in the evidence to obtain the maximum score. For more details on how materiality is determined, download the GRESB Materiality & Scoring Tool.

Section 2: ‘Evidence’ is mandatory for this indicator. Therefore, no points will be awarded unless the hyperlink and/or the uploaded document is considered valid, based on the evidence criteria stated above. The evidence is validated which determines a multiplier, according to the table below:

Evidence: The evidence is manually validated and assigned a multiplier, according to the table below. The evidence must support the validation requirements. If any requirements are not met, the evidence may be partially accepted or not accepted depending on the level of alignment with the requirements.

Validation status	Score
Accepted	2/2
Partially accepted	1/2
Not accepted/not provided	0

Materiality-based scoring: The scoring of this indicator links to the Materiality for the entity, as determined by the GRESB Materiality Assessment (RC7).

Specific materiality weightings are assigned to the entity for each ESG issue as described in (RC7). The weightings are set at one of four levels for each of the ESG issues: No Relevance, Low Relevance, Medium Relevance, and High Relevance. Where an issue is of 'No relevance' or ‘Low relevance’ then the issue is not considered at all in scoring (i.e. there is no impact on score whether or not the issue is addressed). If an issue is of 'Medium relevance' then the issue counts towards the score with ‘standard’ weighting. If an issue is of 'High relevance' then the issue counts towards the score with higher than ‘standard’ weighting.

All issues of “Medium relevance” and “High relevance” need to be selected and addressed in the evidence to obtain the maximum score.

Terminology

Child labor: Work that deprives children of their childhood, their potential and their dignity, and that is harmful to their physical or mental development including by interfering with their education. Specifically, it means types of work that are not permitted for children below the relevant minimum age.

Community development: A process where community members come together to take collective action and generate solutions to common problems.

Customer satisfaction: Customer satisfaction is one measure of an entity's sensitivity to its customers’ needs and preferences and, from an organizational perspective, is essential for long-term success. In the context of sustainability, customer satisfaction provides insight into how the entity approaches its relationship with one stakeholder group (customers).

Employee engagement: An employee's involvement with, commitment to and satisfaction with the entity.

Forced or compulsory labor: All work or service which is exacted from any person under the menace of any penalty and for which the said person has not offered themselves voluntarily.

Freedom of association: Right of employers and workers to form, to join and to run their own organizations without prior authorization or interference by the state or any other entity.

Health and safety: The principles of occupational health and safety management systems include developing a policy, analyzing and controlling health and safety risks, providing training, and recording and investigating health and safety incidents.

Inclusion and diversity: Composition of governance bodies and breakdown of employees per employee category according to gender, age group, minority group membership, and other indicators of diversity including discrimination.

Labor standards and working conditions: Labor standards and working conditions are at the core of paid work and employment relationships. Working conditions cover a broad range of topics and issues, from working time (hours of work, rest periods, and work schedules) to remuneration, as well as the physical conditions and mental demands that exist in the workplace.

Local employment: Providing jobs and skills to local people as employees, and to local contractors.

Policy: Defines an organizational commitment, direction or intention as formally adopted by the organization.

Social enterprise partnering: An entity's partnerships with organizations that have social objectives that serve as the primary purpose of the organization.

Stakeholder relations: The practice of forging mutually beneficial connections with third-party groups and individuals that have a stake in common interest.

References

Supply Chain Sustainability School (UK and Australia), 2012

Alignment with External Frameworks

GRI Standards 2016 - 103-2: The management approach and its components

GRI Standards 2016 - 400 series: Social Standards

Good practice example: Please refer to this link.

Intent

The intent of this indicator is to describe the existence and scope of policies that address governance issues. Policies on governance issues assist organizations with incorporating governance criteria into their business practices and managing governance risks.

Requirements

Select Yes or No: If selecting Yes, select applicable sub-options.

Prefill: This indicator is similar to the one included in the 2019 Assessment and some sections have been prefilled from the 2019 Assessment. Review the response and/or evidence carefully.

2020 changes: i). ‘Conflicts of interest’, ‘Delegating authority’, ’Shareholder rights’, ‘Board ESG oversight’ were added as governance issues. ii.) ‘Fiduciary duty’ was removed. iii.) Section on which stakeholder(s) the policy applied to has been removed.

Note: The policy or policies must be existing and valid policies during the Reporting Year identified in EC 4.

Validation

Evidence: Document upload or hyperlink. The evidence should sufficiently support all the items selected for this question. If a hyperlink is provided, ensure that it is not outdated and the relevant page can be accessed within two steps. If valid, the issue will be assigned Medium Relevance.

Evidence requirements:

1. Demonstrate that there is a formal policy document in place and not simply a list of general goals and/or commitments.
2. Specifically addresses each Governance issue selected. For example, a policy on issues such as cybersecurity or board composition.

Acceptable evidence may include a formal policy that is in place such as a governance policy document, official documents or links to online resources describing the entity's governance policies. Reference can be provided, such as bullets or passages within a policy, to describe the goals or ambition for each issue.

Note: If certain governance issues are embedded in law and/or regulation in the countries of operation, the entity may select the relevant checkbox and evidence can be provided as a reference to the specific law or regulation on the provided Document Upload Cover page (see Appendix 12).

Other: State the other governance issue. Ensure that the other answer provided is not a duplicate of a selected option above (e.g., Information security when ‘Cybersecurity’ is selected). It is possible to report multiple other answers. If valid, the issue will be assigned Medium Relevance.

Document upload: Participants may upload several documents. When providing a document upload, it is mandatory to indicate where relevant information can be found within the document.

See Appendix 4 of the reference guide for additional information about GRESB Validation.

Scoring

This indicator is scored as a Two Section Indicator (i.e. Section 1: 'Elements' response and, Section 2: 'Evidence' response).

Section 1: Fractional points are awarded depending on the participant selecting the issues deemed material by the GRESB Materiality Assessment (see output in RC7 which will automatically populate once the indicators RC3 and RC7 of the Asset Assessment have been fully completed). It is therefore not necessary to select all checkboxes to receive maximum points. Fractional points are then aggregated to calculate the indicator’s final score.

Other: Any ‘other’ answer provided will be manually validated and must be accepted before achieving the respective fractional score. If multiple ‘other’ answers are listed, more than one may be accepted in manual validation, but only one will be counted towards the score.

Materiality-based scoring:

The scoring of this indicator links to the materiality for the entity, as determined by the GRESB Materiality Assessment (RC7).

Specific materiality weightings are assigned to the entity for each ESG issue as described in (RC7). The weightings are set at one of four levels for each of the ESG issues:

• No relevance (weighting: 0)
• Low relevance (weighting: 0)
• Medium relevance (weighting: 1)
• High relevance (weighting: 2)

Where an issue is of 'No relevance' or ‘Low relevance’ it is not considered in scoring (i.e. it has a weighting of 0). If an issue is of 'Medium relevance' the issue counts towards the score with ‘standard’ weighting (i.e. 1). If an issue is of 'High relevance' the issue counts towards the score with higher than ‘standard’ weighting (i.e. 2).

All issues of ‘Medium relevance’ and ‘High relevance’ need to be selected and addressed in the evidence to obtain the maximum score. For more details on how materiality is determined, download the GRESB Materiality & Scoring Tool.

Section 2: ‘Evidence’ is mandatory for this indicator. Therefore, no points will be awarded unless the hyperlink and/or the uploaded document is considered valid, based on the evidence criteria stated above. The evidence is validated which determines a multiplier, according to the table below:

Evidence: The evidence is manually validated and assigned a multiplier, according to the table below. The evidence must support the validation requirements. If any requirements are not met, the evidence may be partially accepted or not accepted depending on the level of alignment with the requirements.

Validation status	Score
Accepted	2/2
Partially accepted	1/2
Not accepted/not provided	0

Materiality-based scoring: The scoring of this indicator links to the Materiality for the entity, as determined by the GRESB Materiality Assessment (RC7).

Specific materiality weightings are assigned to the entity for each ESG issue as described in (RC7). The weightings are set at one of four levels for each of the ESG issues: No Relevance, Low Relevance, Medium Relevance, and High Relevance. Where an issue is of 'No relevance' or ‘Low relevance’ then the issue is not considered at all in scoring (i.e. there is no impact on score whether or not the issue is addressed). If an issue is of 'Medium relevance' then the issue counts towards the score with ‘standard’ weighting. If an issue is of 'High relevance' then the issue counts towards the score with higher than ‘standard’ weighting.

All issues of “Medium relevance” and “High relevance” need to be selected and addressed in the evidence to obtain the maximum score.

Terminology

Audit committee structure/independence: A corporate board of directors establishes an audit committee to assist in discharging its fiduciary responsibility. An effective audit committee is an important feature of a strong corporate governance culture, and should have a clear description of duties and responsibilities.

Board composition: Composition of the board and its committees by (i)Executive or non-executive, (ii) Independence, (iii) Tenure on the governance body, (iv) Number of each individual’s other significant positions and commitments, and the nature of the commitments, (v) Gender, (vi) Membership of under-represented social groups, (vii) Competences relating to economic, environmental and social impacts, (viii) Stakeholder representation.

Board ESG oversight: The highest committee or position that formally reviews and approves the organization’s sustainability report and ensures that all material topics are covered.

Board-level issues: Governance issues that should be recognized at board-level by the entity.

Bribery: The offering, giving, receiving or soliciting an item of value to influence the actions of an official or other person in charge of a public or legal fiduciary duty.

Compensation committee structure/independence: Compensation decisions are central to the governance of many entities. Compensation committees or analogous organizations are established to govern employee compensation and ensure employee remuneration decisions are made in a fair, consistent and independent manner. An independent compensation committee may be one indicator of effective governance.

Conflicts of interest: Situations where an individual is confronted with choosing between the requirements of his or her function and his or her own private interests.

Corruption: Abuse of entrusted power for private gain.

Cybersecurity: The protection of internet-connected systems, including hardware, software and data, from any unauthorised use or access. Malicious attacks in particular can pose a significant threat to infrastructure assets.

Data protection and privacy: Customer privacy includes matters such as the protection of data; the use of information or data for their original intended purpose only, unless specifically agreed otherwise; the obligation to observe confidentiality; and the protection of information or data from misuse or theft.

Delegating authority: The process for delegating authority for economic, environmental, and social topics from the highest governance.

Executive compensation: The financial and non-financial compensation of executives, in a manner that motivates executives to perform their roles in alignment with the entities objectives and risk tolerance.

Fraud: Wrongful deception intended to result in financial or personal gain.

Independence of Board chair: A non-executive member of the board who does not have any management responsibilities within the organization and is not under any other undue influence, internal or external, political or ownership, that would impede the board member’s exercise of objective judgment.

Lobbying activities: Any activity carried out to influence a government or institution’s policies and decisions in favor of a specific cause or outcome.

Operational issues: Governance issues that should be recognized on operational-level by the entity.

Policy: Defines an organizational commitment, direction or intention as formally adopted by the organization.

Political contributions: Disclosure of and guidelines for political contributions, such as the amounts and recipients of all monetary and non-monetary contributions made by an organization, which include political contributions made through third parties.

Shareholder rights: Assessing the potential risk of breaking or working against the entity’s contractual shareholder rights. Shareholder rights are defined in the company’s charter and bylaws.

Whistle-blower mechanism: A process that offers protection for individuals that want to reveal illegal, unethical or dangerous practices. An efficient whistle-blower mechanism prescribes clear procedures and channels to facilitate the reporting of wrongdoing and corruption, defines the protected disclosures, outlines the remedies and sanctions for retaliation.

References

Supply Chain Sustainability School (UK and Australia), 2012

Good practice example: Please refer to this link.

Alignment with External Frameworks

GRI Standards 2016 - 103-2: The management approach and its components

GRI Standards 2016 - 200 series: Economic Standards

Intent

The intent of this indicator is to assess the level of ESG disclosure undertaken by the entity. It also evaluates the entity’s use of third-party ESG reporting review to ensure the reliability, integrity, and accuracy of ESG disclosure. Disclosure of ESG information and performance demonstrates an entity’s transparency in explaining how ESG policies and management practices are implemented by the entity, and how these practices impact the business. In addition, third-party ESG disclosure review increases investors’ confidence in the information disclosed.

Requirements

Select Yes or No: If selecting Yes, select applicable sub-options.

In all cases:

1. Select the applicable reporting level. If the entity reports at multiple levels, you should select the most detailed reporting level.
1. Entity: Related specifically to the named entity, where entity is defined as the investable portfolio for which you are submitting an Assessment response. This option should be selected if the scope of the reporting (e.g., Annual Report) includes actions/performance disclosure that is in direct reference to and/or matches the entity subject to the GRESB submission. For example, an Annual Report that is solely applicable to the entity or includes specific and detailed actions/performance of the entity in addition to other entities within the group of companies.
2. Group: Related to the group of companies of which the participating entity forms a part. This option should be selected if the scope of the reporting (e.g., Annual Report) includes the entity subject to the GRESB submission.For example, an Annual report that does not include specific and detailed actions/performance of the entity itself, but rather for the larger group of companies as an aggregate.
2. If applicable, select alignment from the dropdown lists to confirm that your method of reporting is aligned with a third-party standard. The list is based on leading international best practice guides for sustainability reporting. If reporting is aligned with more than one standard, select the standard with which there is most alignment.
3. State whether the methods of reporting are checked, verified or assured (select one option; the most detailed level of scrutiny to which the disclosure was subject to).
4. If applicable, select alignment from the dropdown lists to confirm that your method of reporting is aligned with an external standard or guideline. The list is based on leading international best practice guides for sustainability reporting. If reporting is aligned with more than one standard, select the standard with which there is most alignment.
5. Provide document upload or URL. A piece of supporting evidence document or URL cannot be uploaded for more than one disclosure method selected i.e., the same evidence cannot be used for separate disclosure methods.

Validation

Reporting year: Answers must refer to the reporting year identified in EC4. The disclosure must be referencing actions and/or performance from the reporting year. For example, disclosures published in 2020 referencing 2019 actions and/or performance are valid. Stand-alone sustainability reports can also refer to the year prior to the reporting year, and integrated reports can also refer to two years prior to the reporting year identified in EC4.

Reporting level: Answers must clearly reference the applicable reporting level. The ESG information and/or performance must be directly in reference to the entity if entity-level is chosen.

Third party review: The evidence provided must support the selected level of third party review (if applicable). The assurance and/or verification of ESG disclosure is separate from the assurance and/or verification of performance data reported in the Data Monitoring & Review aspect. Supplementary evidence can be provided if the disclosure itself does not include confirmation of review. The evidence relating to the check, verification, and/or assurance must be in reference to the uploaded disclosure method provided (i.e., Annual report).

Evidence: Document upload or hyperlink is required. The evidence should sufficiently support all of the items selected for this question. If a hyperlink is provided, ensure that it is not outdated and the relevant page can be accessed within two steps.

Disclosure type: Provide unique evidence for each relevant disclosure type. Note that identical documents will not be accepted for more than one disclosure type, select the most appropriate disclosure type for each piece of evidence (e.g. an integrated report cannot be provided for both Annual report and Integrated report).

• Annual report: The report must reference actions and/or performance from the reporting year. For example, an Annual Report referencing the 2019 calendar year is valid for those entities reporting on calendar year. An Annual Report referencing 2018 calendar year actions and/or performance is not valid unless it is explicitly noted that the 2019 Annual Report has not been published yet.



• Standalone sustainability report: The report must reference the reporting year or the year prior. For example, a Sustainability Report referencing 2019 or 2018 actions and/or performance, as well as a 2018 Sustainability report is valid. A Sustainability Report in reference to 2017 is not valid. Standalone sustainability reports must be published separately from the Annual Report, a section in the Annual Report would not be appropriate evidence for this disclosure type, but should be reported under Annual Report.



• Integrated report: The document upload or URL provided must contain clear evidence of alignment with the International Integrated Reporting Council (IIRC) Integrated Reporting Framework (December 2013). Integrated reports can reference 2019, 2018, or 2017 performance and/or actions.



• Dedicated section on corporate website: A separate section on the company’s website that explicitly addresses ESG and includes actions and/or performance. A hyperlink to the Annual Report or Sustainability report is not valid.



• Entity reporting to investors: A summary outlining an entity’s overall approach to sustainability that does not contain any analysis of performance is insufficient. Entity reporting to investors should include year-on-year comparison of sustainability performances supported by explanatory comments. Performance achievements should be linked to measures formerly implemented by the entity. Quarterly updates, newsletters, or press releases disclosing ESG actions and/or performance are considered valid.



• Other: An additional disclosure method such as third-party forms of disclosure like 2019 CDP Questionnaires or 2019 UN PRI Transparency Reports are valid. Ensure applicability to the reporting year based on the actions and/or performance disclosed.

See Appendix 4 of the reference guide for additional information about GRESB Validation.

Scoring

This indicator is scored as a Two Section Indicator (i.e. Section 1: 'Elements' response and, Section 2: 'Evidence' response).

Section 1: Fractional points are awarded to each disclosure method based on (1) reporting level, (2) alignment and (3) third-party review of the disclosure and fractional points are then aggregated to calculate the indicator’s final score. Disclosure methods are not equally scored. It is not necessary to select all reporting methods to receive maximum points.

Other: Any ‘other’ answer provided will be manually validated and must be accepted before achieving the respective fractional score. If multiple ‘other’ answers are listed, more than one may be accepted in manual validation, but only one will be counted towards the score.

Section 2: ‘Evidence’ is mandatory for this indicator for each reporting method selected. Therefore, no points will be awarded unless the hyperlink and/or the uploaded document is considered valid, based on the evidence criteria stated above. The evidence is validated which determines a multiplier, according to the table below:

Evidence: The evidence is manually validated and assigned a multiplier, according to the table below. The evidence must support the validation requirements. If any requirements are not met, the evidence may be partially accepted or not accepted depending on the level of alignment with the requirements.

Validation status	Score
Accepted	2/2
Partially accepted	1/2
Not accepted/not provided	0

Terminology

Alignment: To agree and match with a recognized sustainability reporting standard (either voluntary or mandatory).

Annual report: A yearly record of an entity’s financial performance that is distributed to investors under applicable financial reporting regulations.

Assured/Verified: The process of checking data, as well as its collection methods and management systems, through a systematic, independent and documented process against predefined criteria or standards. Assurance/Verification services should be in line with a standard and can only be provided by accredited professionals.

Checked: A third-party review that does not comply with the definition of Assurance/Verification.

Dedicated section on corporate website: A section of the entity’s website that explicitly addresses ESG performance.

Disclosure: The act of making information or data readily accessible and available to all interested individuals and institutions. Disclosure must be external and cannot be an internal and/or ad hoc communication.

Entity reporting to investors: A report prepared by the participant for the purpose of informing investors on the ESG performance of the entity. A summary outlining an entity’s overall approach to ESG that does not contain any analysis of performance (as defined below) is insufficient.

ESG actions: Specific activities performed to improve management of environmental, social and governance issues within the entity.

ESG performance: Reporting of material indicators that reflect implementation of environmental, social, or governance (ESG) management

Integrated report: A report that is aligned with the requirements of the International Integrated Reporting Council (IIRC) Integrated Reporting Framework.

Standalone sustainability report: A separately-issued report dedicated to the entity’s sustainability performance.

References

IIRC - Integrated Reporting Framework

UNPRI - PRI Reporting Framework

Alignment with External Frameworks

GRI Standards 2016 - 102: General Disclosures

Good practice examples: Please refer to the links below:

• Integrated Report.

• Stand-alone Sustainability Report.

• Section of Annual Report.

  (See pages from 42 to 53)

• Dedicated section on website.

• Entity reporting to investors.

• Other.

Intent

This indicator intends to identify whether the entity has a defined process in place to monitor and communicate any ESG-related controversies, misconduct, penalties, incidents, accidents or breaches against the codes of conduct/ethics to its stakeholders. The entity’s external communication process is one aspect of management controls necessary to provide investors with transparency about regulatory risks and liabilities. Recurring ESG-related misconduct, penalties, incidents or accidents can increase the risk profile of the entity as they can translate into reputational, compliance, and financial risks.

Requirements

Select Yes or No: If selecting Yes, select applicable sub-options.

Prefill: This indicator is the same as the one included in the 2019 Assessment and some sections have been prefilled from the 2019 Assessment. Review the response and/or evidence carefully.

Open text box: The content of this open text box is not used for scoring, but will be included in the Benchmark Report. Participate may use this open text box to communicate on the process the reporting entity intends to follow in order to communicate any ESG-related misconducts to its stakeholders.

Validation

Other: State the other stakeholder groups. Ensure that the other answer provided is not a duplicate of a selected option above. It is possible to add multiple other answers.

See Appendix 4 of the reference guide for additional information about GRESB Validation.

Scoring

This indicator is scored as a One Section Indicator. Evidence is not required. Fractional points are awarded based on the different selections of external stakeholders.

Other: Any ‘other’ answer provided will be manually validated and must be accepted before achieving the respective fractional score. If multiple ‘other’ answers are listed, more than one may be accepted in manual validation, but only one will be counted towards the score.

Diminishing Increase in Score approach: As indicated by the blue line, some elements of this indicator are scored based on a Diminishing Increase in Score approach, per additional checkbox selected.

Open Text Box: :The open text box is not scored and is for reporting purposes only.

Terminology

Accident: An unplanned, undesired event that results in damage or injury.

Codes of conduct/ethics: An agreement on rules of behaviour for the employees of the entity.

Controversy: Public allegation and/or litigation that could negatively impact the entity’s reputation.

ESG fines and/or penalties: Sanctions resulting from an illegal act or non-compliant behavior, which directly harms the environment and/or stakeholders of the entity.

Incident: An unplanned, undesired event with actual or potential adverse impacts.

Misconduct: Unacceptable or improper behavior, especially by an employee or organization.

Penalty: A punishment imposed for breaking a law, rule, or contract.

Special interest group: Organization with a shared interest or characteristic (e.g. trade unions, non- governmental organizations).

References

DJSI CSA 2019 - 3.4.1 Codes of Conduct

DJSI CSA 2019 - 3.4.4 Systems/Procedures

GRI Standards 2016 - 102-17: Mechanisms for advice and concerns about ethics

GRI Standards 2016 - 205-2: Communication and training about anti-corruption policies and procedures

Intent

This indicator intends to ensure the communication of any ESG-related misconduct, penalties, incidents, accidents breaches against the codes of conduct/ethics to the reporting entity’s investor. Recurring misconducts and penalties can increase the risk profile of the portfolio as they impose financial, management and regulatory burdens on the entity.

Requirements

Select Yes or No: If selecting Yes, select applicable sub-options.

2020 changes: Added ‘Specify the total number of currently pending investigationsʼ.

Open text box: The content of this open text box is not used for scoring, but will be included in the Benchmark Report. Participants may use this open text box to communicate on how the entity has resolved or intends to resolve the above issue(s).

Validation

This indicator is not subject to automatic or manual validation.

See Appendix 4 of the reference guide for additional information about GRESB Validation.

Scoring

This indicator is not scored and is used for reporting purposes only.

*The information in RP2.1 and RP2.2 may be used as criteria for the recognition of 2020 Sector Leaders.

Terminology

ESG fines and/or penalties: Sanctions resulting from an illegal act or non-compliant behavior, which directly harms the environment and/or stakeholders of the entity.

References

Alignment with External Frameworks

DJSI CSA 2019 - 3.4.6 Corruption and Bribery Cases

DJSI CSA 2019 - 3.4.7 Reporting on Breaches

GRI Standards 2016 - 205-3: Confirmed incidents of corruption and actions taken

GRI Standards 2016 - 307: Environmental Compliance

GRI Standards 2016 - 419: Socioeconomic Compliance

Intent

This indicator assesses the entity’s use of management systems to manage environmental impacts, risks and opportunities.. The presence and application of an ESG-related management standard or comparable framework is an indicator of an entity’s commitment to effectively action ESG issues.

Requirements

Select Yes or No: If selecting Yes, select applicable sub-options.

2020 changes: ISO and OHSAS standards added to the list of aligned standards. Added the option to select a non-aligned or certified ESG management system.

Validation

Evidence: Document upload or hyperlink. The evidence should sufficiently support all the items selected for this question. If a hyperlink is provided, ensure that it is not outdated and the relevant page can be accessed within two steps.

Accredited: If the Management System is accredited by an independent third party, the evidence must include signed proof of the certification according to the standard, which must be named within the evidence, as well as contact information of the independent third party involved, and the date of the most recent accreditation (certification).

Other answers: Provide the name of the Other recognized standard that has been certified to or aligned with.

To qualify as valid, the evidence provided for an Other answer must include:

1. A high level outline or diagram of the implemented Management System with which the entity has attempted to align.
2. A clear framework for managing an entity’s ESG impact.
3. The applicability of the Management System at the entity level.
4. The stages, elements and/or processes currently covered by the Management System.
5. Evidence of implementation of the Management System into the entity’s operations.

See Appendix 4 of the reference guide for additional information about GRESB Validation.

Scoring

This indicator is scored as a Two Section Indicator (i.e. Section 1: 'Elements' response and, Section 2: 'Evidence' response).

Section 1:Consists of three sub-sections, i.) accreditation to a management standard(s) and ii.) alignment to a management standard(s) iii.) management system with no accreditation. Fractional points are awarded (equally) for each selected accreditation or alignment to a management standard and are then aggregated to calculate the total score for the section. No fractional points are awarded for having management system with no alignment to an EG-related management standard. Not all checkboxes need to be selected to receive full points. The checkboxes within each subsection are equally scored.

Diminishing Increase in Score approach:As indicated by the blue line, some elements of this indicator are scored based on a Diminishing Increase in Score approach, per additional checkbox selected.

Other:Any ‘other’ answer provided will be manually validated and must be accepted before achieving the respective fractional score. If multiple ‘other’ answers are listed, more than one may be accepted in manual validation, but only one will be counted towards the score.

Section 2:‘Evidence’ is mandatory for this indicator. Therefore, no points will be awarded unless the hyperlink and/or the uploaded document is considered valid, based on the evidence criteria stated above. The evidence is validated which determines a multiplier, according to the table below:

Evidence: The evidence is manually validated and assigned a multiplier, according to the table below. The evidence must support the validation requirements. If any requirements are not met, the evidence may be partially accepted or not accepted depending on the level of alignment with the requirements.

Validation status	Score
Accepted	2/2
Partially accepted	1/2
Not accepted/not provided	0

Terminology

Alignment: To agree and match with a recognized sustainability reporting standard (either voluntary or mandatory).

Accreditation (Certified): Third-party recognition of meeting the requirements of a recognized standard.

Environmental Management System (EMS): A framework for managing an entity’s environmental impact based on its sustainability and related objectives. It covers environmental impacts, impact reduction targets and plans to achieve targeted reductions. An EMS can cover a wide range of environmental topics, including, but not limited to: energy, GHG emissions, water, waste, transportation, climate change, resilience, risks, and materials. An EMS may be certified to an external standard, such as ISO140001.

ISO 9001:2015 sets out the criteria for a quality management system.

ISO 14001:2015 sets out the criteria for an environmental management system.

ISO 20400:2017 provides guidance to organizations, independent of their activity or size, on integrating sustainability within procurement. It is intended for stakeholders involved in, or impacted by, procurement decisions and processes.

ISO 26000 provides guidance on how businesses and organizations can operate in a socially responsible way. This means acting in an ethical and transparent way that contributes to the health and welfare of society.

ISO 55000:2014 provides an overview of asset management, its principles and terminology and the expected benefits from adopting asset management.

ISO 50001:2011 provides a framework of requirements for organizations to: (i) Develop a policy for more efficient use of energy, (ii) Fix targets and objectives to meet the policy, (iii) Use data to better understand and make decisions about energy use, (iv) Measure the results, (v) Review how well the policy works, and (vi) Continually improve energy management.

OHSAS 1800:2007 Occupational Health and Safety Management Certification is an international standard which provides a framework to identify, control and decrease the risks associated with health and safety within the workplace.

References

ISO - International Organization for Standardization

Intent

The intent of this indicator is to assess the entity’s process for assessing material environmental risks, and its understanding and mitigation of these risks. Systematic responses to environmental risks include effective risk assessment, thoughtful mitigation planning, and implementation of action plans.

Requirements

Select Yes or No: If selecting Yes, select applicable sub-options.

2020 changes: “Hazardous substances” added as an environmental issue.

Contractor and/or operator engagement: In some cases, an indicator addresses an activity that applies to the reporting entity, yet is undertaken by an assigned contractor, operator and/or contracted entity. This is often the case, for example, for PPP type arrangements. In these cases, when providing evidence, the participant should specify the entity undertaking the activity and the relationship to that entity, to verify how these actions are applicable to the reporting entity. Copies of redacted contractual agreements/clauses to verify these relationships are acceptable.

Validation

Evidence: Document upload or hyperlink. The evidence should sufficiently support all the items selected for this question. If a hyperlink is provided, ensure that it is not outdated and the relevant page can be accessed within two steps.

The provided evidence piece(s) should:

• Confirm that an environmental risk assessment was conducted.
• Contain all selected elements of the risk assessment process, highlighting or bringing attention to these where possible.
• Include all selected issues within the assessment, highlighting or bringing attention to these where possible.

Evidence examples may include but are not limited to:

• A document describing the entity’s environmental risk assessments or other tangible proof of the entity's risk assessment activity.
• Acceptable evidence may include an extract of a procedure undertaken such as register or matrix, checklists, scenario analysis or a section of an environmental management plan addressing environmental risks.

Evidence completeness: Evidence does not necessarily need to be provided in full. Rather, the evidence needs to be sufficient to verify the existence of the claimed risk assessment for each issue.

Reporting Year: Evidence provided must refer to an assessment that has taken place within the last three years; up to and including the end of the reporting year identified in EC3.

Other: State the other environmental issue. Ensure that the other answer provided is not a duplicate of a selected option above (e.g. recycling when ‘waste management’ is selected). It is possible to report multiple other answers. If valid, the issue will be assigned Medium Relevance.

Document upload: Participants may upload several documents. When providing a document upload, it is mandatory to indicate where relevant information can be found within the document.

See Appendix 4 of the reference guide for additional information about GRESB Validation.

Scoring

This indicator is scored as a Two Section Indicator (i.e. Section 1: 'Elements' response and, Section 2: 'Evidence' response).

Section 1: For section 1 of the indicator, fractional points are awarded depending on the participant selecting the issues deemed material by the GRESB Materiality Assessment (see output in RC7 which will automatically populate once the indicators RC3 and RC7 of the Asset Assessment have been fully completed). It is therefore not necessary to select all checkboxes to receive maximum points. Fractional points are then aggregated to calculate the indicator’s final score.

Other:Any ‘other’ answer provided will be manually validated and must be accepted before achieving the respective fractional score. If multiple ‘other’ answers are listed, more than one may be accepted in manual validation, but only one will be counted towards the score.

Materiality-based scoring:

The scoring of this indicator links to the materiality for the entity, as determined by the GRESB Materiality Assessment (RC7).

Specific materiality weightings are assigned to the entity for each ESG issue as described in (RC7). The weightings are set at one of four levels for each of the ESG issues:

• No relevance (weighting: 0)
• Low relevance (weighting: 0)
• Medium relevance (weighting: 1)
• High relevance (weighting: 2)

Where an issue is of 'No relevance' or ‘Low relevance’ it is not considered in scoring (i.e. it has a weighting of 0). If an issue is of 'Medium relevance' the issue counts towards the score with ‘standard’ weighting (i.e. 1). If an issue is of 'High relevance' the issue counts towards the score with higher than ‘standard’ weighting (i.e. 2).

All issues of ‘Medium relevance’ and ‘High relevance’ need to be selected and addressed in the evidence to obtain the maximum score. For more details on how materiality is determined, download the GRESB Materiality & Scoring Tool.

Section 2:‘Evidence’ is mandatory for this indicator. Therefore, no points will be awarded unless the hyperlink and/or the uploaded document is considered valid, based on the evidence criteria stated above. The evidence is validated which determines a multiplier, according to the table below:

Evidence: The evidence is manually validated and assigned a multiplier, according to the table below. The evidence must support the validation requirements. If any requirements are not met, the evidence may be partially accepted or not accepted depending on the level of alignment with the requirements.

Validation status	Score
Accepted	2/2
Partially accepted	1/2
Not accepted/not provided	0

Terminology

Air pollution: Air pollutants are particles and gases released into the atmosphere that may adversely affect living organisms. Additionally, some pollutants contribute to climate change or exacerbate the effects of climate change locally.

Biodiversity and habitat: Issues related to wildlife, endangered species, ecosystem services, habitat management, and invasive species. Biodiversity refers to the variety of all plant and animal species. Habitat refers to the natural environment in which these plant and animal species live and function.

Climate change adaptation: Preparation for long-term change in climatic conditions or climate related events. Example of climate change adaptation measures can include, but are not limited to: building flood defenses, xeriscaping and using tree species resistant to storms and fires, adapting building codes to extreme weather events.

Contamination: Land that contains substances in or under it that are actually or potentially hazardous to human health or the environment.

Energy: Energy refers to energy consumption and generation from non-renewable and renewable sources (e.g. electricity, heating, cooling, steam).

Environmental issues: The impact on living and non-living natural systems, including land, air, water and ecosystems. This includes, but is not limited to, biodiversity, transport and product and service-related impacts, as well as environmental compliance and expenditures.

Greenhouse gas emissions: GHGs refers to the seven gases listed in the Kyoto Protocol: carbon dioxide (CO₂); methane (CH₄); nitrous oxide (N₂O); hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs); perfluorocarbons (PFCs); nitrogen trifluoride (NF₃) and sulphur hexafluoride (SF₆).

Hazardous substances: Also known as dangerous goods. Any substances that can pose a health or physical hazard to humans or the environment, such as carcinogens, toxic agents, irritants, corrosives, combustibles or explosives.

Light pollution: Excessive or obtrusive artificial light also known as photo pollution or luminous pollution. Examples of light pollution and reflection include: spilled light from construction zones and parking lots which may impact breeding grounds or resting areas; highly reflective towers which may affect bird flight.

Materials sourcing and resource efficiency: Responsible sourcing of materials considers the environmental, social and economic impacts of the procurement and production of products and materials. Resource efficiency means using those products and materials in an efficient and sustainable manner while minimizing impacts on the environment and society.

Noise pollution: Refers to noise pollution, also known as environmental noise, which is the propagation of noise with harmful impact on the activity of human or animal life.

Policy: Defines an organizational commitment, direction or intention as formally adopted by the organization.

Resilience to catastrophe/disaster: Preparedness of the built environment towards existing and future threats of natural disasters (e.g., the ability to absorb disturbances such as increased precipitation or flooding while maintaining its structure). This can be achieved by management policies, informational technologies, educating tenant, community, suppliers and physical measures at the asset level.

Risk assessment: Careful examination of the factors that could potentially adversely impact the value or longevity of an infrastructure asset. The results of the assessment assist in identifying measures that have to be implemented in order to prevent and mitigate the risks.

Waste: Entity's consideration of waste disposal methods and whether waste minimization strategies emphasize prioritizing options for reuse, recycling, and then recovery over other disposal options to minimize ecological impact.

Water outflows/discharges: Discharge of water to water bodies (e.g. lakes, rivers, oceans, aquifers and groundwater) or to third-parties for treatment or use.

Water inflows/withdrawals: Water drawn into the boundaries of the entity from all sources (including surface water, ground water, rainwater, and municipal water supply) as well as water reuse, efficiency, and recycling, including the entity's consideration of whether water sources are significantly affected by withdrawal of water.

References

CDP Climate Change 2020 - C2.1 Management Practices

DJSI CSA 2019 - 3.3.3 Emerging Risks

DJSI CSA 2019 - 3.3.4 Risk Culture

GRI Standards 2016 - 102-29: Identifying and managing economic, environmental and social impacts

Intent

The intent of this indicator is to assess the entity’s understanding and mitigation of material social risks. Systematic responses to social issues include effective risk assessment, thoughtful mitigation planning, and implementation of action plans.

Requirements

Select Yes or No: If selecting Yes, select applicable sub-options.

2020 changes: “Local employment” added to the list of social issues.

Contractor and/or operator engagement: In some cases, an indicator addresses an activity that applies to the reporting entity, yet is undertaken by an assigned contractor, operator and/or contracted entity. This is often the case, for example, for PPP type arrangements. In these cases, when providing evidence, the participant should specify the entity undertaking the activity and the relationship to that entity, to verify how these actions are applicable to the reporting entity. Copies of redacted contractual agreements/clauses to verify these relationships are acceptable.

Validation

Evidence: Document upload or hyperlink. The evidence should sufficiently support all the items selected for this question. If a hyperlink is provided, ensure that it is not outdated and the relevant page can be accessed within two steps.

The provided evidence piece(s) should:

• Confirm that a social risk assessment was conducted.
• Contain all selected elements of the risk assessment process, highlighting or bringing attention to these where possible.
• Include all selected issues within the assessment, highlighting or bringing attention to these where possible.

Evidence examples may include but are not limited to:

• A document describing the entity’s social risk assessments or other tangible proof of the entity's risk assessment activity.
• Acceptable evidence may include an extract of a procedure undertaken such as register or matrix, checklists, scenario analysis or a section of a social management plan addressing social risks.

Evidence completeness: Evidence does not necessarily need to be provided in full. Rather, the evidence needs to be sufficient to verify the existence of the claimed risk assessment for each issue.

Reporting Year: Evidence provided must refer to an assessment that has taken place within the last three years; up to and including the end of the reporting year identified in EC3.

Note: If certain social issues are embedded in law and/or regulation in the countries of operation, the entity may select the issue and evidence can be provided as a reference to the specific law or regulation and how it has been complied with, on the provided Evidence template.

Other: State the other social issue. Ensure that the other answer provided is not a duplicate of a selected option above (e.g., modern slavery when ‘forced or compulsory labor’ is selected). It is possible to report multiple other answers.If valid, the issue will be assigned Medium Relevance.

Document uploaded: Participants may upload several documents. When providing a document upload, it is mandatory to indicate where relevant information can be found within the document.

See Appendix 4 of the reference guide for additional information about GRESB Validation.

Scoring

This indicator is scored as a Two Section Indicator (i.e. Section 1: 'Elements' response and, Section 2: 'Evidence' response).

Section 1: For section 1 of the indicator, fractional points are awarded depending on the participant selecting the issues deemed material by the GRESB Materiality Assessment (see output in RC7 which will automatically populate once the indicators RC3 and RC7 of the Asset Assessment have been fully completed). It is therefore not necessary to select all checkboxes to receive maximum points. Fractional points are then aggregated to calculate the indicator’s final score.

Other:Any ‘other’ answer provided will be manually validated and must be accepted before achieving the respective fractional score. If multiple ‘other’ answers are listed, more than one may be accepted in manual validation, but only one will be counted towards the score.

Materiality-based scoring:

The scoring of this indicator links to the materiality for the entity, as determined by the GRESB Materiality Assessment (RC7).

Specific materiality weightings are assigned to the entity for each ESG issue as described in (RC7). The weightings are set at one of four levels for each of the ESG issues:

• No relevance (weighting: 0)
• Low relevance (weighting: 0)
• Medium relevance (weighting: 1)
• High relevance (weighting: 2)

Where an issue is of 'No relevance' or ‘Low relevance’ it is not considered in scoring (i.e. it has a weighting of 0). If an issue is of 'Medium relevance' the issue counts towards the score with ‘standard’ weighting (i.e. 1). If an issue is of 'High relevance' the issue counts towards the score with higher than ‘standard’ weighting (i.e. 2).

All issues of ‘Medium relevance’ and ‘High relevance’ need to be selected and addressed in the evidence to obtain the maximum score. For more details on how materiality is determined, download the GRESB Materiality & Scoring Tool.

Section 2:‘Evidence’ is mandatory for this indicator. Therefore, no points will be awarded unless the hyperlink and/or the uploaded document is considered valid, based on the evidence criteria stated above. The evidence is validated which determines a multiplier, according to the table below:

Evidence: The evidence is manually validated and assigned a multiplier, according to the table below. The evidence must support the validation requirements. If any requirements are not met, the evidence may be partially accepted or not accepted depending on the level of alignment with the requirements.

Validation status	Score
Accepted	2/2
Partially accepted	1/2
Not accepted/not provided	0

Terminology

Child labor: Work that deprives children of their childhood, their potential and their dignity, and that is harmful to their physical or mental development including by interfering with their education. Specifically, it means types of work that are not permitted for children below the relevant minimum age.

Community development: A process where community members come together to take collective action and generate solutions to common problems.

Customer satisfaction: Customer satisfaction is one measure of an entity's sensitivity to its customers’ needs and preferences and, from an organizational perspective, is essential for long-term success. In the context of sustainability, customer satisfaction provides insight into how the entity approaches its relationship with one stakeholder group (customers).

Employee engagement: An employee's involvement with, commitment to and satisfaction with the entity.

Forced or compulsory labor: All work or service which is exacted from any person under the menace of any penalty and for which the said person has not offered themselves voluntarily.

Freedom of association: Right of employers and workers to form, to join and to run their own organizations without prior authorization or interference by the state or any other entity.

Health and safety: The principles of occupational health and safety management systems include developing a policy, analyzing and controlling health and safety risks, providing training, and recording and investigating health and safety incidents.

Inclusion and diversity: Composition of governance bodies and breakdown of employees per employee category according to gender, age group, minority group membership, and other indicators of diversity including discrimination.

Labor standards and working conditions: Labor standards and working conditions are at the core of paid work and employment relationships. Working conditions cover a broad range of topics and issues, from working time (hours of work, rest periods, and work schedules) to remuneration, as well as the physical conditions and mental demands that exist in the workplace.

Local employment: Providing jobs and skills to local people as employees, and to local contractors.

Risk assessment: Careful examination of the factors that could potentially adversely impact the value or longevity of an infrastructure asset. The results of the assessment assist in identifying measures that have to be implemented in order to prevent and mitigate the risks.

Social enterprise partnering: An entity's partnerships with organizations that have social objectives that serve as the primary purpose of the organization.

Stakeholder relations: The practice of forging mutually beneficial connections with third-party groups and individuals that have a stake in common interest.

References

DJSI CSA 2019 - 3.3.3 Emerging Risks

DJSI CSA 2019 - 3.3.4 Risk Culture

GRI Standards 2016 - 102-29: Identifying and managing economic, environmental and social impacts

Intent

The intent of this indicator is to assess the entity’s understanding and mitigation of material governance risks. Systematic responses to governance issues include effective risk assessment, thoughtful mitigation planning, and implementation of action plans.

Requirements

Select Yes or No: If selecting Yes, select applicable sub-options.

2020 changes: i). ‘Conflicts of interest’, ‘Delegating authority’, ’Shareholder rights’, ‘Board ESG oversight’ were added as governance issues. ii.) ‘Fiduciary duty’ was removed.

Contractor and/or operator engagement: In some cases, an indicator addresses an activity that applies to the reporting entity, yet is undertaken by an assigned contractor, operator and/or contracted entity. This is often the case, for example, for PPP type arrangements. In these cases, when providing evidence, the participant should specify the entity undertaking the activity and the relationship to that entity, to verify how these actions are applicable to the reporting entity. Copies of redacted contractual agreements/clauses to verify these relationships are acceptable.

Validation

Evidence: Document upload or hyperlink. The evidence should sufficiently support all the items selected for this question. If a hyperlink is provided, ensure that it is not outdated and the relevant page can be accessed within two steps.

The provided evidence piece(s) should:

• Confirm that a governance risk assessment was conducted.
• Contain all selected elements of the risk assessment process, highlighting or bringing attention to these where possible.
• Include all selected issues within the assessment, highlighting or bringing attention to these where possible.

Evidence examples may include but are not limited to:

• A document describing the entity’s governance risk assessments or other tangible proof of the entity's risk assessment activity.
• Acceptable evidence may include an extract of a procedure undertaken such as register or matrix, checklists, scenario analysis or a section of a governance management plan addressing governance risks.

Evidence completeness: Evidence does not necessarily need to be provided in full. Rather, the evidence needs to be sufficient to verify the existence of the claimed risk assessment for each issue.

Reporting Year:Evidence provided must refer to an assessment that has taken place within the last three years; up to and including the end of the reporting year identified in EC3.

Note: If certain governance issues are embedded in law and/or regulation in the countries of operation, the entity may select the issue and evidence can be provided as a reference to the specific law or regulation and how it has been complied with, on the provided Evidence template.

Other: State the other governance issue. Ensure that the other answer provided is not a duplicate of a selected option above (e.g., Information security when ‘Cybersecurity’ is selected). It is possible to report multiple other answers. If valid, the issue will be assigned Medium Relevance.

Document uploaded: Participants may upload several documents. When providing a document upload, it is mandatory to indicate where relevant information can be found within the document.

See Appendix 4 of the reference guide for additional information about GRESB Validation.

Scoring

This indicator is scored as a Two Section Indicator (i.e. Section 1: 'Elements' response and, Section 2: 'Evidence' response).

Section 1: For section 1 of the indicator, fractional points are awarded depending on the participant selecting the issues deemed material by the GRESB Materiality Assessment (see output in RC7 which will automatically populate once the indicators RC3 and RC7 of the Asset Assessment have been fully completed). It is therefore not necessary to select all checkboxes to receive maximum points. Fractional points are then aggregated to calculate the indicator’s final score.

Other:Any ‘other’ answer provided will be manually validated and must be accepted before achieving the respective fractional score. If multiple ‘other’ answers are listed, more than one may be accepted in manual validation, but only one will be counted towards the score.

Materiality-based scoring:

The scoring of this indicator links to the materiality for the entity, as determined by the GRESB Materiality Assessment (RC7).

Specific materiality weightings are assigned to the entity for each ESG issue as described in (RC7). The weightings are set at one of four levels for each of the ESG issues:

• No relevance (weighting: 0)
• Low relevance (weighting: 0)
• Medium relevance (weighting: 1)
• High relevance (weighting: 2)

Where an issue is of 'No relevance' or ‘Low relevance’ it is not considered in scoring (i.e. it has a weighting of 0). If an issue is of 'Medium relevance' the issue counts towards the score with ‘standard’ weighting (i.e. 1). If an issue is of 'High relevance' the issue counts towards the score with higher than ‘standard’ weighting (i.e. 2).

All issues of ‘Medium relevance’ and ‘High relevance’ need to be selected and addressed in the evidence to obtain the maximum score. For more details on how materiality is determined, download the GRESB Materiality & Scoring Tool.

Section 2:‘Evidence’ is mandatory for this indicator. Therefore, no points will be awarded unless the hyperlink and/or the uploaded document is considered valid, based on the evidence criteria stated above. The evidence is validated which determines a multiplier, according to the table below:

Evidence: The evidence is manually validated and assigned a multiplier, according to the table below. The evidence must support the validation requirements. If any requirements are not met, the evidence may be partially accepted or not accepted depending on the level of alignment with the requirements.

Validation status	Score
Accepted	2/2
Partially accepted	1/2
Not accepted/not provided	0

Terminology

Audit committee structure/independence: A corporate board of directors establishes an audit committee to assist in discharging its fiduciary responsibility. An effective audit committee is an important feature of a strong corporate governance culture, and should have a clear description of duties and responsibilities.

Board composition: Composition of the board and its committees by (i)Executive or non-executive, (ii) Independence, (iii) Tenure on the governance body, (iv) Number of each individual’s other significant positions and commitments, and the nature of the commitments, (v) Gender, (vi) Membership of under-represented social groups, (vii) Competences relating to economic, environmental and social impacts, (viii) Stakeholder representation.

Board ESG oversight: The highest committee or position that formally reviews and approves the organization’s sustainability report and ensures that all material topics are covered.

Board-level issues: Governance issues that should be recognized at board-level by the entity.

Bribery: The offering, giving, receiving or soliciting an item of value to influence the actions of an official or other person in charge of a public or legal fiduciary duty.

Compensation committee structure/independence: Compensation decisions are central to the governance of many entities. Compensation committees or analogous organizations are established to govern employee compensation and ensure employee remuneration decisions are made in a fair, consistent and independent manner. An independent compensation committee may be one indicator of effective governance.

Conflicts of interest: Situations where an individual is confronted with choosing between the requirements of his or her function and his or her own private interests.

Corruption: Abuse of entrusted power for private gain.

Cybersecurity: The protection of internet-connected systems, including hardware, software and data, from any unauthorised use or access. Malicious attacks in particular can pose a significant threat to infrastructure assets.

Data protection and privacy: Customer privacy includes matters such as the protection of data; the use of information or data for their original intended purpose only, unless specifically agreed otherwise; the obligation to observe confidentiality; and the protection of information or data from misuse or theft.

Delegating authority: The process for delegating authority for economic, environmental, and social topics from the highest governance.

Executive compensation: The financial and non-financial compensation of executives, in a manner that motivates executives to perform their roles in alignment with the entities objectives and risk tolerance.

Fraud: Wrongful deception intended to result in financial or personal gain.

Independence of Board chair: A non-executive member of the board who does not have any management responsibilities within the organization and is not under any other undue influence, internal or external, political or ownership, that would impede the board member’s exercise of objective judgment.

Lobbying activities: Any activity carried out to influence a government or institution’s policies and decisions in favor of a specific cause or outcome.

Operational issues: Governance issues that should be recognized on operational-level by the entity.

Political contributions: Disclosure of and guidelines for political contributions, such as the amounts and recipients of all monetary and non-monetary contributions made by an organization, which include political contributions made through third parties.

Risk assessment: Careful examination of the factors that could potentially adversely impact the value or longevity of an infrastructure asset. The results of the assessment assist in identifying measures that have to be implemented in order to prevent and mitigate the risks.

Shareholder rights: Assessing the potential risk of breaking or working against the entity’s contractual shareholder rights. Shareholder rights are defined in the company’s charter and bylaws.

Whistle-blower mechanism: A process that offers protection for individuals that want to reveal illegal, unethical or dangerous practices. An efficient whistle-blower mechanism prescribes clear procedures and channels to facilitate the reporting of wrongdoing and corruption, defines the protected disclosures, outlines the remedies and sanctions for retaliation.

References

DJSI CSA 2019 - 3.3.3 Emerging Risks

DJSI CSA 2019 - 3.3.4 Risk Culture

GRI Standards 2016 - 102-29: Identifying and managing economic, environmental and social impacts

Intent

The intent of this indicator is to assess the entity’s use of a systematic process to collect data to monitor and assess environmental performance.

Requirements

Select Yes or No: If selecting Yes, select applicable sub-options.

2020 changes: “Hazardous substances” added as an environmental issue.

Contractor and/or operator engagement: In some cases, an indicator addresses an activity that applies to the reporting entity, yet is undertaken by an assigned contractor, operator and/or contracted entity. This is often the case, for example, for PPP type arrangements. In these cases, when providing evidence, the participant should specify the entity undertaking the activity and the relationship to that entity, to verify how these actions are applicable to the reporting entity. Copies of redacted contractual agreements/clauses to verify these relationships are acceptable.

Validation

Other: State the other environmental issue. Ensure that the other answer provided is not a duplicate of a selected option above (e.g. recycling when ‘waste management’ is selected). It is possible to report multiple other answers. If valid, the issue will be assigned Medium Relevance.

See Appendix 4 of the reference guide for additional information about GRESB Validation.

Scoring

This indicator is scored as a One Section Indicator. Evidence is not required. Fractional points are awarded depending on the participant selecting the issues deemed material by the GRESB Materiality Assessment (see output in RC7 which will automatically populate once the indicators RC3 and RC7 of the Asset Assessment have been fully completed). It is therefore not necessary to select all checkboxes to receive maximum points. Fractional points are then aggregated to calculate the indicator’s final score.

Other:Any ‘other’ answer provided will be manually validated and must be accepted before achieving the respective fractional score. If multiple ‘other’ answers are listed, more than one may be accepted in manual validation, but only one will be counted towards the score.

Materiality-based scoring: This indicator applies materiality-based scoring. Specific materiality weightings are assigned to the entity for each ESG issue in the GRESB Materiality Assessment indicator (RC7). The weightings are set at one of four levels for each of the ESG issues: No Relevance, Low Relevance, Medium Relevance, and High Relevance. Where an issue is of 'No relevance' or ‘Low relevance’ then the issue is not considered in scoring (i.e. there is no impact on score whether or not the issue is addressed). If an issue is of 'Medium relevance' then the issue counts towards the score with ‘medium’ weighting. If an issue is of 'High relevance' then the issue counts towards the score with ‘high’ weighting.

All issues of “Medium relevance” and “High relevance” need to be selected and addressed in the evidence to obtain the maximum score. For more details refer to the section on Materiality Based Scoring in this Reference Guide or download the Gresb Materiality & Scoring Tool.

Terminology

Air pollution: Air pollutants are particles and gases released into the atmosphere that may adversely affect living organisms. Additionally, some pollutants contribute to climate change or exacerbate the effects of climate change locally.

Biodiversity and habitat: Issues related to wildlife, endangered species, ecosystem services, habitat management, and invasive species. Biodiversity refers to the variety of all plant and animal species. Habitat refers to the natural environment in which these plant and animal species live and function.

Climate change adaptation: Preparation for long-term change in climatic conditions or climate related events. Example of climate change adaptation measures can include, but are not limited to: building flood defenses, xeriscaping and using tree species resistant to storms and fires, adapting building codes to extreme weather events.

Contamination: Land that contains substances in or under it that are actually or potentially hazardous to human health or the environment.

Energy: Energy refers to energy consumption and generation from non-renewable and renewable sources (e.g. electricity, heating, cooling, steam).

Environmental issues: The impact on living and non-living natural systems, including land, air, water and ecosystems. This includes, but is not limited to, biodiversity, transport and product and service-related impacts, as well as environmental compliance and expenditures.

Greenhouse gas emissions: GHGs refers to the seven gases listed in the Kyoto Protocol: carbon dioxide (CO₂); methane (CH₄); nitrous oxide (N₂O); hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs); perfluorocarbons (PFCs); nitrogen trifluoride (NF₃) and sulphur hexafluoride (SF₆).

Hazardous substances: Any substance or chemical which is a "health hazard" or "physical hazard," including: chemicals which are carcinogens, toxic agents, irritants, corrosives, sensitizers; agents which act on the hematopoietic system; agents which damage the lungs, skin, eyes, or mucous membranes; chemicals which are combustible, explosive, flammable, oxidizers, pyrophorics, unstable-reactive or water-reactive; and chemicals which in the course of normal handling, use, or storage may produce or release dusts, gases, fumes, vapors, mists or smoke which may have any of the previously mentioned characteristics. (Full definitions can be found at 29 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 1910.1200.) Ref US OSHA's definition includes any substance or chemical which is a "health hazard" or "physical hazard," including: chemicals which are carcinogens, toxic agents, irritants, corrosives, sensitizers; agents which act on the hematopoietic system; agents which damage the lungs, skin, eyes, or mucous membranes; chemicals which are combustible, explosive, flammable, oxidizers, pyrophorics, unstable-reactive or water-reactive; and chemicals which in the course of normal handling, use, or storage may produce or release dusts, gases, fumes, vapors, mists or smoke which may have any of the previously mentioned characteristics. (Full definitions can be found at 29 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 1910.1200.)

Light pollution: Excessive or obtrusive artificial light also known as photo pollution or luminous pollution. Examples of light pollution and reflection include: spilled light from construction zones and parking lots which may impact breeding grounds or resting areas; highly reflective towers which may affect bird flight.

Materials sourcing and resource efficiency: Responsible sourcing of materials considers the environmental, social and economic impacts of the procurement and production of products and materials. Resource efficiency means using those products and materials in an efficient and sustainable manner while minimizing impacts on the environment and society.

Monitor: To observe the progress of entity's ESG performance over a period of time.

Noise pollution: Refers to noise pollution, also known as environmental noise, which is the propagation of noise with harmful impact on the activity of human or animal life.

Policy: Defines an organizational commitment, direction or intention as formally adopted by the organization.

Resilience to catastrophe/disaster: Preparedness of the built environment towards existing and future threats of natural disasters (e.g., the ability to absorb disturbances such as increased precipitation or flooding while maintaining its structure). This can be achieved by management policies, informational technologies, educating tenant, community, suppliers and physical measures at the asset level.

Waste: Entity's consideration of waste disposal methods and whether waste minimization strategies emphasize prioritizing options for reuse, recycling, and then recovery over other disposal options to minimize ecological impact.

Water outflows/discharges: Discharge of water to water bodies (e.g. lakes, rivers, oceans, aquifers and groundwater) or to third-parties for treatment or use.

Water inflows/withdrawals: Water drawn into the boundaries of the entity from all sources (including surface water, ground water, rainwater, and municipal water supply) as well as water reuse, efficiency, and recycling, including the entity's consideration of whether water sources are significantly affected by withdrawal of water.

References

GRI Standards 2016 - 102-29: Identifying and managing economic, environmental and social impacts

GRI Standards 2016 - 300 series: Environmental Standards

Intent

The intent of this indicator is to assess the entity’s use of a systematic process to collect data to monitor and assess social performance.

Requirements

Select Yes or No: If selecting Yes, select applicable sub-options.

2020 changes: “Hazardous substances” added as an environmental issue.

Contractor and/or operator engagement: In some cases, an indicator addresses an activity that applies to the reporting entity, yet is undertaken by an assigned contractor, operator and/or contracted entity. This is often the case, for example, for PPP type arrangements. In these cases, when providing evidence, the participant should specify the entity undertaking the activity and the relationship to that entity, to verify how these actions are applicable to the reporting entity. Copies of redacted contractual agreements/clauses to verify these relationships are acceptable.

Validation

Other: State the other social issue. Ensure that the other answer provided is not a duplicate of a selected option above (e.g., modern slavery when ‘forced or compulsory labor’ is selected). It is possible to report multiple other answers.If valid, the issue will be assigned Medium Relevance.

See Appendix 4 of the reference guide for additional information about GRESB Validation.

Scoring

This indicator is scored as a One Section Indicator. Evidence is not required. Fractional points are awarded depending on the participant selecting the issues deemed material by the GRESB Materiality Assessment (see output in RC7 which will automatically populate once the indicators RC3 and RC7 of the Asset Assessment have been fully completed). It is therefore not necessary to select all checkboxes to receive maximum points. Fractional points are then aggregated to calculate the indicator’s final score.

Other:Any ‘other’ answer provided will be manually validated and must be accepted before achieving the respective fractional score. If multiple ‘other’ answers are listed, more than one may be accepted in manual validation, but only one will be counted towards the score.

Materiality-based scoring: This indicator applies materiality-based scoring. Specific materiality weightings are assigned to the entity for each ESG issue in the GRESB Materiality Assessment indicator (RC7). The weightings are set at one of four levels for each of the ESG issues: No Relevance, Low Relevance, Medium Relevance, and High Relevance. Where an issue is of 'No relevance' or ‘Low relevance’ then the issue is not considered in scoring (i.e. there is no impact on score whether or not the issue is addressed). If an issue is of 'Medium relevance' then the issue counts towards the score with ‘medium’ weighting. If an issue is of 'High relevance' then the issue counts towards the score with ‘high’ weighting.

All issues of “Medium relevance” and “High relevance” need to be selected and addressed in the evidence to obtain the maximum score. For more details refer to the section on Materiality Based Scoring in this Reference Guide or download the Gresb Materiality & Scoring Tool.

Terminology

Child labor: Work that deprives children of their childhood, their potential and their dignity, and that is harmful to their physical or mental development including by interfering with their education. Specifically, it means types of work that are not permitted for children below the relevant minimum age.

Community development: A process where community members come together to take collective action and generate solutions to common problems.

Customer satisfaction: Customer satisfaction is one measure of an entity's sensitivity to its customers’ needs and preferences and, from an organizational perspective, is essential for long-term success. In the context of sustainability, customer satisfaction provides insight into how the entity approaches its relationship with one stakeholder group (customers).

Employee engagement: An employee's involvement with, commitment to and satisfaction with the entity.

Forced or compulsory labor: All work or service which is exacted from any person under the menace of any penalty and for which the said person has not offered themselves voluntarily.

Freedom of association: Right of employers and workers to form, to join and to run their own organizations without prior authorization or interference by the state or any other entity.

Health and safety: The principles of occupational health and safety management systems include developing a policy, analyzing and controlling health and safety risks, providing training, and recording and investigating health and safety incidents.

Inclusion and diversity: Composition of governance bodies and breakdown of employees per employee category according to gender, age group, minority group membership, and other indicators of diversity including discrimination.

Labor standards and working conditions: Labor standards and working conditions are at the core of paid work and employment relationships. Working conditions cover a broad range of topics and issues, from working time (hours of work, rest periods, and work schedules) to remuneration, as well as the physical conditions and mental demands that exist in the workplace.

Local employment: Providing jobs and skills to local people as employees, and to local contractors.

Monitor: To observe the progress of entity's ESG performance over a period of time.

Social enterprise partnering: An entity's partnerships with organizations that have social objectives that serve as the primary purpose of the organization.

Stakeholder relations: The practice of forging mutually beneficial connections with third-party groups and individuals that have a stake in common interest.

References

GRI Standards 2016 - 102-29: Identifying and managing economic, environmental and social impacts

GRI Standards 2016 - 400 series: Social Standards

Intent

The intent of this indicator is to assess the entity’s use of a systematic process to collect data to monitor and assess governance performance.

Requirements

Select Yes or No: If selecting Yes, select applicable sub-options.

2020 changes: i). ‘Conflicts of interest’, ‘Delegating authority’, ’Shareholder rights’, ‘Board ESG oversight’ were added as governance issues. ii.) ‘Fiduciary duty’ was removed. iii.) Section on which stakeholder(s) the policy applied to has been removed.

Contractor and/or operator engagement: In some cases, an indicator addresses an activity that applies to the reporting entity, yet is undertaken by an assigned contractor, operator and/or contracted entity. This is often the case, for example, for PPP type arrangements. In these cases, when providing evidence, the participant should specify the entity undertaking the activity and the relationship to that entity, to verify how these actions are applicable to the reporting entity. Copies of redacted contractual agreements/clauses to verify these relationships are acceptable.

Validation

Other: State the other governance issue. Ensure that the other answer provided is not a duplicate of a selected option above (e.g., Information security when ‘Cybersecurity’ is selected). It is possible to report multiple other answers. If valid, the issue will be assigned Medium Relevance.

See Appendix 4 of the reference guide for additional information about GRESB Validation.

Scoring

This indicator is scored as a One Section Indicator. Evidence is not required. Fractional points are awarded depending on the participant selecting the issues deemed material by the GRESB Materiality Assessment (see output in RC7 which will automatically populate once the indicators RC3 and RC7 of the Asset Assessment have been fully completed). It is therefore not necessary to select all checkboxes to receive maximum points. Fractional points are then aggregated to calculate the indicator’s final score.

Other:Any ‘other’ answer provided will be manually validated and must be accepted before achieving the respective fractional score. If multiple ‘other’ answers are listed, more than one may be accepted in manual validation, but only one will be counted towards the score.

Materiality-based scoring: This indicator applies materiality-based scoring. Specific materiality weightings are assigned to the entity for each ESG issue in the GRESB Materiality Assessment indicator (RC7). The weightings are set at one of four levels for each of the ESG issues: No Relevance, Low Relevance, Medium Relevance, and High Relevance. Where an issue is of 'No relevance' or ‘Low relevance’ then the issue is not considered in scoring (i.e. there is no impact on score whether or not the issue is addressed). If an issue is of 'Medium relevance' then the issue counts towards the score with ‘medium’ weighting. If an issue is of 'High relevance' then the issue counts towards the score with ‘high’ weighting.

All issues of “Medium relevance” and “High relevance” need to be selected and addressed in the evidence to obtain the maximum score. For more details refer to the section on Materiality Based Scoring in this Reference Guide or download the Gresb Materiality & Scoring Tool.

Terminology

Audit committee structure/independence: A corporate board of directors establishes an audit committee to assist in discharging its fiduciary responsibility. An effective audit committee is an important feature of a strong corporate governance culture, and should have a clear description of duties and responsibilities.

Board composition: Composition of the board and its committees by (i)Executive or non-executive, (ii) Independence, (iii) Tenure on the governance body, (iv) Number of each individual’s other significant positions and commitments, and the nature of the commitments, (v) Gender, (vi) Membership of under-represented social groups, (vii) Competences relating to economic, environmental and social impacts, (viii) Stakeholder representation.

Board ESG oversight: The highest committee or position that formally reviews and approves the organization’s sustainability report and ensures that all material topics are covered.

Board-level issues: Governance issues that should be recognized at board-level by the entity.

Bribery: The offering, giving, receiving or soliciting an item of value to influence the actions of an official or other person in charge of a public or legal fiduciary duty.

Compensation committee structure/independence: Compensation decisions are central to the governance of many entities. Compensation committees or analogous organizations are established to govern employee compensation and ensure employee remuneration decisions are made in a fair, consistent and independent manner. An independent compensation committee may be one indicator of effective governance.

Conflicts of interest: Situations where an individual is confronted with choosing between the requirements of his or her function and his or her own private interests.

Corruption: Abuse of entrusted power for private gain.

Cybersecurity: The protection of internet-connected systems, including hardware, software and data, from any unauthorised use or access. Malicious attacks in particular can pose a significant threat to infrastructure assets.

Data protection and privacy: Customer privacy includes matters such as the protection of data; the use of information or data for their original intended purpose only, unless specifically agreed otherwise; the obligation to observe confidentiality; and the protection of information or data from misuse or theft.

Delegating authority: The process for delegating authority for economic, environmental, and social topics from the highest governance.

Executive compensation: The financial and non-financial compensation of executives, in a manner that motivates executives to perform their roles in alignment with the entities objectives and risk tolerance.

Fraud: Wrongful deception intended to result in financial or personal gain.

Independence of Board chair: A non-executive member of the board who does not have any management responsibilities within the organization and is not under any other undue influence, internal or external, political or ownership, that would impede the board member’s exercise of objective judgment.

Lobbying activities: Any activity carried out to influence a government or institution’s policies and decisions in favor of a specific cause or outcome.

Monitor: To observe the progress of entity's ESG performance over a period of time.

Operational issues: Governance issues that should be recognized on operational-level by the entity.

Political contributions: Disclosure of and guidelines for political contributions, such as the amounts and recipients of all monetary and non-monetary contributions made by an organization, which include political contributions made through third parties.

Shareholder rights: Assessing the potential risk of breaking or working against the entity’s contractual shareholder rights. Shareholder rights are defined in the company’s charter and bylaws.

Whistle-blower mechanism: A process that offers protection for individuals that want to reveal illegal, unethical or dangerous practices. An efficient whistle-blower mechanism prescribes clear procedures and channels to facilitate the reporting of wrongdoing and corruption, defines the protected disclosures, outlines the remedies and sanctions for retaliation.

References

GRI Standards 2016 - 102-29: Identifying and managing economic, environmental and social impacts

GRI Standards 2016 - 200 series: Economic Standards

Intent

The intent of this indicator is to assess the existence, scope and reach of the entity’s stakeholder engagement program. Effective stakeholder engagement programs are often critical in preventing or addressing controversy that may create regulatory risks, legal liabilities, or undermine the entity’s social license to operate and maximizing opportunities for creating shared value.

Requirements

Select Yes or No: If selecting Yes, select applicable sub-options.

Third-party alignment: Indicate whether and which third-party standard the stakeholder engagement program aligns with. Finally, select which stakeholders the stakeholder engagement program applies to.

Guideline name: Additional guidelines such as 'IAP2 Core Values: Ethics and Spectrum' can be listed under 'Other'.

2020 changes: i.) Removal of sub-options ‘Employees’, ‘Suppliers’ and ‘Supply Chain (beyond Tier 1 suppliers and contractors)’. ii.) Added stakeholder program elements.

Validation

Other: This indicator contains two options to provide an Other answer. Other answers must be outside the options listed in the indicator to be valid nor a duplicate of a selected answer. Within the respective sections state:

1. An 'Other' element of the stakeholder engagement program;
2. An 'Other' external stakeholder group.

See Appendix 4 of the reference guide for additional information about GRESB Validation.

Scoring

This indicator is scored as a One Section Indicator. Evidence is not required. Fractional points are awarded based on the selections of:

• Employee engagement program elements.
• Alignment of the program with third-party standards.
• Stakeholder groups selected.

Other: Any ‘other’ answer provided will be manually validated and must be accepted before achieving the respective fractional score. If multiple ‘other’ answers are listed, more than one may be accepted in manual validation, but only one will be counted towards the score.

Diminishing Increase in Score approach: As indicated by the blue line, some elements of this indicator are scored based on a Diminishing Increase in Score approach, per additional checkbox selected.

Terminology

Stakeholder engagement program: A formal strategy to communicate with stakeholders to achieve and maintain their support.

Stakeholder groups: Terminology for the various stakeholder groups is defined in Appendix 2.

References

Alignment with External Frameworks

GRI Standards 2016 - 102-40: List of stakeholder groups

GRI Standards 2016 - 102-42: Identifying and selecting stakeholders

GRI Standards 2016 - 102-43: Approach to stakeholder engagement

Intent

This indicator describes the management practices and requirements the entity uses to manage supply chain risks. The procurement process is an effective way to integrate the entity’s sustainability-specific requirements into their supply chain. This indicator applies to existing and new contracts.

Requirements

Select Yes or No: If selecting Yes, select applicable sub-options.

2020 changes: Added a section on ‘elements of the supply chain engagement program’ which replaces the former SE6 indicator.

Validation

1. Other: State the other issue included in requirements, and/or;
2. Other: State the other external party to whom the requirements apply to. It is possible to report multiple other answers for the above sub-options.

See Appendix 4 of the reference guide for additional information about GRESB Validation.

Scoring

This indicator is scored as a One Section Indicator. Evidence is not required. Fractional points are awarded based on the selections of:

• Supply chain engagement program elements.
• Issues covered by the procurement process.
• External parties to whom the program applies to.

Other: Any ‘other’ answer provided will be manually validated and must be accepted before achieving the respective fractional score. If multiple ‘other’ answers are listed, more than one may be accepted in manual validation, but only one will be counted towards the score.

Diminishing Increase in Score approach: As indicated by the blue line, some elements of this indicator are scored based on a Diminishing Increase in Score approach, per additional checkbox selected.

Terminology

Action plan: A detailed plan outlining actions needed to enhance tenant satisfaction. An action plan has three major elements (1) Specific tasks: what will be done and by whom; (2) Time horizon: when will it be done; (3) Resource allocation: what specific funds are available for specific activities.

Business ethics: Basic moral and legal principles used to address issues such as corporate governance, insider trading, bribery, discrimination, corporate social responsibility and fiduciary responsibilities.

Child labor: Work that deprives children of their childhood, their potential and their dignity, and that is harmful to their physical or mental development including by interfering with their education. Specifically, it means types of work that are not permitted for children below the relevant minimum age.

Environmental process standards: Minimum standards required during the procurement process in relation to environmental processes, such as requirements for disposal of waste generated by contractors.

Environmental product standards: Minimum standards required during the procurement process in relation to environmental products, such as requiring a certain percentage of products to be locally sourced or contain recycled content.

ESG-specific requirements:Includes specification and use of sustainable and energy efficient materials, systems, equipment and onsite operating practices that relate to ESG issues.

Health and safety - employees: The health and safety of employees responsible for the entity.

Employee health & well-being: The health & well-being of employees responsible for the entity.

Human health-based product standards: Minimum standards for the health-related attributes of products, such as lists of prohibited chemicals.

Human rights: Human rights are rights inherent to all human beings, whatever their nationality, place of residence, sex, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, language or any other status.

Suppliers: Organizations or persons in the supply chain that provide a product or service used during the reporting year.

References

GRI Standards 2016 - 204: Procurement Practices

GRI Standards 2016 - 308: Supplier Environmental Assessment

GRI Standards 2016 - 414: Supplier Social Assessment

DJSI CSA 2019 - 3.6.1 Supplier Code of Conduct

DJSI CSA 2019 - 3.6.3 Risk Exposure

DJSI CSA 2019 - 3.6.5 ESG Integration in Supply Chain Management Strategy

Intent

This indicator identifies the existence of a grievance mechanism at the reporting entity. An entity’s procurement decisions and activities can lead to significant negative sustainability impacts in the supply chain, including human rights violations, even when entities operate optimally. Grievance mechanisms play an important role to provide access to remedy and reflect an entity’s commitment to ESG management. An entity should establish a mechanism for stakeholders in the supply chain to bring this to the attention of the entity and seek redress.

Requirements

Select Yes or No: If selecting Yes, select applicable sub-options.

Prefill: This indicator is similar to the one included in the 2019 Assessment and some sections have been prefilled from the 2019 Assessment. Review the response and/or evidence carefully.

Validation

Other: This indicator contains two options to provide an Other answer. Other answers must be outside the options listed in the indicator to be valid. Within the respective sections, state:

1. Other: State the other method used for the grievance process. It is possible to report multiple other answers.
2. Other: State the other stakeholder group. It is possible to report multiple other answers.

See Appendix 4 of the reference guide for additional information about GRESB Validation.

Scoring

This indicator is scored as a One Section Indicator. Evidence is not required. Fractional points are awarded based on the selections of:

• Characteristic elements selected that are applicable to the grievances process.
• Stakeholder to which the process applies to.

Other: Any ‘other’ answer provided will be manually validated and must be accepted before achieving the respective fractional score. If multiple ‘other’ answers are listed, more than one may be accepted in manual validation, but only one will be counted towards the score.

Diminishing Increase in Score approach: As indicated by the blue line, some elements of this indicator are scored based on a Diminishing Increase in Score approach, per additional checkbox selected.

Terminology

Accessible: Known to relevant stakeholder groups and provides adequate assistance for those who may face particular barriers to access (e.g. 24/7, language translations)

Dialogue based: Looks for mutually agreed solutions through engagement between parties.

Equitable: Ensure that parties have reasonable access to sources of information, advice and expertise necessary to engage in a grievance process on fair, informed and respectful terms (e.g. independent review).

Grievance mechanism: Formal, legal or non-legal (or ‘judicial/non-judicial’) complaint or feedback process that can be used by individuals, communities and/or civil society organizations that are being negatively affected by certain business activities and operations.The process enables the complaining party to flag an issue, seek redress and remedy.

Improvement based: Drawing on lessons learnt to improve processes and prevent future harms.

Legitimate: Enable trust from stakeholder groups.

Predictable: Provide a clear procedure with an indicative time frame for each stage, and clarity on the types of process and outcome available.

Rights compatible: Ensure that outcomes accord with international norms of behavior.

Transparent: Stakeholders are informed about the process and complainants are kept informed about the progress of grievances.

Safe: Protect stakeholders from potential threats and retaliations through a secure, anonymous, independent and two-way communication system.

Stakeholder groups: Terminology for the various stakeholder groups is defined in Appendix 2.

References

ISO20400: Sustainable Procurement

UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights

Alignment with External Frameworks

GRI Standards 2016 - 103-2: The management approach and its components

Good practice example: Please refer to this

link

Intent

The intent of this indicator is to communicate the nature of grievances received by the entity and how they have been resolved. Although this is not scored in the assessment, this is of significant interest to investors.

Requirements

Select Yes or No: If selecting Yes, select applicable sub-options.

Zero (0) may be entered but only if there is a formal grievance mechanism in place as per SE3.1 and no grievances have been received during the reporting year; Provide a summary of those grievances (if applicable);

Provide a summary of resolutions available for those grievances (if applicable).

Validation

This indicator is not subject to automatic or manual validation.

See Appendix 4 of the reference guide for additional information about GRESB Validation.

Scoring

This indicator is not scored and is for reporting purposes only.

Terminology

Grievance mechanism: Formal, legal or non-legal (or ‘judicial/non-judicial’) complaint or feedback process that can be used by individuals, communities and/or civil society organizations that are being negatively affected by certain business activities and operations.The process enables the complaining party to flag an issue, seek redress and remedy.

References

ISO20400: Sustainable Procurement

UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights

Alignment with External Frameworks

GRI Standards 2016 - 103-2: The management approach and its components

Intent

The purpose of this indicator is to describe specific actions implemented to mitigate environmental risk and/or improve environmental performance. Although unscored, this indicator provides an opportunity for the entity to communicate to its investors the meaningful efforts that are being made.

Requirements

Select Yes or No: If you select “Yes”, provide at least one example to complete the table.

Change: Indicator RO4 (2019) was moved to the Performance Component and restructured. It has also been split into environmental, social and governance indicators. These indicators are now for reporting purposes only and no longer scored.

No prefill: This indicator has changed from the 2019 Assessment and has not been prefilled with 2019 Assessment answers.

Add an issue: Describe the actions implemented by completing the table as follows for each action:

1. Select the environmental issue addressed in column 1 (“Issues addressed”) or use the ‘other’ option to list a custom environmental issue;
2. Select the relevant category in column 2 (“Category”);
3. Describe the action taken in column 3 (“Description”) (What did the action (project or initiative) involve?);
4. Select the relevant incentive (i.e. motivation or reason) for implementing the action in column 4 (“Incentive”);
5. Describe the impact of the action, i.e. the outcome, in column 5 (“Impact of the action”). For example, what benefit will or has been achieved by implementing the action, or how did the action mitigate environmental risk and/or improve environmental performance;
6. Provide an indication of the monetary impact in column 6 (“Monetary impact”). This can be an exact number, an estimate or a description, e.g. return on investment (ROI), payback period or net present value (NPV);
7. Select the status of the action at the end of the reporting period in column 7 (“Status”). If the action has been completed and operational for more than three years (at the end of the reporting period), it should not be included.
8. Finally, it is possible to provide additional context to the response provided in column 8 (“Context”).

The actions should be specific, tangible and outside the regular business activities. For example, a standing policy should not be included here, but a program to increase energy efficiency could be appropriate.

The action must have taken place within the last three years, up to and including the end of the reporting period identified in EC3.

Validation

This indicator is not subject to manual validation.

Scoring

This indicator is not scored and is for reporting purposes only.

Terminology

Environmental issues: The impact on living and non-living natural systems, including land, air, water and ecosystems. This includes, but is not limited to, biodiversity, transport and product and service-related impacts, as well as environmental compliance and expenditures. Full reference to listed environmental issues can be found in Appendix 2.

References

DJSI 2019 - 3.3.3 Emerging risks

CDP Climate Change 2020 - C4.3 Emissions reduction initiatives

Intent

The purpose of this indicator is to describe specific actions implemented to mitigate social risk and/or improve social performance. Although unscored, this indicator provides an opportunity for the entity to communicate to its investors the meaningful efforts that are being made.

Requirements

Select Yes or No: If you select “Yes”, provide at least one example to complete the table.

Change: Indicator RO4 (2019) was moved to the Performance Component and restructured. It has also been split into environmental, social and governance indicators. These indicators are now for reporting purposes only and no longer scored.

No prefill: This indicator has changed from the 2019 Assessment and has not been prefilled with 2019 Assessment answers.

Add an issue: Describe the actions implemented by completing the table as follows for each action:

1. Select the social issue addressed in column 1 (“Issues addressed”) or use the ‘other’ option to list a custom social issue;
2. Select the relevant category in column 2 (“Category”);
3. Describe the action taken in column 3 (“Description”) (What did the action (project or initiative) involve?);
4. Select the relevant incentive (i.e. motivation or reason) for implementing the action in column 4 (“Incentive”);
5. Describe the impact of the action, i.e. the outcome, in column 5 (“Impact of the action”). For example, what benefit will or has been achieved by implementing the action, or how did the action mitigate social risk and/or improve social performance;
6. Provide an indication of the monetary impact in column 6 (“Monetary impact”). This can be an exact number, an estimate or a description, e.g. return on investment (ROI), payback period or net present value (NPV);
7. Select the status of the action at the end of the reporting period in column 7 (“Status”). If the action has been completed and operational for more than three years (at the end of the reporting period), it should not be included.
8. Finally, it is possible to provide additional context to the response provided in column 8 (“Context”).

The actions should be specific, tangible and outside the regular business activities. For example, a standing policy should not be included here, but an employee outreach program to improve health and safety could be appropriate.

The action must have taken place within the last three years, up to and including the end of the reporting period identified in EC3.

Validation

This indicator is not subject to manual validation.

Scoring

This indicator is not scored and is for reporting purposes only.

Terminology

Social issues: Concerns the impacts the organization has on the social systems within which it operates. Full reference to listed social issues can be found in Appendix 2.

References

Alignment with External Frameworks

DJSI 2019 - 3.3.3 Emerging risks

Intent

The purpose of this indicator is to describe specific actions implemented to mitigate governance risk and/or improve governance performance. Although unscored, this indicator provides an opportunity for the entity to communicate to its investors the meaningful efforts that are being made.

Requirements

Select Yes or No: If you select “Yes”, provide at least one example to complete the table.

Change: Indicator RO4 (2019) was moved to the Performance Component and restructured. It has also been split into environmental, social and governance indicators. These indicators are now for reporting purposes only and no longer scored.

No prefill: This indicator has changed from the 2019 Assessment and has not been prefilled with 2019 Assessment answers.

Add an issue: Describe the actions implemented by completing the table as follows for each action:

1. Select the governance issue addressed in column 1 (“Issues addressed”) or use the ‘other’ option to list a custom governance issue;
2. Select the relevant category in column 2 (“Category”);
3. Describe the action taken in column 3 (“Description”) (What did the action (project or initiative) involve?);
4. Select the relevant incentive (i.e. motivation or reason) for implementing the action in column 4 (“Incentive”);
5. Describe the impact of the action, i.e. the outcome, in column 5 (“Impact of the action”). For example, what benefit will or has been achieved by implementing the action, or how did the action mitigate governance risk and/or improve governance performance;
6. Provide an indication of the monetary impact in column 6 (“Monetary impact”). This can be an exact number, an estimate or a description, e.g. return on investment (ROI), payback period or net present value (NPV);
7. Select the status of the action at the end of the reporting period in column 7 (“Status”). If the action has been completed and operational for more than three years (at the end of the reporting period), it should not be included.
8. Finally, it is possible to provide additional context to the response provided in column 8 (“Context”).

The actions should be specific, tangible and outside the regular business activities. For example, a standing policy should not be included here, but a new initiative to support whistleblowers could be appropriate.

The action must have taken place within the last three years, up to and including the end of the reporting period identified in EC3.

Validation

This indicator is not subject to manual validation.

Scoring

This indicator is not scored and is for reporting purposes only.

Terminology

Governance issues: Governance structure and composition of the organization. This includes how the highest governance body is established and structured in support of the organization’s purpose, and how this purpose relates to economic, environmental and social dimensions. Full reference to listed governance issues can be found in the Appendix 2.

References

Alignment with External Frameworks

DJSI 2019 - 3.3.3 Emerging risks

Intent

The intent of this indicator is to assess the entity’s reporting on broad metrics covering capacity, output and impact value. These metrics assess the physical output from the entity and the service it provides. The output metric is then used as a denominator with other quantitative metrics (e.g. GHG emissions) to calculate intensity metrics. Intensity metrics will not be used as a basis for scoring in 2019, but may be used in future years. The impact value metric allows entities to report the ESG value of their activities.

Requirements

Select Yes or No: If selecting “Yes”, the entity must be actively tracking and reporting on all of the mandatory reporting metrics (indicated by the dark green cell outline).

Changes: The metric “Output” is now mandatory, and metrics on GAV, revenue and input have been removed from the Output Table.

Prefill: The metrics in the column “Previous-year performance” have been prefilled with the 2019 Assessment response.

Performance Tables

Output table: Complete the table as follows:

• Previous-year performance (2018): This column shows the reported performance for the previous year (2018). If a metric is new or has changed substantially compared to last year’s Assessment, or if there is no data available for the entity for the previous year, ‘N/A’ is shown. It is not possible to enter any data into this column.
• Reporting-year performance (2019): Enter data for the performance during the reporting year for each metric where available.
• It is mandatory to enter data for “Output” (cell highlighted with a green border).
• ‘Zero’ is an acceptable answer if it is true and accurate. If the entity cannot provide the mandatory data then it must select ‘No’ for the overall indicator.
• The metrics and/ units for “Capacity” and “Output” will be automatically allocated based on the participant's primary sector (as determined by RC3). For example, for the sector Renewable Power: Solar Power Generation the relevant capacity unit would be ‘Installed capacity (MW)’ and the relevant output unit would be ‘Energy generated (MWh)’. In some cases, a sector will not have any relevant metric/units assigned, so 'Not applicable' will be displayed and the field does not need to be completed.
• “Impact value” should be estimated using Social Return on Investment (SROI) or a similar methodology. Methodology details may be provided in the additional context box.
• Reporting-year target (2019): Enter the targets that were applicable for the reporting year for each metric, where available.
• A target can be interpolated from a future-year target.
• A target (or the future-year target from which it is derived) must be formally adopted. This means that the entity must have set and communicated the target at least internally, and has implemented, or is preparing, actions to achieve the target.
• Future-year targets: Enter the relevant year for which the targets are set at the top of the column and enter the future-year targets for each metric where available.
• A target must be formally adopted.
• The target must be set for any future year that is not the reporting year.

Output and impact intensities table: Intensity metrics provide a basis for comparing and benchmarking ESG performance. Intensity metrics are not mandatory and not scored in 2020. The table should be completed as follows:

• Previous-year performance (2018): This column shows the reported performance for the previous year (2018). If a metric is new or has changed substantially compared to last year’s Assessment, or if there is no data available for the entity for the previous year, ‘N/A’ is shown. It is not possible to enter any data into this column.
• Reporting-year performance (2019): Intensity performance metrics are calculated automatically as follows:
• Output intensity (/GAV) = Output/GAV. GAV is reported in RC2 (Economic Size) and is converted from millions to units within the calculation.
• Output intensity (/Revenue) = Output/Revenue. Revenue is reported in RC2 (Economic Size) and is converted from millions to units within the calculation.
• Impact intensity (/GAV) = Impact value/GAV. GAV is reported in RC2 (Economic Size) and is converted from millions to units within the calculation.
• Impact intensity (/Revenue) = Impact value/Revenue. Revenue is reported in RC2 (Economic Size) and is converted from millions to units within the calculation.
• Impact intensity (/Output) = Impact value/Output. “Output” is reported in the Output table and is specific to the entity’s primary sector (reported in RC3).

In some cases, the calculated cells may show as ‘Not applicable’. This is either due to:

1. the participant not reporting the input data (within the indicator);
2. the participant not reporting on the relevant denominator (GAV/Revenue/Output);
3. there being no output metric applicable to the entity’s primary sector.
• Reporting-year target (2019): Enter the targets that were applicable for the reporting period for each metric, where available.
• A target can be interpolated from a future-year target.
• A target (or the future-year target from which it is derived) must be formally adopted. This means that the entity must have set the target at least internally and has implemented or is preparing actions to achieve the target.
• Future-year targets: Enter the relevant year for which the targets are set at the top of the column and enter the future-year targets for each metric where available.
• A target must be formally adopted.
• The target must be set for any future year that is not the reporting year.

An overview with the GRESB sector metrics and units list is also available here

Exceptions:

Select Yes or No: GRESB is seeking to standardize the scope and boundaries of reporting to allow for more accurate benchmarking and to progressively move towards scoring of performance. If the scope of the data reported for this indicator does not exactly match the reporting scope (facilities, ancillary activities and time period) as reported in “Entity and Reporting Characteristics” (EC3, RC3, RC4), then answer ‘No’ to this question and describe these exceptions in the “Exceptions” text box.

Examples are:

• Temporal - A toll road includes data on energy consumption from its street lighting within its boundary but due to a data glitch, it lost this data for a two month period during the reporting year.
• Physical - A power plant includes a switchyard facility within its reporting boundary but does not have data on water discharge for this facility.
• Operational - An airport includes the operation of mobile equipment within its reporting boundary but not for aircraft since these are operated by airlines.

Validation

This indicator is not subject to manual validation.

Scoring

This indicator is not scored and is for reporting purposes only.

Terminology:

Capacity: The entity’s physical capacity or maximum output over a period of time.

Gross Asset Value (GAV): The gross infrastructure value owned by the entity being the 'tangible fixed assets' or 'property, plant and equipment' associated with the infrastructure asset.

Impact value: The estimated net value (benefits minus costs) of the social and/or environmental impacts of the entity over the reporting period in monetary units.

Output: The entity's physical primary output for the reporting period.

Revenue: The annual income generated by the entity in exchange for providing the asset service.

References

The SROI Network, 2012 - A Guide to Social Return on Investment

Alignment with External Frameworks

GRI Standard 201: Economic Performance

GRI Standard 203: Indirect Economic Impacts

Relevant UN Sustainable Development Goals

SDG 7 - Affordable and Clean Energy

7.1 By 2030, ensure universal access to affordable, reliable and modern energy services

7.2 By 2030, increase substantially the share of renewable energy in the global energy mix

7.3 By 2030, double the global rate of improvement in energy efficiency

SDG 8 - Decent Work and Economic Growth

8.4 Improve progressively, through 2030, global resource efficiency in consumption and production and endeavour to decouple economic growth from environmental degradation, in accordance with the 10‑Year Framework of Programmes on Sustainable Consumption and Production, with developed countries taking the lead

SDG 9 - Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure

9.1 Develop quality, reliable, sustainable and resilient infrastructure, including regional and transborder infrastructure, to support economic development and human well-being, with a focus on affordable and equitable access for all

SDG 11 - Sustainable Cities and Communities

11.3 By 2030, enhance inclusive and sustainable urbanization and capacity for participatory, integrated and sustainable human settlement planning and management in all countries