ESRS 2 — General Disclosures

General Basis for Preparation of the Non-financial Statement

With this statement, Beiersdorf provides information on material sustainability aspects within the Management Report. The Non-financial Statement (NFS) was prepared in accordance with §§ 289b ff. Handelsgesetzbuch (German Commercial Code, HGB) as well as 315b to 315c HGB and thus represents the consolidated NFS of the Beiersdorf Group and Beiersdorf AG as the parent company. Unless otherwise stated, the qualitative information regarding the Consumer business segment also applies to Beiersdorf AG. The results of the concepts for Beiersdorf AG are comparable to the presentation for the Consumer business segment.

Beiersdorf reports partially in accordance with the first set of the “European Sustainability Reporting Standards” (ESRS) as a framework for non-financial reporting in accordance with § 315c HGB in conjunction with § 289d HGB. This means that not all components of our NFS were prepared in compliance with the ESRS. An overview of all disclosure requirements included in the NFS is provided in “Appendix A.” This shows which disclosure requirements have been fully or partially implemented.

Since the 2021 financial year, Beiersdorf has been reporting within the NFS in accordance with Article 8 of the EU Taxonomy Regulation on revenue, capital expenditures, and operating expenses associated with environmentally sustainable activities.

For our NFS with regard to Beiersdorf AG pursuant to § 289b HGB, we did not use a framework because a (at least partially ESRS-compliant) NFS for the group is relevant to our stakeholders.

The scope of consolidation of the NFS is the same as that for the Annual Report (see “Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statement”) with the exceptions of our joint venture NIVEA-Kao, our majority shareholding S-Biomedic and the Chantecaille, La Prairie and Coppertone brands. Deviations exist in chapters ESRS E1, ESRS E3, ESRS S1 and ESRS G1. The brands mentioned are partially included in the figures there. These discrepancies are explained at the appropriate points in the report.

In the process of the materiality assessment, impacts, risks and opportunities in own operations and along the upstream and downstream value chain have been considered. A detailed overview of the positive and negative impacts, financial risks and opportunities identified as material and their location in the value chain is provided in the section “Material impacts, risks, and opportunities and their interaction with strategy and business model” and in the respective topical chapters. There are no material risks arising from our own business activities, or from our business relationships, products, and services, that are very likely to have severe negative impacts on the non-financial aspects pursuant to § 289c HGB.

Policies, actions, targets and metrics relating to the material topics are presented in the following chapters. Whether these concern own operations or the upstream and/or downstream value chain depends on the materiality assessment of the respective sustainability aspect and its location in the value chain.

The safeguard clause is not applicable; no information on intellectual property, know-how or results of innovation has been omitted.

Disclosures in Relation to Specific Circumstances

Changes in the preparation or presentation of sustainability information

Compared with previous periods, there were significant changes in the preparation and presentation of sustainability information in the management report during the 2024 reporting year. These concerned both the structure and the content of the NFS, which are now prepared partially in accordance with the ESRS. This means that Beiersdorf is already starting to implement the requirements of the framework in its business and reporting processes before the “Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive” (CSRD) regulations are implemented into German law. Some of the metrics and information previously reported under environmental, social, and governance aspects have been supplemented or replaced by new disclosures required under ESRS. Any methodological changes resulting in adjustments to or recalculations of metrics (e.g. new scientific findings such as the “Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change” (IPCC) reports) were performed in the current reporting period. This is explained at the appropriate point in the report.

Value chain estimation

We use estimates when calculating metrics in cases that extend beyond Group boundaries, such as Scope 3 emissions, as these involve complex and often indirect processes of data collection from our value chain. In-depth information on the methods used for these estimates is provided at the relevant points in the report.

The Role of the Administrative, Management, and Supervisory Bodies

As required by law in Germany for stock corporations (Aktiengesellschaften), Beiersdorf AG has a dual management and supervisory structure consisting of the Executive Board and the Supervisory Board.

Executive Board

Our Executive Board takes sole responsibility for managing the company and conducting the company’s business. It performs its duties in the company’s best interests and is dedicated to sustainably increasing the enterprise value. The members of the Executive Board are appointed by the Supervisory Board. An Executive Committee was established to support the operational control of the Beiersdorf Group’s Consumer Business Segment. This comprises the members of the Executive Board and two individuals with global management functions.

The Beiersdorf Group Executive Board has seven members, in 2024 43% of them were female (Astrid Hermann, Nicola D. Lafrentz, and Grita Loebsack).

Collectively, all members of the Executive Board must possess extensive relevant international experience aquired from years of working abroad or special expertise in our key international markets. Sector-specific knowledge is also required.

Primary responsibility for sustainability matters within the Executive Board lies with the Chairman of the Executive Board, Vincent Warnery, and Labor Director Nicola D. Lafrentz. Within the Executive Committee, Dr. Gitta Neufang (Chief Research & Development Officer) and Michael Frey (Chief Supply Chain Officer) also have environmental, social, and governance (ESG) expertise. Dr. Gitta Neufang is also a sponsor of the Sustainability Council, the cross-functional management body for material sustainability matters in the Consumer Business Segment (see “ESG governance” section).

Supervisory Board

Our Supervisory Board comprises 12 members. In 2024

• 58% were female,
• 50% of shareholder representatives and 100% of employee representatives were independent within the meaning of the German Corporate Governance Code in the opinion of the Supervisory Board, and
• six members were employee representatives.

The Supervisory Board ensures that its members collectively have the knowledge, skills, and professional experience needed to perform their duties properly. In terms of their expertise, the members must collectively, in accordance with § 100 (5) Aktiengesetz (German Stock Corporation Act, AktG), be familiar with the sector in which the company operates; in addition, there must be at least one member with expertise and experience in each of the following specific areas:

• Business areas and sectors (consumer goods, beauty and skin/body care, international markets, including emerging markets)
• Marketing and Sales (brand development and management, distribution and retail, communication and media)
• Research and Development (R&D), including innovation management
• Supply Chain (supply chains and production)
• Human Resources and Organization (personnel development and management, corporate organization, corporate culture, diversity)
• ESG (sustainability, corporate social responsibility, ethics)
• Law and Governance (law, compliance, auditing, regulatory law, corporate governance)
• Information Technology (IT) and Digitalization (digitalization, data management, IT and IT security)
• Finance (finance and controlling, accounting and auditing, each including sustainability reporting, risk management and internal control systems)

Donya-Florence Amer has been responsible for ESG matters within the Supervisory Board since 2024.

Further information on the composition and diversity of the Executive Board and Supervisory Board is provided in the “Corporate Governance Statement.”

Compliance Management

The Executive Board is responsible for establishing and monitoring an appropriate compliance management system (CMS). Both Business Segments, Consumer and tesa, have implemented CMS that conform to uniform standards and are implemented in close coordination with their Corporate Compliance departments for all Consumer and tesa subsidiaries. The Corporate Compliance departments are also responsible for developing and monitoring the CMS and defining minimum standards for our compliance programs.

The Corporate Compliance departments of Consumer and tesa report annually to the Executive Board and the Supervisory Board on the Group-wide effectiveness of our CMS as well as progress on other compliance issues such as anti-corruption. To this end, compliance incidents and the implementation status of our compliance programs are recorded centrally and in our subsidiaries worldwide. The results are used to identify any further action required, with appropriate measures implemented by the Corporate Compliance departments to ensure continual improvement. Reports on selected compliance issues are also submitted to the Executive Committee during the year.

In addition to these reports, the Executive and Supervisory Boards receive regular information and training on fundamental compliance issues and legal aspects.

Further information on the CMS is provided in the chapter “ESRS G1 – Business Conduct.”

ESG Governance

The Executive Board chaired by Chief Executive Officer (CEO) Vincent Warnery is responsible for approving the sustainability strategies and the Group targets they involve. It delegates implementation of the sustainability strategy to the Corporate Sustainability function, headed by Vice President Sustainability Jean-François Pascal, and the sustainability experts within the brands and functions, who report to the Executive Board on a monthly basis concerning implementation of the strategies and progress made in terms of targets and milestones.

ESG Governance (Consumer Business Segment)

In addition, the Executive Board is responsible for ensuring internal control and risk management that is commensurate with the business activities and risk situation. This includes sustainability-related targets relevant to the company. The Executive Board provides the Supervisory Board with regular, timely, and comprehensive reports (approx. three to five times a year and additionally in urgent cases) on all questions of relevance to the company, also regarding sustainability in particular, and explains discrepancies between the actual course of business and the planning and targets.

The Supervisory Board appoints, advises, and supervises the Executive Board in connection with the latter’s management of the company, as laid down by the law, the Articles of Association, and the by laws. This also includes sustainability matters. The Supervisory Board and Executive Board work closely together to make a positive contribution to society and to achieve sustainable added value.

A new Digital and ESG Committee was established within the Supervisory Board in 2024, comprising three shareholder representatives and three employee representatives. The Digital and ESG Committee advises and supervises the Executive Board in its business conduct with respect to sustainability matters. These include strategies, targets, and initiatives relating to climate and environmental impacts, circular economy, social matters, human rights, and the commitment to an inclusive society along the entire value chain and beyond. The Digital and ESG Committee also supports the Presiding Committee in preparing the ESG targets to be set for Executive Board remuneration.

The responsibilities for monitoring sustainability matters are incorporated into the duties and offices of the Executive Board and Supervisory Board. These responsibilities are set out in our Corporate Governance Guidelines, in which the obligations with regard to the monitoring and management of sustainability matters are described in detail.

The members of the Executive Board and Supervisory Board receive specific training as needed, usually once a year. This ensures they have sufficient sustainability-related knowledge of the material positive and negative impacts, financial risks and opportunities as identified.

Information Provided to and Sustainability Matters Addressed by the Company’s Administrative, Management, and Supervisory Bodies

Our Group-wide Corporate Sustainability function is responsible for setting the strategic direction of our sustainability activities and regularly reports to the Executive Board on progress and the need for action. This Corporate Sustainability function reports monthly directly to the Chairman of the Executive Board of Beiersdorf AG, who is responsible for sustainability. The Chief Financial Officer receives quarterly reports on matters relating to compliance and reporting (e.g., the Lieferkettensorgfaltspflichtengesetz (German Supply Chain Due Diligence Act, LkSG), the “Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive” (CSDDD), the CSRD, and the “European Deforestation Regulation” (EUDR)). Meetings are also held with members of the Executive Board, Executive Committee, Supervisory Board and the entire Executive Board, as needed. The Audit Committee receives reports of sustainability matters two to three times per year.

Two cross-functional steering committees oversee the management of material sustainability matters: the Sustainability Council for the Consumer Business Segment and the Global Executive Committee for tesa. The directors of all relevant business units headed by the members of the Executive Board are represented on the Sustainability Council. This committee convenes at least once every quarter. The Global Executive Committee at tesa is composed of the members of the Executive Board and other executives. The committee meets every two weeks; it also discusses sustainability-related topics in the course of its meetings. In addition, the Chief Sustainability Officer reports directly to the Chairman of the Executive Board of tesa.

The following sustainability matters were discussed at Executive Board and Supervisory Board meetings during the reporting year:

• Sustainability reporting
• Human rights risks
• Biodiversity
• Climate change adaptation
• Social protection
• Diversity
• Circular economy

The regular reports on sustainability matters to the Executive Board and the Supervisory Board are intended to ensure that they consider material impacts, risks, and opportunities in their oversight of the strategy, decisions on major transactions, and in risk management, and that trade-offs are dealt with if necessary.

Integration of Sustainability-Related Performance in Incentive Schemes

Achievement of sustainability targets is firmly enshrined in the Beiersdorf remuneration and incentive schemes. This underscores the Executive Board’s responsibility for creating long-term value for people, the environment, and society.

The Supervisory Board is responsible for the determination of the remuneration of the members of the Executive Board. The total remuneration payable to the members of the Executive Board is composed of fixed and variable elements. The fixed remuneration, which is not tied to performance, comprises the base remuneration plus ancillary benefits. The variable, performance-related remuneration is composed of a short-term variable bonus with annual targets (variable bonus) and a long-term variable bonus (LTP). The sustainability and ESG-related targets are integrated into this variable remuneration.

Variable Bonus

The members of the Executive Board receive a variable bonus tied to the performance of the Consumer Business Segment for each financial year. This is paid out after the Annual General Meeting of the year following the financial year in question. The variable bonus is composed of joint and individual performance criteria that are tied to the company’s financial and non-financial performance as well as its strategic and operational development. The specific performance criteria can also be related to sustainability or ESG.

The performance criteria within the individual variable bonus targets in 2024 included (depending on the member) reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, receipt of the Triple-A rating from CDP, NIVEA sustainability projects, gender diversity, internationalization, and other diversity and inclusion targets. The average proportion of sustainability and ESG-related performance criteria in the 2024 variable bonus was 18% of target remuneration.

Long-Term Bonus (LTI)

Executive Board members receive a multi-annual bonus measured, in accordance with the currently valid remuneration system, on the basis of the targets for the achievement of strategic criteria after the expiry of a four-year bonus period from 2021 through 2024 (LTP 2021 – 2024). Climate-related targets accounted for 20% of the weighting of the entire LTP 2021 – 2024 (based on target remuneration). The climate targets were to reduce global Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions by 20% (vs. 2018) and increase the share of recycled materials in plastic packaging by 20%, both by 2024 (see chapter “ESRS E1 – Climate Change”). Targets relating to diversity and employee development also accounted for 20% of the weighting.

The average proportion of sustainability and ESG-related targets in the entire performance-related variable remuneration for 2024 was 32% of target remuneration.

Risk Management and Internal Controls over Sustainability Reporting

As part of a risk analysis, the relevant positions and their associated processes were identified along with the key risks for sustainability reporting. Group-wide safeguarding and control measures have been defined for these positions and processes.

These measures include, among others, segregation of duties, manual approval processes based on the four-eyes principle, IT controls, access restrictions, and authorization concepts within the IT system, as well as system-supported procedures for data processing.

Compliance with recording and control mechanisms is regularly reviewed by Internal Audit. Sustainability-related risks are recorded and consolidated in an integrated IT system. In close coordination with Internal Audit, the Executive Board continuously monitors and oversees these safeguarding and control measures.

To meet the increasingly complex requirements of sustainability reporting, Beiersdorf will continue to expand its internal control system in the future.

Strategy, Business Model, and Value Chain

With a portfolio of global brands, Beiersdorf has developed into one of the world’s leading companies in the consumer goods industry over the past 143 years – with over 190 international subsidiaries and more than 22,000 employees worldwide. Our business is divided into two separate, independently operating business segments: Consumer and tesa. As a wholly-owned subsidiary of Beiersdorf AG, tesa SE has been operated as an independent subgroup with its own management and corporate strategy since 2001.

In the Consumer Business Segment, our focus is on skin and body care for end consumers. We are represented in three market segments with our worldwide brands NIVEA, Eucerin and La Prairie: the mass market, dermocosmetics, and the premium segment. Our products are sold in 180 countries, with Europe representing our main sales market. Information on changes during the reporting period regarding sales market developments and the product segments offered can be found in the chapters “Results of Operations – Business Segments” in the management report and “Regional Reporting” in the consolidated financial statements.

In the tesa Business Segment, we concentrate on developing innovative adhesive tapes and self-adhesive solutions for industry, craft businesses, and end consumers. In the Industry division, tesa supplies specialized product and system solutions directly to industrial customers, especially in the automotive, electronics, printing and paper, and building and construction industries worldwide.

The tesa Consumer division encompasses those markets in which retail partners or retail-like channels supply end consumers with market-driven products. These include product ranges aimed at private consumers and craftspeople. tesa also uses e-commerce business to offer products for sale directly to end customers. The Consumer business is focused on Europe and Latin America. It sells both long-established and innovative product solutions intended for various applications, including for daily use in offices, at home, and in crafts.

In total 22,678 employees had an active employment contract with Beiersdorf as of December 31, 2024.

We see the three main challenges to the future realization of the sustainability strategies of the Consumer and tesa Business Segments as the availability of renewable energy for the existing supply chains, particularly in the chemicals industry, and the increasing digitalization of internal processes and supply chains to generate transparency. The increased transparency for consumers, including the supporting regulations from the legislator, will also play a key role in achievement of sustainability targets. The main solutions and projects for these challenges are set out in the topic-specific chapters below.

Value Chain

Beiersdorf relies on extraction of raw materials for the production of its products. The raw materials used are associated with the following activities: cultivation and harvesting of agricultural raw materials (primarily palm oil, soy, coconut, wood, and natural rubber), animal husbandry (tallow), and mining and extraction of fossil and mineral raw materials. These raw materials are processed and refined to produce emulsifiers, surfactants, oils, adhesives and other substances, as well as packaging materials. We procure these raw materials from our suppliers via multi-tier supply chains and use them at our production sites. The intermediate products that we procure directly are primarily chemical products and packaging materials comprising plastic, aluminium, glass and paper.

Beiersdorf manufactures a wide range of products in its own operations. The Consumer Business Segment focuses on development and production of skin and body care products, and the tesa Business Segment makes self-adhesive product solutions for industrial customers and consumers. There are 15 production centers for the Consumer Business Segment, located in Europe, North and South America, Africa and the Asia-Pacific region. These centers focus on mixing and filling activities and produce primarily for their local and regional markets. tesa has seven production centers in Germany, Italy, the USA, China and Vietnam. The production network is supplemented by selected third-party manufacturers (3PMs).

Our production sites and 3PMs deliver the goods to our customers via a network of warehouses and distribution centers. Most warehousing and transportation services are purchased externally. Two warehouses are owned and operated by Beiersdorf. Individual adjustments to products shortly before dispatch (last minute adjustments and co-packing) are largely integrated into warehouse operations. Products are largely distributed to customers by truck and sea freight, increasing also by rail, and in exceptional cases by air freight.

Products in the Consumer Business Segment are predominantly delivered to food retail partners, who sell our products to the end consumers. The tesa Business Segment primarily supplies industrial customers, and to a lesser extent retail partners from the food and building materials sectors.

We rely on agile supply chains, and perform ongoing analyses of our production and supply networks and update them as necessary to ensure procurement of our most important materials and address the needs of our customers and consumers.

Interests and Views of Stakeholders

The transition to a more environmentally-friendly and socially responsible economy requires collective action. We are therefore in continual dialog with our stakeholders and endeavor to understand their positions, concerns and expectations. We share the insights from this dialog several times per year in the relevant decision-making bodies and with the Executive Board and Supervisory Board. This enables us to subject our business strategy to constant scrutiny and make targeted adjustments as necessary.

Material Impacts, Risks, and Opportunities and Their Interaction with Strategy and Business Model

The table below lists the material sustainability-related impacts, risks, and opportunities (IROs) that we have identified in our ESRS-compliant materiality assessment. The IROs are allocated to the topical ESRS and the sub-topics listed in ESRS 1. All listed IROs are covered by the ESRS requirements and no further entity-specific topics were identified. The IROs generally apply to both, the Consumer Business Segment and the tesa Business Segment; exceptions are clearly indicated in the table.

The identified impacts on the environment and people are all to be put into the context of our business model as a global consumer goods manufacturer. The impacts in our own operations are primarily associated with the process of manufacturing our products. Impacts in the upstream and downstream value chain arise through our business relationships with suppliers that supply us with raw materials and intermediate products or deliver our products. Impacts also arise through the use and disposal of our products by consumers or at the end of the product life cycle.

Our business model and strategy are heavily influenced by the necessity for sustainable conduct. The direct effects of the impacts, risks, and opportunities listed below are already noticeable: They include the increasing regulatory pressure, potential reputational risks, transitioning our production sites, and the need for good working conditions both for our own staff and throughout the value chain. We expect additional challenges going forward, such as rising costs, stronger shifts in consumer preferences, and operational adjustments to meet regulatory requirements.

Beiersdorf performed a qualitative analysis of the resilience of its corporate strategy and business model with a view to the material IROs in 2024. The focus was on the extent to which these topics are integrated in the business processes, strategy, and reporting. The results of the analysis underpin the assessment that the company is capable of addressing the material impacts and risks and taking advantage of its material opportunities. Sustainability is firmly enshrined in our business strategy and integrated in our strategic planning with the objective of ensuring the long-term success and resilience of our company.

As regards the identified opportunities and risks, we do not expect any material financial effects on Beiersdorf’s net assets, financial position, results of operations this reporting year or next.

Further information on the actions we are carrying out in the various areas is provided in the topic-specific chapters under “Environment,” “Social,” and “Governance.”

E1 Climate Change

E2 Pollution

E3 Water and Marine Resources

E4 Biodiversity and Ecosystems

E5 Resource Use and Circular Economy

S1 Own Workforce

S2 Workers in the Value Chain

S3 Affected Communities

S4 Consumers and End-Users

G1 Business Conduct

Description of the Processes to Identify and Assess Material Impacts, Risks, and Opportunities

We have relied on materiality assessments as a strategic tool to orient our sustainability strategy and our reporting since 2011. In 2024, we revised our materiality assessment process extensively in line with new requirements under the ESRS, and performed a double materiality assessment pursuant to ESRS provisions. We also consolidated the assessment at Group level for the tesa and Consumer Business Segments.

The first step of the assessment involves defining potential and actual positive and negative impacts, as well as financial risks and opportunities. To do this, we identified business activities along our entire value chain at the level of the sub-topics specified in the ESRS, in which impacts, risks, and opportunities could arise. This allocation of the value chain provided an overview of potential interdependencies between the environmental and social impacts and the associated risks and opportunities within the materiality assessment. As a player in the cosmetics and FMCG industry, our focus is on resource use, packaging management and supply chain conditions. For example, we analyze how the extraction and processing of key raw materials such as palm oil or water produce environmental risks such as deforestation or water scarcity, while addressing social challenges such as fair working conditions in the supply chain. These interactions are analyzed not only for potential risks, but also for opportunities such as innovative packaging solutions or sustainable raw material alternatives. The aim is to ensure that our sustainability strategy is not developed in isolation, but as a dynamic response to complex interdependencies.

Our data basis was drawn from internal sources such as topic-specific risk analyses, and external data sources that deal with industry-specific risks.

We considered both our own operations and the upstream and downstream value chain in identifying and assessing the impacts of our company on people and the environment. The focus was on our main business activities, product groups, business relationships, and key raw materials supply chains in which multiple negative and positive impacts, opportunities, and risks are likely. Individual sites and assets were not reviewed and affected communities were not consulted with a view to impacts, opportunities, and risks in the areas of pollution, water, resource use and circular economy. In some cases, individual impacts were assessed separately because of the different business models of the Consumer and tesa Business Segments.

In the next step, these impacts, risks, and opportunities were assessed and prioritized in several internal workshops involving representatives from all affected departments. In planning the workshops, we made sure that specialist representatives were in attendance, who were in regular dialog with relevant external stakeholders and whose perspectives could therefore be directly included in the discussions. No external experts were involved.

The assessment of impacts, risks, and opportunities was based on the methodology and thresholds set out in the implementation guidance of the “European Financial Reporting Advisory Group” (EFRAG). Negative impacts were assessed in terms of scale, scope and irremediable character, and potential impacts in terms of likelihood. Positive impacts were not assessed in terms of irremediable character. Having assessed the positive and negative impacts, we classified these according to the scales and materiality thresholds determined by the EFRAG.

In our financial materiality assessment, the likelihood of occurrence and the potential scale of the financial effect were considered. We applied the scales and thresholds used in the Group-wide risk management system. This was also a net risk assessment, in line with the Group-wide risk management system. Such methodological alignment is intended to ensure that the knowledge obtained from the materiality assessment can be integrated into the company’s general risk management and thus also in the associated management processes. Sustainability risks are generally regarded as equally as important as other risk types in the Group-wide risk management system. Where sustainability risks are categorized as strategic risks, they are given special consideration (see “Risks and Opportunities Report”).

Where an impact, opportunity, or risk exceeded the materiality threshold, the associated topic was classed as material. The final results were then validated by the relevant sustainability bodies from the two business segments: the Sustainability Council (Consumer Business Segment) and the Executive Committee (tesa Business Segment). The Executive Board and Supervisory Board (Audit Committee) of Beiersdorf AG were also informed and discussed the possible strategic implications of the results.

Based on the impacts, risks and opportunities identified as material, Beiersdorf selected the disclosures to be reported and assigned material data points to the IROs. Data points that are voluntarily reported or subject to phase-in options were eliminated. Where Beiersdorf identified individual data points or data elements in the remaining data points that were not considered material due to company-specific circumstances, these were not included in the reporting. An overview of all reported disclosure requirements can be found in “Annex A.”

Monitoring identified impacts and risks is a key part of our sustainability management. Developments and progress within the framework of our sustainability strategy are measured against clearly defined KPIs and targets, allowing any necessary adjustments to be made at an early stage. The results are presented to the relevant committees so that the identified risks and impacts can be strategically addressed. Regular reviews of the materiality assessment ensure that our actions remain relevant. The materiality assessment is scheduled to be reviewed during reporting year 2025 and updated as necessary.

Assessment of Climate-related Impacts, Risks, and Opportunities

To identify climate-related impacts in the materiality assessment, we considered in particular our Scope 1 – 3 emissions, in order to take account of the impacts from both our own operations and the upstream and downstream value chain. We perform regular analyses to assess physical and transition climate risks and opportunities – most recently in 2023 – in line with the requirements of the “Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures” (TCFD). These results were also included in the materiality assessment. The transition risks and opportunities were assessed based on the “Net Zero Emissions by 2050” (NZE) scenario of the “International Energy Agency” (IEA). This involved assessing the extent to which certain business activities and assets are directly or indirectly affected by regulatory, technological, reputational or market risks, the scale and likelihood of the impacts, and which remediation actions Beiersdorf takes.

We also performed an additional site-specific assessment of physical risks for all production sites in 2024. This was based on currently available scientific findings and relevant methods in line with the latest report by the “Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change” and recognized scientific publications. The assessment covered both chronic and acute natural hazards, aiming to identifying all material risks to production sites under current and future climate conditions. We analyzed the hazards based on an ensemble of 20 climate models, taking into account emission scenarios SSP1-2.6, SSP2-4.5 and SSP5-8.5 for four periods (2000, 2030, 2050, 2085).

The three emission scenarios covered the entire spectrum of currently conceivable developments:

• SSP1-2.6: This scenario assumes a slight increase in emissions from 2020 with an increase in temperature of below 2 °C against pre-industrial levels. This requires extensive climate change mitigation actions.
• SSP2-4.5: This scenario represents a medium emission pathway, with a balance between climate change mitigation actions and economic performance. There is a moderate increase in GHG emissions as fossil fuels continue to be used, resulting in a greater need for adaptation strategies, especially in vulnerable regions.
• SSP5-8.5: This scenario assumes a sharp rise in emissions. Increased use of fossil fuels and an energy intensive lifestyle result in a temperature rise of around 5 °C by the end of the century. Minimal climate change mitigation actions are implemented. Climate adaptation challenges require international coordination.

A site and building-based risk assessment was carried out for each climate-related hazard. The risk comprises the threat at the site due to natural hazards (hazard analysis) and the associated damage potential for the property assessed (vulnerability).

Assessment of Impacts, Risks, and Opportunities related to Biodiversity and Ecosystems

We applied a two-step process to assess actual and potential impacts on biodiversity and ecosystems, both from our own operations and along the upstream and downstream value chain. First, we performed a traceability study on our palm oil supply chain. It then assessed biodiversity risks in the specific regions of our own sites and the oil mills in the upstream supply chain using such tools as the WWF’s “Biodiversity Risk Filter” (BRF) and “Water Risk Filter” (WRF). Moreover, as a founding member of the “Action for Sustainable Derivatives” (ASD), we have been conducting an annual transparency analysis of our palm oil supply chain since 2019 to identify hotspots, disclose upstream supply chains, and support targeted local projects (see chapter “ESRS E4 – Biodiversity and Ecosystems”).

The WWF’s BRF covers both the regions in which our sites are located and the sector in which we operate. Together, these factors determine the overall biodiversity risk of a site, using 33 indicators that cover different aspects of biodiversity risk. A risk score is calculated for every indicator based on an assessment of the state of the biodiversity-related issue at a specific site and the dependency/impact of the sector on this indicator. Dependency in this context means that the selected sector relies on ecosystems, for instance to provide water and wood, or to regulate and mitigate environmental impacts. On the other hand, sectors have an impact on biodiversity at their sites, for example through direct or indirect exploitation, pollution and land-use changes (including conversion, degradation and changes to ecosystems).

Physical risks were assessed based on our dependency on intact ecosystems and our exposure to ecosystem degradation and natural hazards. Sites located in regions with high water scarcity or poor soil conditions may be exposed to greater physical risks. The BRF assesses these risks by taking into account the local environmental conditions and the dependency of the industry on ecosystem services. The tool also assesses transition risks by considering how political changes, consumer trends, and technological developments could affect the business activities of a sector.

At present, Beiersdorf does not consider systemic risks in its assessment and has not directly consulted affected communities on the materiality assessment of shared biological resources and ecosystems.

None of our production centers coincide with biodiversity-sensitive areas as defined in the WWF’s BRF. Therefore, the activities at these sites neither negatively affect these areas, nor lead to deterioration of natural habitats or the habitats of species. We have not so far assessed whether we need to implement actions to mitigate the impact on biodiversity associated with our business activities, as set out in Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and the Council.