Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures 

Introduction

Facilitating the transition to a low-carbon economy is high on the agenda at dormakaba. Having been named one of Europe’s Climate Leaders by the Financial Times, our task is to address the risks associated with climate change while harnessing the opportunities available to us in our industry. Our commitment is evident from the annual report that we submit to the Carbon Disclosure Report (CDP), a not-for-profit charity that provides a global disclosure system for investors, companies, cities, states, and regions to disclose their environmental impact. We received a ‘B’ rating in our last report, indicating that while we are on the right track, there is room for improvement when it comes to tackling both risks and opportunities.

This section looks into these areas in more detail, taking as its basis a gap analysis that we conducted of our latest report to the CDP. The analysis was performed based on the recommendations issued by the Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) and the approach proposed by leading global risk intelligence company Verisk Maplecroft, which uses geospatial data and analytics to acquire insights into sustainability and ESG. Ultimately, this analysis will enable us to refine and expand on our governance, assessment and management measures at dormakaba for the future.

Governance

a. Board’s oversight of climate-related risks and opportunities

The Board of Directors (BoD) at dormakaba holds the highest decision-making authority and establishes the strategic, organizational, financial planning, and accounting rules for the Group. The BoD delegates the management of day-to-day operations to the Chief Executive Officer (CEO), who is supported by the Executive Committee. The Sustainability Governance structure, with clearly defined roles and responsibilities, extends to climate-related matters at both the BoD and top management levels.

The Board ensures that climate-related risks and opportunities are integrated into the Groupʼs risk management framework, the companyʼs overall strategy Shape4Growth, and decision-making processes. As specified in the company’s Sustainability Charter, the Board provides guidance for dormakabaʼs sustainability framework and is responsible for its governance, reviewing and approving it.

The Chairman of the Board monitors the progress of sustainability strategy implementation against targets and evaluates sustainability risks and opportunities. The Audit Committee ensures the integrity of the Sustainability Report including carbon inventory data, monitoring its assurance and the effectiveness of risk management vis a vis the Sustainability Report. The Nomination and Compensation Committee approves ESG-related targets included in our management incentive plans.

Climate-related considerations are factored into all major corporate decisions, including strategy, annual budgets, capital expenditures, corporate targets, mergers and acquisitions, employee incentives, innovation, R&D priorities, value chain oversight, and the development and implementation of a transition plan.

At least once per year, the Board receives updates from the Group Sustainability Officer on ESG strategy implementation, including climate-related performance, risks, and opportunities. Additionally, the Chairman of the Board is informed on quarterly basis about strategy implementation by the Group Sustainability Officer, as representative of the Group Sustainability Council. This council is chaired by the CEO and oversees the implementation of the sustainability framework, manages climate-related risks and opportunities, and regularly reports on sustainability performance and progress to the Board. The BoD provides guidance and oversight to the Executive Committee, ensuring comprehensive governance of climate-related management. This mechanism provides a well-balanced approach to the Board's oversight of all sustainability and climate-related matters.

b. Management’s role in assessing and managing climate-related risks and opportunities

Sustainability performance and risk assessment at dormakaba is continuously monitored, and data thereon are regularly provided to top decision-makers to help shape corporate strategy and policies and improve overall business and operational performance. Our Sustainability Charter defines the overall sustainability management system, which covers – among other elements – the sustainability governance and organizational bodies. The organizational chart shows that dormakaba has consistently assigned climate-related responsibilities throughout the company – from management-level positions or committees to the operational level of the business units.

Members and groups within the organisation responsible for assessing and managing climate-related risks and opportunities are the following:

• Chief Executive Officer (CEO)
• Group Sustainability Council
• Global Sustainability Working Group consisting of four Expert Groups: Sustainable Products, Environment and Health & Safety, Supplier Sustainable Development, and People
• Management in the respective global functions and regions: Environmental Sustainability Managers and Business Unit Managers (assessing risks only)

The Group Sustainability Council (GSC), chaired by the CEO, is responsible for recommending sustainability strategies, priorities, and objectives to the Executive Committee. The GSC includes cross-functional members of top management in particular from operations, procurement and product development, which are best placed to reduce sources of Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions. The councilʼs mandate is based on the results of the formal materiality assessment, which includes strategic priorities addressing climate change.

The cross-functional and cross-regional Global Sustainability Working Group receives its mandate from the GSC. It consists of four Expert Groups defined by their functional expertise as well as the Corporate Sustainability team and representatives from Compliance. The Global Sustainability Working Group has over 50 members and is responsible for implementing the sustainability strategy. Each sustainability target is allocated to an Expert Group with the most relevant job functions and business know-how. These are:

• Expert Group Health, Safety and Environment – Operations
• Expert Group People – Human Resources
• Expert Group Supplier Sustainable Development – Procurement
• Expert Group Sustainable Products – Product Management, Product Development, Marketing

The contribution of the Expert Group members is key to ensuring the successful implementation and development of strategic initiatives to achieve our sustainability targets. dormakaba attaches great importance to the evaluation of activities and projects to fulfil these objectives. For this reason, the company has developed an initiative tracker that records and recognizes the climate-related impact of projects. Sustainability and climate are regularly on the agenda at both the GSC and Global Sustainability Working Group. The former meet twice a year and the latter every two months. Additionally, each Expert Groups meets once a month.

At an operational level, it is the responsibility of Quality, Health & Safety and Environment (QHSE) managers or Plant Managers of each manufacturing site to establish additional measures and initiatives aimed at climate change adaptation and mitigation, as well as to oversee their implementation. Meanwhile, the Business Unit Managers, who are designated as risk coordinators under the dormakaba Risk Directive, are required to report on climate-related risks twice a year as part of the regular risk assessment framework of dormakaba. The rationale behind this structure is that climate-related issues impact all areas of dormakabaʼs business, and therefore require oversight and management at all levels of the organization. Outside of these processes the Group Sustainability Officer has a direct reporting line to the CEO and can therefore alert on highly relevant climate-related issues as well.

Strategy

At dormakaba, we see two ways to make a significant contribution to facilitating the transition to a low-carbon economy: one, by directly ensuring the efficiency of our own operations; two, by indirectly helping to reduce the carbon footprint of the buildings and projects to which we supply our products. The measures we have derived from our scenario analysis approach incorporate both the financial side of our business and our operational strategy. The idea is to integrate climate-related and risk management initiatives into all our solutions and processes, as this will allow us to become more resilient as a company in the long term – and help our customers become more sustainable, too.

a./b. Climate-related risks and opportunities identified in the short, medium, and long term along with their impact on business, strategic and financial planning at dormakaba

As stated in the introduction, dormakaba is dedicated to integrating climate-related risks and opportunities into our company-wide strategic decision-making processes. Not only will this allow us to maintain our competitive edge and ensure we are ready for the future, but it serves as a clear signal that we are committed to addressing the needs and expectations of stakeholders and society. In short, doing the right thing for the planet can only serve to benefit everyone.

As part of our broader risk management framework, which enables us to mitigate and eliminate risks across all aspects of our business, we have identified significant risks and opportunities, not least those related to climate change (see Risk Management section of the Annual Report).

A turning point in our desire to reduce our carbon footprint came in 2023, when we conducted an in-depth scenario analysis of our business with a focus on climate change mitigation. We mapped this analysis on to business decisions, financial plans and capital allocation as a means of identifying climate-related risks and feasible opportunities.

We can break down the scenario analysis into three primary activities:

1. Identifying current and future risks and opportunities relating to the transition to more environmentally friendly material flows (in alignment with our risk assessment framework)
2. Calculating the financial impact that these risks and opportunities could have and how they may influence dormakaba’s financial planning and operational strategy
3. Evaluating the main transition risks and opportunities based on two distinct emissions scenarios across three time frames: short term (0–1 years), medium term (1–3 years) and long-term (3–15 years). The long-term time frame currently deviates from our broader risk management process, which formally looks at short-term and medium-term time frames. The two scenarios mentioned are based on frameworks from the Network of Central Banks and Supervisors for Greening the Financial System (NGFS):

• The Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) assumes that the conditional NDC commitments are implemented in full and that the energy and emissions targets will be reached in every country in 2025 and again in 2030, leading to a global warming rate of approx. 2.6°C.
• Divergent Net Zero assumes that the world will reach net-zero emissions by around 2050, albeit with higher costs due to divergent policies introduced across sectors, leading to a quicker phase-out of oil. Under this scenario, global warming will be limited to 1.5°C, in line with the Paris Agreement.

We are already comparing the findings to our current operations, supply chains and customer operations in order to evaluate the financial impacts of both physical risks and transition risks. Our initial focus is on assessing the financial implications of our highest risk, namely increasing carbon prices (see below for initial estimates). dormakaba aims to quantify the financial impact of climate risks with reliable estimates or ranges within the next two years, providing a foundation to guide our business strategy and financial planning.

Transition Risks and Opportunities

As the world shifts towards a low-carbon, climate-friendly future, our business will need to overcome a range of societal and economic challenges. With this in mind, we conducted a literature review as well as several interviews and workshops with colleagues from our risk, strategy, operations and sustainability teams to identify key climate transition risks and opportunities. After drawing up a longlist of related risks, we settled on six transition risk clusters and assessed their individual impacts:

• Financial and investment: The transition to a low-carbon economy will require significant investment in research and development. Having sufficient access to financing and investment will likely accelerate the pace of this transition (with reduced financing having the opposite effect).
• Markets: Volatile energy and raw material prices projected based on both emissions scenarios stand to have a significant impact on dormakaba’s suppliers and our own production costs.
• Technology: As well as presenting various opportunities for our business, technological advancements may enhance cost efficiency, performance, sustainability, energy efficiency and reliability, leading to greater competition in our industry.
• Legal: dormakaba may face legal challenges from regulators or other parties who claim that our operations do not comply fully with environmental laws and regulations.
• Reputation: Our reputation may suffer in the public eye (customers, investors, other stakeholders, etc.) if we fail to address climate change or meet our climate-related targets. This can lead to a loss of trust, credibility and financial buoyancy.
• Regulatory: Some policy measures or uncertainty regarding how or when to implement them could have a negative impact on production costs and potentially affect our market growth.

Sixteen transition risks and three opportunities were identified in these six risk clusters:

Overall transition risks rating

Long-term risks tend to have a higher significance and likelihood that they will occur. This is especially the case under the Divergent Net Zero scenario, where climate-related challenges are expected to be more severe. The exception is the “insurance” risk, which refers to disaster and catastrophe insurance premiums; they may be lower in a world where global warming has increased by only 1.5°C. To calculate the overall risk ratings across various time horizons, we applied the following weightings: 50% for short-term risks (0–1 years), 30% for medium-term risks (1–3 years), and 20% for long-term risks (3–15 years). These weightings reflect a lower level of certainty when it comes to long-term projections.

Of the 16 risks identified, six come with a high impact and likelihood of occurrence in either or both climate scenarios. The most significant is rising carbon prices due to national and international carbon schemes. This, combined with the increasing cost of globally sourced goods, could lead both to higher operating costs and a fall in demand due to escalating product prices.

This is especially important to consider when looking at future mergers and acquisitions and the procurement of machinery (due to their energy consumption). By 2025, the annual carbon costs for our own Scope 1+2 emissions could range from 5 to 50 million USD (this would be lower under the NDC scenario and higher under the Divergent Net Zero scenario). According to our estimates, this could escalate to anywhere from USD 12 to 89 million per annum by 2030.

Another factor to consider is the unquestionable increase in the price of raw materials. For instance, European enterprises importing aluminum and steel from outside the EU will face higher costs due to the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) and associated Scope 3 emissions.

Most Significant Transition Risks and Impacts

Most Significant Transition Opportunities and Impacts

Physical Risks and Impacts

Physical climate-related risks have the potential to affect various sectors, ecosystems, and human quality of life. This is why it is essential to take effective risk management, adaptation and mitigation measures now at both the economic and political levels if we are to build resilience and reduce our vulnerability to these climate-related hazards in the future.

Against this backdrop, we have adopted a data-driven approach to identify and analyze those physical climate-related risks that will have the greatest impact on our global operations. We also used this approach to map out how these risks may evolve along different trajectories according to three individual emissions scenarios, known as Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs). We evaluated the following risk types: climate change exposure; coastal flooding hazard; cooling degree days; drought hazard; extra-tropical cyclone hazard; flood hazard; heat stress; heating degree days; sea level rise; severe storm hazard; tropical storm and cyclone hazard; and water stress and wildfire hazard.

We assessed all of these risks types based on Verisk Maplecroft’s risk indices while incorporating various validated climate change projections. For each of our business locations, we drew up a profile to gauge site-specific exposure to acute risks and chronic hazards and included a materiality threshold that was specific to that location. The risk scores below are presented on a relative scale, allowing for simple comparisons between locations and time frames. This allows us to make informed decisions as to investing in and allocating resources to each site, and streamlines the strategic decision-making process thanks to the awareness of risks.

We assessed 112 sites in total across our operational regions, and followed this up with a closer analysis of 46 of our most important locations. These locations are known as “critical sites”, with the categorization being awarded based on factors such as net sales, number of employees, and tangible asset value. The Physical Climate Risk Dashboard supported our analysis. In a final step, we generated individual site scorecards and set individual benchmarks for sites, geographies and business entities.

While some hazards have a low risk of exposure for dormakaba, such as coastal flood hazard and landslide hazard, others, such as severe storm hazard, heating degree days, heat stress, drought hazard and water stress, have a higher risk across multiple locations. The table below shows which of our critical sites are exposed to which risks:

Most Significant Physical Risks

Our task now is to quantify the financial implications that the physical climate-related risks set out above will have on our business. We also need to evaluate the effectiveness of various mitigation activities and understand how these can be factored into our business strategy and financial planning in the coming financial year.

c. Resilience of the organization’s strategy, taking into consideration different climate-related scenarios, global warming scenario of 2°C or lower

We conducted an assessment to consider the various effects of climate change on our facilities. The reason was to gain insight into the physical risk profile (whether acute or chronic) of our operations, identify both vulnerabilities and opportunities, and make strategic decisions to boost our resilience across all aspects of the business. The assessment was based on climate model projections presented by the following three Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs):

• RCP2.6: Aggressive mitigation assumes global annual GHG emissions will peak between 2010–2020, with emissions declining substantially after this point.
• RCP4.5: Strong mitigation assumes emissions will peak around 2040, after which they will decline.
• RCP8.5: Business-as-usual assumes emissions will continue to rise throughout the 21^st century.

Each pathway predicts future greenhouse gas concentrations caused by human activities, with varying degrees of physical impact.

We also conducted a transition risk analysis, this time using two climate change scenarios as our basis. The analysis factored in three dimensions: likelihood, significance and time frame. For more details on the results of this analysis, refer to subsection a./b. above.

Summary and Outlook

The overall conclusion of these analyses is that there are no indications of any risks that could significantly threaten dormakaba’s business continuity in the short, medium or long term. Nevertheless, it is important that we remain committed to mitigating the risks identified, as this will allow us to safeguard our operations and maintain our competitive edge.

As outlined in the transition risks table above, there are ways for us to potentially mitigate the risks identified. While we will evaluate these in more detail in the near future, for now we can say that we are planning to enhance the resilience of dormakaba by taking the following key measures in the coming financial year:

• Increase our investment in low-carbon technologies
• Share the results of the physical risk profiles with the local management team at each dormakaba location
• Calculate the potential financial implications associated with the identified risks and opportunities, along with the costs involved in implementing the mitigation measures
• Evaluate the carbon emissions of potential acquisitions and integrate carbon pricing into mergers and acquisitions processes
• Integrate the expected impact of carbon prices on Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions into our inflation projections
• Evaluate and promote the diversification of energy sources and sources of supply for key commodities

In terms of the opportunities presented by the transition to a low-carbon economy, we plan to increase our investment in low-carbon materials and product innovations that prioritize reduced energy consumption. Examples of such products include Motion IQ, our intelligent sensor system for automatic doors, and our Door Efficiency Calculator, a tool that customers can use to determine the most energy-efficient entrance solution for their building. Measures such as this will enable us to meet customer demand for sustainable solutions and therefore keep pace with the competition. For more information about this, see the Energy and Emissions section.

Risk Management

At dormakaba, we have developed a robust risk management framework, emphasizing our commitment to proactive identification, assessment, and mitigation of various risks, including those linked to climate change. Our approach ensures that we are aware of and prepared for physical, regulatory, and reputational risks associated with climate change.

We also recognize the need to further enhance our capabilities in assessing and managing climate-related risks. By focusing on these improvements, we aim to ensure the resilience and continuity of our operations, aligning with our sustainability objectives and commitment to addressing climate-related challenges.

a. Processes for identifying and assessing climate-related risks

Risk management at dormakaba is integrated into our everyday business processes, consisting of these key activities:

1. Outcome-oriented risk assessment;
2. Definition and implementation of improvement measures based on cost-benefit analysis;
3. Regular monitoring and review of identified risks and mitigation efforts;
4. Transparent reporting on the risk and control environment.

This approach encompasses company-wide evaluations of reputational and transitional risks related to sustainability, climate trends in the downstream value chain, and regulatory changes, such as the EU Green Dealʼs impact on the building industry.

At the asset level, quality, health, safety, and environmental managers in our larger manufacturing plants ensure compliance with local regulations. They conduct annual reviews to identify transitional risks and assess potential physical risks to dormakaba assets. In addition, our geographical climate change risk mapping evaluates risks and opportunities to address potential physical impacts such as flooding.

At the corporate level, the Audit Committee, which reports to the Board of Directors, approves the detailed risk map created by the Executive Committee, adopts the necessary risk control and mitigation measures, and reports outcomes annually. This risk map covers strategic, financial, operational, reputational, physical, legal, and compliance risks that could affect the companyʼs business goals and financial targets.

dormakaba recognizes that effective risk management relies on a coordinated effort across the entire Group, from assessing and managing risks to monitoring and reporting. Our risk management framework includes a short- to medium-term outlook (1–3 years) for operational risks, while climate change risk management extends beyond this range.

Risk assessment involves prioritizing risks based on their significance and likelihood of occurrence. Each risk is assessed by “risk process owners," who are responsible for accurate risk identification, appropriate analysis, and the implementation of improvement measures. Climate-related risks are treated with the same priority as other business risks, using a 4-by-4 matrix to evaluate the likelihood of occurrence and the significance of impact. Risks are then compiled into a Group risk map with four color-coded quadrants, from red to green, indicating the level of urgency.

The approach for identifying and assessing climate-related risks within the context of scenario analysis is outlined in the Strategy section above.

b. Processes for managing climate-related risks

The Board of Directors at dormakaba plays a pivotal role in managing climate-related risks. This includes identifying these risks, determining appropriate mitigation measures, and implementing these measures at both the company and asset levels. dormakaba has achieved ISO 14001 and ISO 50001 certifications for several production sites, which ensures periodic evaluations of environmental risks specific to each site. This systematic approach provides the Board with a comprehensive overview of key risks, allowing the Group to prioritize resources effectively for risk mitigation.

dormakabaʼs risk management framework is tightly integrated with its business continuity management system, connected to a central enterprise risk management (ERM) system where all listed risks are captured. Responsibility for risks is delegated to local management through the Group Risk Management Directive, with scoring done using a traditional risk framework that assesses both likelihood and significance. Risks identified at the local level are then consolidated into a group-level risk map, ensuring that climate-related risks are considered alongside other strategic and operational risks.

The Board of Directorsʼ Audit Committee discusses risks biannually, ensuring that the risk management process complements the companyʼs financial planning process, which has a 3-year outlook. Although climate risks are not explicitly captured within the financial planning process, they are considered under broader categories of risk.

Simultaneously, dormakaba uses materiality analysis to identify climate-related opportunities and value-adding topics. This process, which incorporates stakeholder engagement, provides a balanced strategy to manage climate risks while also exploring opportunities for operational efficiency and safeguarding the companyʼs reputation.

c. Integration of processes for identifying, assessing, and managing climate-related risks into the organization’s overall risk management

dormakabaʼs approach to risk management integrates climate-related risks within the broader risk management framework. This integration is achieved through a consistent process that identifies, assesses, and manages various risks, including those tied to climate change. The outcome-oriented risk assessments are designed to capture a wide range of risks, ensuring that climate-related issues are given due consideration. The regular monitoring and review process provides continuous oversight, allowing dormakaba to align climate-related risk management with other operational and strategic risks.

Additionally, the Board of Directors plays a key role in ensuring that climate-related risks are part of the companyʼs broader risk map. The involvement of the Executive Committee in risk management processes ensures that climate risks are assessed alongside other business risks. This alignment with existing risk management processes enables dormakaba to prioritize and allocate resources effectively, treating climate-related risks on par with other business risks, thus ensuring a cohesive strategy for addressing both immediate and long-term risks.

Elsewhere, we have already incorporated the physical risks and transition risks into our risk management framework, making it even more robust than before. Even so, there is still much we can do to integrate these risks at business unit level, which is why our next step is to raise awareness locally and turn our qualitative financial impact pathways into quantifiable figures. This will enable us to prioritize risks for each site and streamline the risk management process.

Metrics and Targets

As evidenced from the above, we have developed a robust framework for measuring our ESG targets. This provides a firm basis for consistently achieving these targets going forward. Furthermore, our metrics are now aligned with our strategic priorities as a business and have been integrated into our company-wide risk management processes. We have a comprehensive GHG accounting system in place that covers all emissions scopes (1–3), allowing us to measure our performance with a high degree of accuracy. We have likewise emphasized our commitment to sustainability by setting validated science-based targets and pledging to achieving net-zero emissions within the company by 2050 at the latest. Finally, we have drawn up a climate transition plan to assist us with this.

In terms of improvements, we are aiming to expand our Scope 3 emissions inventory, so that we can better understand and manage our emissions across our value chain. This will enable us to craft a more comprehensive net-zero strategy and an effective transition plan.

a. Metrics used to assess climate-related risks and opportunities in line with strategy and risk management process

• Key metrics for the assessment of climate-related risks and opportunities: see Strategy section above.
• Water stress, a chronic physical climate-related risk, is further detailed in the Human Rights chapter.
• Other climate-related metrics can be found in the ESG Performance Table
• dormakaba also secured a syndicated loan that incorporates sustainability criteria and metrics into its credit facility agreement. The loan terms are tied to our Scope 1 and 2 emissions, the implementation of energy management systems at manufacturing entities, and the sustainability performance of our suppliers.
• dormakabaʼs remuneration practices include climate-related performance metrics as part of the long-term incentives for top management (see Compensation Report). Additionally, in the UK, bonus payouts are tied to achieving objectives like reducing energy use and GHG emissions. In Germany, all employees can propose efficiency improvement projects, including environmental and sustainability initiatives, via an online platform. Suggestions are evaluated for viability, and those implemented earn a bonus of 30% from the achieved savings. Non-financial savings are rewarded through a point-based system.
• As a risk mitigation method, in FY 23/24 dormakaba has been integrating two types of carbon pricing as mandatory for all non-IT capital expenditure investment applications, as increasing carbon prices has been seen as the most material transition risk based on the scenario analysis we conducted. Having committed to carbon neutrality in our own operations by 2030, we use the expected future cost of Gold Standard carbon offsets (75 CHF per tCO₂) as one metric. In addition, the investment application template now has a mandatory inclusion of a price for carbon taxes. These average carbon price projections are calculated along the Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) scenario based on an unweighted average across all dormakaba’s countries of operation, and an 8% discount rate is applied based on the Weighted Average Cost of Capital (WACC) listed in our financial filings. The investment application provides the user with transparency on the total cost of energy (electricity and/or heating fuels) and total cost of carbon for the entire lifetime of the machinery up until 2045. The carbon price is dynamic, increasing every five years and ranging from 43 CHF per tCO₂ up to 99 CHF as of 2040. The impacts of the carbon and energy costs are integrated into cashflow, EBITDA and internal rate of return calculations for the accounting lifetime of the machinery (10 years). The new process will be rolled out in early FY 24/25
• EU taxonomy-aligned economic activities are listed in the Energy & Emissions chapter and in the EU Taxonomy table.

b. Scope 1, Scope 2 and Scope 3 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and the related risks

• Our Scope 1, 2 and 3 GHG emissions (including time series) are listed in the ESG Performance Table.
• Associated risks are detailed in the Strategy section of this report.

c. Targets used to manage climate-related risks and opportunities and performance against targets

• Our officially validated, science-based climate targets are detailed in the Energy & Emissions chapter.
• Other climate-related targets pertaining to net zero emissions, climate neutrality in own operations, energy intensity, renewable energy use, water stewardship, resource efficiency, waste, and circularity are listed in the Strategy & Approach chapter