Page 71 - Corporate Responsibility Report 2013
P. 71
Corporate Responsibility Report 2013
Materiality: Has AIA provided a balanced representation of material issues concerning its
sustainability performance?
► Nothing has come to our attention that causes us to believe that AIA’s materiality determination
approach does not provide a balanced representation of material issues concerning its
sustainability performance. Nevertheless, we consider that AIA’s materiality determination
approach could be enhanced by including direct engagement and input from external
stakeholders.
Responsiveness: Has AIA responded to stakeholder concerns?
► We are not aware of any matters that would lead us to conclude that AIA has not applied the
responsiveness principle in considering the matters to be reported.
2. Accuracy and completeness of quantitative data and plausibility of qualitative information
related to the GRI G4 General and Specific Standard Disclosures (indicated in the assurance
column of the GRI G4 Content Index with a checkmark, pp. 60-65), against the “In accordance
– Core” requirements.
How plausible are the statements and claims within the Report linked to qualitative information on
GRI G4 General and Specific Standard Disclosures under scope?
► We have reviewed information or explanations on selected statements on AIA’s sustainability
activities presented in the Report and we are not aware of any misstatements in the assertions
made.
How complete and accurate are the quantitative data linked to the GRI G4 General and Specific
Standard Disclosures under scope?
► Nothing has come to our attention that causes us to believe that quantitative data linked to the
GRI G4 General and Specific Standard Disclosures under scope has not been collated properly
at corporate level.
► We are not aware of any errors that would materially affect the data as presented in the Report.
3. Adherence to the United Nations Global Compact (UNGC) Communication on Progress (CoP)
requirements, against the guidelines found in the Practical Guide to the UNGC CoP.
Does AIA’s UNGC CoP adhere to the guidelines found in the Practical Guide to the UNGC CoP?
► Nothing has come to our attention that causes us to believe that AIA’s UNGC CoP is not fairly
stated, according to the guidelines found in the Practical Guide to the UNGC CoP.
4. Adherence to Clause 4 “Principles of Social Responsibility” of ISO26000:2010, as this is
reported in the “Linkage table between ISO26000:2010 and GRI G4 Guidelines”.
Does AIA adhere to the ISO26000 Clause 4, as this is disclosed in the “Linkage table between
ISO26000:2010 and GRI G4 Guidelines”?
► Nothing has come to our attention that causes us to believe that AIA’s adherence to ISO26000
Clause 4, as this is disclosed in the relevant table, is not fairly stated.
aia.gr / 71
Materiality: Has AIA provided a balanced representation of material issues concerning its
sustainability performance?
► Nothing has come to our attention that causes us to believe that AIA’s materiality determination
approach does not provide a balanced representation of material issues concerning its
sustainability performance. Nevertheless, we consider that AIA’s materiality determination
approach could be enhanced by including direct engagement and input from external
stakeholders.
Responsiveness: Has AIA responded to stakeholder concerns?
► We are not aware of any matters that would lead us to conclude that AIA has not applied the
responsiveness principle in considering the matters to be reported.
2. Accuracy and completeness of quantitative data and plausibility of qualitative information
related to the GRI G4 General and Specific Standard Disclosures (indicated in the assurance
column of the GRI G4 Content Index with a checkmark, pp. 60-65), against the “In accordance
– Core” requirements.
How plausible are the statements and claims within the Report linked to qualitative information on
GRI G4 General and Specific Standard Disclosures under scope?
► We have reviewed information or explanations on selected statements on AIA’s sustainability
activities presented in the Report and we are not aware of any misstatements in the assertions
made.
How complete and accurate are the quantitative data linked to the GRI G4 General and Specific
Standard Disclosures under scope?
► Nothing has come to our attention that causes us to believe that quantitative data linked to the
GRI G4 General and Specific Standard Disclosures under scope has not been collated properly
at corporate level.
► We are not aware of any errors that would materially affect the data as presented in the Report.
3. Adherence to the United Nations Global Compact (UNGC) Communication on Progress (CoP)
requirements, against the guidelines found in the Practical Guide to the UNGC CoP.
Does AIA’s UNGC CoP adhere to the guidelines found in the Practical Guide to the UNGC CoP?
► Nothing has come to our attention that causes us to believe that AIA’s UNGC CoP is not fairly
stated, according to the guidelines found in the Practical Guide to the UNGC CoP.
4. Adherence to Clause 4 “Principles of Social Responsibility” of ISO26000:2010, as this is
reported in the “Linkage table between ISO26000:2010 and GRI G4 Guidelines”.
Does AIA adhere to the ISO26000 Clause 4, as this is disclosed in the “Linkage table between
ISO26000:2010 and GRI G4 Guidelines”?
► Nothing has come to our attention that causes us to believe that AIA’s adherence to ISO26000
Clause 4, as this is disclosed in the relevant table, is not fairly stated.
aia.gr / 71
