Koninklijke Philips N.V. – Annual report – 31 December 2019
13 Sustainability statements (extract)
13.1 Approach to sustainability reporting
Philips has a long tradition of sustainability reporting, beginning with our first environmental Annual Report published in 1999. This was expanded in 2003, with the launch of our first sustainability Annual Report, which provided details of our social and economic performance in addition to our environmental results. As a next step, in 2008, we decided to publish an integrated financial, social and environmental report. This is our 12th annual integrated financial, social and environmental report. For more information, please refer to the company’s website.
Royal Philips publishes its integrated Annual Report with the highest (reasonable) assurance level on the financial, social and environmental performance. With that overall reasonable assurance level, Philips is a frontrunner in our industry.
13.1.1 Tracking trends
We follow external trends continuously to determine the issues most relevant for our company and where we can make a positive contribution to society at large. In addition to our own research, we make use of a variety of sources, including the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP), World Bank, World Economic Forum, World Health Organization, and the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD). Our work also involves tracking topics of concern to governments, non-governmental organizations (NGO), regulatory bodies, academia, and following the resulting media coverage.
We derive significant value from our diverse stakeholders across all our activities and engage with, listen to and learn from them. Working in partnerships is crucial to delivering on our vision to make the world healthier and more sustainable through innovation. We incorporate their feedback on specific areas of our business into our planning and actions. In addition, we participate in meetings and task forces as a member of organizations including the World Economic Forum, WBCSD, Responsible Business Alliance (RBA), Dutch Sustainable Growth Coalition, the Ellen MacArthur Foundation, and the European Partnership for Responsible Minerals.
Furthermore, we engage with the leading Dutch labor union (FNV) and a number of NGOs, including Enough, GoodElectronics, the Chinese Institute of Public and Environmental Affairs, UNICEF, Amnesty International, Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth, as well as a variety of investors and analysts.
Our sustainability e-mail account (firstname.lastname@example.org) enables stakeholders to share their issues, comments and questions, also about this Annual Report, with the sustainability team. The table below provides an overview of the different stakeholder groups, examples of those stakeholders and the topics discussed, used for our materiality analysis.
13.1.3 Reporting standards
We have prepared this integrated annual report in line with the International Integrated Reporting Council (IIRC) Integrated Reporting framework and the EU Non Financial Reporting decree (2014/95/EU). We have also included a visualization of our value creation process.
For the sustainability information included in this integrated annual report we followed the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) Standards-Option Comprehensive. A detailed overview of the GRI Comprehensive indicators can be found in the GRI content index on our sustainability website. Next, we developed additional company-specific indicators and started to measure the impact we are having on society. The information on definition, scope and measurement can be found in this chapter.
We signed up to the United Nations Global Compact in March 2007 to advance 10 universal principles in the areas of human rights, labor, the environment and anticorruption. Our General Business Principles, Human Rights, Sustainability and Environmental Policies, and our Supplier Sustainability Declaration are the cornerstones that enable us to live up to the standards set by the Global Compact. This is closely monitored and reported, as illustrated throughout this report, which is also our annual Communication on Progress (COP) submitted to the UN Global Compact Office.
At the World Economic Forum in January 2017 Philips signed the Compact for Responsive and Responsible Leadership. The Compact is an initiative to promote and align the long-term sustainability of corporations and the long-term goals of society, with an inclusive approach for all stakeholders.
We also use this report to communicate on our progress towards the relevant Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), in particular SDG 3 (Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages), SDG 12 (Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns) and SDG 13 (Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts). Please refer to Stakeholder engagement, starting on page 202 for more details.
13.1.4 Material topics and our focus
We identify the environmental, social, and governance topics which have the greatest impact on our business and the greatest level of concern to stakeholders along our value chain. Assessing these topics enables us to prioritize and focus upon the most material topics and effectively address these in our policies and programs.
Our materiality assessment is based on an ongoing trend analysis, media search, and stakeholder input. In 2019, we solicited input from a diverse group of external and internal stakeholders, including investors, NGOs, customers, suppliers, peer companies, and senior management in Philips. Similar to 2018, we used an evidence-based approach to materiality analysis powered by Datamaran. By applying Datamaran’s automated sifting and analysis of millions of data points from publicly available sources, including, corporate reports, mandatory regulations and voluntary initiatives, as well as news and social media, we identified a list of topics that are material to our business. With this data-driven approach to materiality analysis we have incorporated a wider range of data and stakeholders than was ever possible before and managed to get an evidence-based perspective into regulatory, strategic and reputational risks and opportunities. The most significant increases compared to 2018 on the external view are Climate change, Product responsibility, Energy efficiency, Innovation and Sustainable value creation. The internal view saw a significant increase in importance on Employee rights, Human Rights and Responsible supply chains.
Our materiality assessment has been conducted in the context of the GRI Sustainable Reporting Standards and the results have been reviewed and approved by the Philips Sustainability Board.
13.1.5 Programs and targets
With the 5-year ‘Healthy people, Sustainable planet’ program, new sustainability commitments were introduced; more detailed targets can be found in the respective sections.
All of our programs are guided by the Philips General Business Principles, which provide the framework for all of our business decisions and actions.
13.1.6 Boundaries of sustainability reporting
Our sustainability performance reporting encompasses the consolidated Philips Group activities in the Social and Environmental Performance sections, following the consolidation criteria detailed in this section. As a result of impact assessments of our value chain we have identified the material topics, determined their relative impact in the value chain (supply chain, our own operations, and use phase of our products) and reported for each topic on the relevant parts of the value chain. More details are provided in the relevant sections in the Sustainability Statements.
The consolidated selected financial information in this Sustainability statements section has been derived from the Group Financial Statements, which are based on IFRS.
13.1.7 Comparability and completeness
We used expert opinions and estimates for some parts of the Key Performance Indicator calculations. There is therefore an inherent uncertainty in our calculations, e.g. Lives Improved, Environmental Profit and Loss account and Social Impact calculations. The figures reported are Philips’ best estimate. As our insight increases, we may enhance the methodology in the future.
In 2019, Philips re-aligned its ‘Lives Improved’ target with the UN 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda following the completion of its portfolio transformation. Philips targets an ambitious, average annual Lives Improved growth rate of around 6% for the 2019 – 2030 period, resulting in 3 billion lives improved annually by 2030.
In 2018 the emission factor set for consumed electricity was updated to the International Energy Agency (IEA) 2018 v1.00 publications. For our market-based scope 2 calculations in Europe and the US, IEA and eGrid residual-mix emission factors were used as prescribed in the Greenhouse Gas. The emission factors have not been updated in 2019.
The emissions of substances data is based on measurements and estimates at manufacturing site level. The figures reported are Philips’ best estimate.
The integration of newly acquired activities is scheduled according to a defined integration timetable (in principle, the first full reporting year after the year of acquisition) and subject to the integration agenda. Data for activities that are divested during the reporting year are not included in full-year reporting. Environmental data are reported for manufacturing sites with more than 50 industrial employees.
Lives improved and materials
The Key Performance Indicators on ‘lives improved’ and ‘materials’ and the scope are defined in the respective methodology documents that can be found in Methodology for calculating Lives Improved. We used opinions from Philips experts and estimates for some parts of the Lives Improved calculations. Philips has made strong commitments to enabling healthy living and well-being for all. To track our impact, Philips identifies countries where the need for access to healthcare is highest. This is determined by four selected health indicators, as provided by United Nations Sustainable Development Goal 3, which focuses on health and well-being. The specific methodology for how we determine an underserved health community can be found in Methodology for defining underserved health communities.
Health and safety
Health and safety data is reported by sites with over 50 FTEs (full-time equivalents) and is voluntary for smaller locations. Health and safety data are reported and validated each month via an online centralized IT tool. The Total Recordable Cases (TRC) rate is defined as a KPI for work-related cases where the injured employee is unable to work one or more days, or had medical treatment or sustained an industrial illness. We also provide the Lost Workday Injury Cases (LWIC) rate, which measures work-related injuries and illnesses that predominantly occur in manufacturing operations and Field Services Organizations where the incident leads to at least one lost workday. Fatalities are reported for staff, contractors and visitors. The TRC and LWIC KPIs refer to all reported cases.
General Business Principles
Alleged GBP violations are registered in our web-based reporting and validation tool.
All environmental data from manufacturing operations, except process chemicals, are reported on a quarterly basis in our sustainability reporting and validation tool, according to company guidelines that include definitions, procedures and calculation methods. Process chemicals are reported on a half-yearly basis.
Internal validation processes have been implemented and peer audits performed to ensure consistent data quality and to assess the robustness of data reporting systems.
These environmental data from manufacturing are tracked and reported to measure progress against our Sustainable Operations targets.
Reporting on ISO 14001 certification is based on manufacturing units reporting in the sustainability reporting system.
Environmental Profit & Loss account
The Philips Environmental Profit & Loss (EP&L) account measures our environmental impact on society at large. The EP&L account is based on Life Cycle Analysis methodology in which the environmental impacts are expressed in monetary terms using specific conversion factors. For more information we refer to our methodology report .
Operational carbon footprint
Philips reports in line with the Greenhouse Gas Protocol (GHGP). The GHGP distinguishes three scopes, as described below. The GHGP requires businesses to report on the first two scopes to comply with the GHGP reporting standards. As per the updated GHGP Scope 2 reporting guidance, from 2015 onward our scope 2 emissions reporting includes both the market-based method and the location-based method. The market-based method of reporting will serve as our reference for calculating our total operational carbon footprint.
• Scope 1 – direct CO2e emissions – is reported on in full, with details of direct emissions from our industrial and non-industrial sites. Emissions from industrial sites, which consist of direct emissions resulting from processes and fossil fuel combustion on site, are reported in the sustainability reporting system. Energy use and CO2e emissions from nonindustrial sites are based on actual data where available. If this is not the case, they are estimated based on average energy usage per square meter, taking the geographical location and building type of the site into account.
• Scope 2 – indirect CO2e emissions – is reported on in full, with details of indirect emissions from our industrial and non-industrial sites. CO2e emissions resulting from purchased electricity, steam, heat and other indirect sources are reported in the sustainability reporting system. The indirect emissions of sites not yet reporting are calculated in the same manner as described in Scope 1.
• The location-based method of scope 2 reporting reflects the average emissions intensity of grids on which energy consumption occurs (using mostly grid-average emission factor data). For this method our emission factors derive from the International Energy Agency (IEA) 2016 and are based on grid averages.
• The market-based method of scope 2 reporting allows use of an emission factor that is specific to the energy purchased. The emissions intensity of consumed energy can differ according to the contractual instruments used. For example, so-called ‘green electricity contracts’ guarantee the purchaser will be supplied with electricity from renewable sources, which typically lowers emissions per energy unit generated. In the market-based method Philips will account for renewable electricity with an emission factor of 0 grams CO2e per kWh. All renewable electricity claimed by Philips is sourced from the same energy market where the electricity-consuming operations are located, and is tracked and redeemed, retired, or cancelled solely on behalf of Philips. All certificates were obtained through Green-e certified Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs) in the United States, European Guarantees of Origin (GOs) from the Association of Issuing Bodies (AIB) of the European Energy Certificate System (EECS) and i-RECs for our ASEAN operations. To ensure the additionality, all certificates were produced in 2019 in the country of consumption and are retired on behalf Royal Philips. Only 1.7% of our total renewable electricity volume was allocated ex-domain to cover for sites with smaller consumption. To quantify our emissions we have used the residual mix emission factors derived from the Association of Issuing Bodies (AIB) and Green-e where available. Where location specific residual mix factors were missing, the grid-average emission factors from the International Energy Agency (IEA) are used.
• Scope 3 – other CO2e emissions related to activities not owned or controlled by Royal Philips – is reported on for our business travel and distribution activities.
The Philips operational carbon footprint (Scope 1, 2 and 3) is calculated on a quarterly basis and includes the emissions from our:
• industrial sites – manufacturing and assembly sites • non-industrial sites – offices, warehouses, IT centers and R&D facilities
• business travel – lease and rental cars and airplane travel
• logistics – air, ocean and road transport
All emission factors used to transform input data (for example, amount of tonne-kilometers transported) into CO2 emissions have been updated to the DEFRA (UK Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs) 2018 and the IEA emission factor set 2018. The total CO2 emission resulting from these calculations serves as input for scope 1, 2 and 3.
Commuting by our employees, upstream distribution (before suppliers ship to us), outsourced activities and emissions resulting from product use by our customers are not included in our operational carbon footprint. The calculations for business travel by lease car are based on actual fuel usage, and for travel by rental car the emissions are based on the actual mileage. Taxis and chauffeur-driven cars used for business travel are not included in the calculations. Emissions from business travel by airplane are calculated by the supplier based on mileage flown and emission factors from DEFRA, distinguishing between short, medium and long-haul flights. Furthermore, emissions from air freight for distribution are calculated based on the amount of tonne-kilometers transported between airports (distinguishing between short, medium and long-haul flights), including an estimate (based on actual data of the lanes with the largest volumes) for trucking from sites and distribution centers to airports and vice versa.
Express shipments are generally a mix of road and air transport, depending on the distance.
It is therefore assumed that shipments across less than 600 km are transported by road and the rest by air (those emissions by air are calculated in the same way as air freight). For sea transport, only data on transported volume were available, so an estimate had to be made about the average weight of a container. Transportation to and from ports is not registered. This fore and aft part of sea transport was estimated to be around 3% of the total distance (based on actual data of the lanes with the largest volumes), consisting of a mix of modalities, and was added to the total emissions accordingly. CO2e emissions from road transport were also calculated based on tonne-kilometers. Return travel of vehicles is not included in the data for sea and road distribution.
Employee Engagement Index (EEI)
The Employee Engagement Index (EEI) is the single measure of the overall level of employee engagement at Philips. It is a combination of perceptions and attitudes related to employee satisfaction, commitment and advocacy.
The reported figures are based on the Employee Survey. The total score of the employee engagement is an average of the quarterly results of the survey. The results are calculated by taking the average of the answered questions of the surveys.
13.1.9 Sustainability governance
Sustainability is strongly embedded in our core business processes, like innovation (EcoDesign), sourcing (Supplier Sustainability Program), manufacturing (Sustainable Operations), logistics (Green Logistics) and projects like the Circular Economy initiative.
In Royal Philips, the Sustainability Board is the highest governing sustainability body and is chaired by the Chief Strategy & Innovation Officer, who is a member of the Executive Committee. Three other Executive Committee members, our Chief Operating Officer, our Chief Legal Officer and our Chief Human Resources Officer, sit on the Sustainability Board together with segment and functional executives. The Sustainability Board convenes four times per year, defines Philips’ sustainability strategy, programs and policies, monitors progress and takes corrective action where needed.
Progress on Sustainability is communicated internally and externally (www.results.philips.com) on a quarterly basis and at least annually in the Executive Committee and Supervisory Board.
EY has provided reasonable assurance on whether the information in Sustainability statements, starting on page 191 and Social performance, starting on page 37 and Environmental performance, starting on page 42 presents fairly, in all material respects, the sustainability performance in accordance with the reporting criteria. Please refer to Assurance report of the independent auditor, starting on page 213