What do companies operating in Turkey prioritize and discuss about when it comes to sustainability? How aligned are they with the global trends and agenda?
What do companies operating in Turkey prioritize and discuss about when it comes to sustainability? How aligned are they with the global trends and agenda?
With these questions in mind, we aimed to identify the sustainability priorities of the business world in Turkey by cumulatively investigating the issues defined as material in sustainability reports. For the analysis, we created a shared materiality matrix by compiling the data of 32 companies that are listed in the Borsa İstanbul Sustainability Index and that report their material sustainability issues with a matrix. Within the data gathering process, we used publicly shared data of 13 companies with which the S360 has worked directly with in the previous 3 years. For the rest, we used companies’ publicly available data.
When evaluating the materiality analyses of 32 companies together, we observe that the top material issue is Financial performance while the lowest material issue is Biodiversity. Additionally, we examine the most repeated issues among 32 companies as well as separately evaluating the material issues for companies and their stakeholders. In the last part of the study, we examine the degree to which the companies base their reports on Sustainable Development Goals and open an area for discussion regarding how much they adhere to this fundamental guide.
The future of the global system and investments is changing fundamentally. This change has accelerated in recent years as the sustainability perspective has become increasingly embedded in investor relations, companies' strategies and business models. Thus, it is considered a sought-after criterion. Nowadays, instead of focusing on maximizing short-term returns for shareholders, it is expected from publicly traded companies to focus on providing a good service to all their stakeholders (customers, suppliers, employees, communities and the environment) and transparently share it. Transparency has become the most important criterion for investors.
A large and growing proportion of assets managed in global markets are owned by asset managers and owners who incorporate Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) criteria into their investment processes. So much so that, currently the United Nations Principles for Responsible Investment (UNPRI) has more than 2,000 signatories with a total asset management value of $81.7 trillion. In 2020, these numbers were 800 signatories and $22 trillion. The number of asset managers adopting these principles in the last 10 years has more than doubled and the amount controlled by these managers has more than tripled. Another important data belongs to Morningstar, an investment research and analysis company. According to the company's research, mutual funds focused on sustainability attracted almost $5.5 billion in 2018, quadrupling in 2019 with a net capital flow of $20.6 billion(1).
The global system, in which investors undergo such a transformation, encourages companies to be more transparent with each passing day. Especially for publicly traded companies, it has become even more important to disclose their performance to the public via sustainability reports. Additionally, it is becoming more and more important to integrate sustainability performance and business strategy to manage the uncertainties brought by the global system and the market. Materiality analysis is a backbone method for reporting sustainability performance and determining company strategies. Companies can use materiality analysis to effectively measure their performance in the ESG areas, determine the subjects they will focus on in the short, medium and long term, and identify areas that will create shared value for both the company and all its stakeholders with its future operations. In the process of identifying material issues, companies create a participatory process with the inputs they have received from their internal and external stakeholders through stakeholder analysis, as well as examining local and global trends.
According to the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) Reporting Matters 2019, which examines 159 reports and includes companies such as Apple, IKEA, JPMorgan, Nestle and Michelin, 86% of companies that reveal their materiality analysis not only describe their processes but also share their analyses in the form of a matrix. This rate, which was 82% in 2015, indicates that the existence of materiality matrices alongside clearer as well as understandable data and process sharing have increased in reporting trends(2). In Turkey, it is possible to say that companies' reporting on their sustainability performance is a developing trend. In 2018, nearly 400 companies announced their sustainability performance. Considering that there were only 18 organizations reporting sustainability in 2010, it can be said that this field is developing significantly(3). However, not all companies that report their sustainability performance in Turkey perform a materiality analysis. Still, the performance of companies in this field is improving. According to the Reporting Matters 2019 Turkey report conducted by the Sustainable Development Association, 24% of the evaluated companies improved their performance in materiality analysis compared to the previous year(4).
This study aims to map the sustainability priorities of the business world in Turkey and to reflect the transformation of the business world in light of global ESG trends by evaluating the material issues in the sustainability reports of the selected companies with a cumulative analysis. The study examines the publicly shared sustainability reports of 32 companies in the Borsa Istanbul Sustainability Index, 13 of which S360 works directly, It focuses on the materiality matrices they have prepared based on the companies’ own strategies, stakeholders and global trends. The analysis presents a consolidated materiality matrix by examining the matrices of the companies covered. In this way, the research offers the opportunity to evaluate the issues that crosscut sectors in Turkey, and which constitute a materiality for all companies. In other words, the priorities of the Turkish business world.
The analysis reveals which issues companies give weight to the most, and what are the top material issues for stakeholders. It examines where companies and stakeholders agree and disagree on these issues, and which issues lag behind in the materiality ranking. In addition to assessing the material issues for companies and stakeholders, the study offers two other analyses. The first is to analyse the topics in each company's long list of issues to identify which ones are the most repetitive. This evaluation is important in terms of understanding which issues occupy the sustainability agenda in Turkey the most. The second analysis is to explore how Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) contribute to framing material issues in sustainability reports. This examination allows us to understand how the SDGs are positioned in companies' materiality strategy.
The study aims to map the sustainability priorities of the business world in Turkey by evaluating the material issues in the sustainability reports of the selected companies with a cumulative analysis. For this purpose, 32 companies (out of 56) that are included in the BIST Sustainability Index published by Borsa Istanbul on November 1, 2019, that publicly presented their sustainability performance with a matrix of material issues were included in the study. Companies that share a long list of material issues in their reports, but do not set a ranking, were not included in the study(5).
When the sectoral distribution of the companies is examined, companies from the finance sector stand out the most. The sectoral distribution of companies is summarized in the chart below.
The work consists of three main parts. The first part was created with the cumulative matrix of the companies included in the research. For this purpose, the materiality matrix of each of the companies was examined. All the issues covered in the examined matrices were gathered under one long list. Thus, 40 issues emerged. Afterwards, industry-specific issues were excluded to determine the cumulative materiality matrix issues list. In addition, issues that were repeated less than five times in the 32 matrices examined were excluded from the list, assuming that they did not achieve sufficient coverage. In addition, the issues with the same meaning but with different definitions were combined under a single definition. As a result, a total of 29 issues were evaluated consisting of 5 environmental, 9 social and 15 governance areas(6) . After the issues were determined, the priority of each issue according to companies and stakeholders was evaluated on a six-unit scale. The materiality matrices, which were created according to different scales, were normalized on a common scale with 6 being the highest materiality and 0 being the lowest materiality level. This means that the values given with different scales in the matrices were arranged according to a common scale. Thus, the materiality scores of different companies were made comparable.
Although the X-axis values are not the same in all the reports we have reviewed, they are generally formed by the business strategy of the companies and their subsidiaries and the opinions of those representing the senior management. Y-axis values are generally defined by stakeholders in the reports. Although it varies according to the companies, they are defined by the employees of the companies, analysts, the press, rating and valuation institutions, think tanks, financial institutions, shareholders, public institutions, regulatory authorities, customers, competitors, unions, non-governmental organizations, organizations, suppliers, business partners, international organizations, universities, investors and local governments. In this study, the concept of "company" is used when describing the X axis, and "stakeholder" when referring to the Y axis.
The second part of the study aims to understand which issues constitute the sustainability agenda of companies. Within this scope, it was identified how many times each issue was included in company agendas (long list of issues). Thus, it was identified which issues the companies keep on their agendas. At this point, it should be reminded that the analysis evaluates the issues that are on the agenda and the issues that are prioritized differently. In other words, the number of times an issue appears on the companys’ long lists indicates that it is an issue that is kept on the agenda, while the position of these issues in the matrix helps to understand their materiality.
Finally, the third part of the report examines the impact of the SDGs on companies' materiality strategy. For this purpose, three criteria were established: Those who do not include the SDGs in the framework of the report, those who report which SDGs their activities contribute to, and those who integrate the SDGs more deeply into their reports and align their material issues with them. How the companies incorporate the SDGs in their reports was analyzed under three criteria. In addition, the 17 goals that companies referenced were analysed.
When the material topics in the sustainability reports of 32 companies are analysed cumulatively, the distribution showing the materialities of the issues according to the stakeholders and companies is summarized in the matrix above.
In the matrix, the top 5 issues for both stakeholders and companies in order are Financial performance, Research & development and innovation, Digital transformation and new technologies, Risk, opportunity and crisis management, and Occupational health and safety. According to the analysis, the 5 lowest material issues for both stakeholders are Biodiversity, Supply chain management, Local economy and employment, Community investments and Impact on local communities.
When the matrix is analysed, Financial performance comes first among the top material issues. It is not surprising that this issue has the highest priority, both in terms of content and the industry weight of the companies included in the research. Having a strong financial performance is seen as a key requirement that crosses many areas when companies are strategizing and implementing their sustainability materialities. So much so that investing in sustainability is closely associated with companies achieving robust and resilient economic performance. On the other hand, the vast majority of issues identified as high priority by companies are in the field of governance.
Global trends indicate that adapting to change will be a very important feature for companies in the coming times.
At this point, the fact that Research & development and innovation, Digital transformation and new technologies, Risk, opportunity and crisis management, Customer loyalty and satisfaction, Data privacy and information security are among the high-material issues, shows how companies respond to constantly changing conditions.
Companies attach great importance to preserving their human capital while enhancing their speed and resilience. In this respect, Occupational health and safety, Employee loyalty and talent management are also among the high-material issues.
One of the striking results highlighted by the matrix is that none of the environmental issues are among the 11 high-material issues for companies and their stakeholders. This data raises interest because it questions the perception that sustainability is mostly associated with environmental issues in the business world. While the meaning of “sustainability” goes beyond its connotation with environmental issues, it is worrying that companies do not keep this phenomenon on their agenda enough.
As seen in the cumulative matrix, the last issue on the materiality list is Biodiversity. Although it ranks at the bottom of the materiality matrix, it is a recurring issue on the materiality list of 19 (out of 32) companies. This situation shows that biodiversity is on the agenda of many companies and their stakeholders, but it is not prioritized. When considering this situation from a global lens, 2011-2020 was declared a “Decade on Biodiversity” by the United Nations. The aim was to live in harmony with nature, protect biodiversity, use biodiversity components sustainably and share the benefits arising from the use of genetic resources fairly and equally. Recent studies show that what is targeted in line with this plan is insufficient(8). The fact that the theme of World Environment Day for 2020 is biodiversity and the steps taken since 2010 are insufficient, it becomes essential for companies to look more carefully at this area in the future. Confirming this conclusion, according to a study of Fortune 500 companies, half of the companies mention biodiversity in their sustainability reports, but only 5 of them set specific, measurable and time-limited smart targets(9).
When the issues prioritized by companies and stakeholders are analyzed separately in the cumulative materiality matrix, we see that different issues ranked first for these two groups. While Digital transformation and new technologies and Customer loyalty and satisfaction are the top materialities for companies, Financial performance is the top material issue for stakeholders. It is possible to say that the stakeholders think companies will not invest in environmental and social issues in their sustainability agenda without having sufficient resources.
The top 5 materialities for companies stand out as follows:
Risk, opportunity and crisis management, Occupational health and safety, and Employee and human rights are the three issues that companies and their stakeholders score with complete agreement on the degree of materiality. Among these three issues, Risk, opportunity and crisis management and Occupational health and safety are among the highest material issues in the matrix, while the Employee and human rights is under the medium material issues.
From this perspective, it is possible to observe that Financial performance, which is the highest material issue, is prioritized more by companies than by stakeholders. Biodiversity, which ranks last among 29 issues, has been evaluated by stakeholders with a slightly higher materiality than companies.
The top 5 issues that companies and their stakeholders evaluate differently from each other are Customer loyalty and satisfaction, Responsible marketing, Digital transformation and new technologies, Corporate transparency and Anti-corruption and bribery.
When examined in detail, Customer loyalty and satisfaction and Digital transformation and new technologies are prioritized by the companies with almost the highest value, while stakeholders ranked them at a lower materiality level. Responsible marketing among these issues was evaluated by companies at a higher materiality level than stakeholders. When examined as the degree of materiality in the cumulative matrix, this issue is included in the cluster of low material issues.
Among these issues, unlike the others, Corporate transparency is seen as a material topic by the stakeholders. Also it is one of the medium material issues in the cumulative matrix.
When the prioritized issues are filtered through the ESG lens, the distribution is seen in the graph below.
When the cumulative materiality matrix is examined, it is possible to say that the issues in the field of economy and governance are “higher priority” for companies and their stakeholders. Of the 11 issues identified as the highest materiality, 9 are in the field of economics and governance. However, none of the Environmental issues is included in the set of high material issues.
While companies give slightly higher importance to Governance and Social issues than stakeholders, we see that Environmental issues are given more importance by stakeholders.
Within the scope of the methodology, in addition to the materiality order for companies and stakeholders, the frequency of appearance of the issues in the reports was also examined. The purpose of this examination is to see which issues exist more frequently on the long list of issues of companies. Thus, to understand which issues are at the forefront of the sustainability agendas.
As seen in the graph, the most frequently repeated issue among the long list of 32 companies is Climate change and energy. Climate change and energy, which is on the long list of almost all companies, is a fundamental issue that concerns all sectors. Additionally, it is one of the most important issues for institutions, the private sector and civil society on the global level.
In terms of global trends, climate change, loss of biodiversity and water scarcity are among the greatest sustainability concerns(10). In the Global Risk Report published annually by the World Economic Forum (WEF), the top five most important threats to the global economy in 2020 are (1) extreme weather events, (2) climate action failure, (3) natural disasters, (4) biodiversity loss, and (5) human-made environmental disasters.
It is noteworthy that all 5 of the most important threats are caused by environmental problems(11).
Extreme climate events threaten the future of many industries. The steps taken to combat climate change have become critical for companies that have realized the importance of this problem in the past 10 years. From the perspective of sustainability, it is normal that this mega-trend, which has an impact all over the world, is the most recurring issue, even though sufficient action has not been taken yet.
It is not surprising, given the global trends and the relevance of the issue, that climate change and energy topic ranks first. What is surprising is that this issue is not listed as a high materiality by companies. Climate change and energy is ranked 14th out of 29 issues in the materiality matrix and is in the category of medium material issues. In addition, the issue is considered a higher materiality by stakeholders compared to companies.
This is also reflected in the global reports examining Sustainability Reporting trends.
• According to The Responsible Business Trends Report 2019 published by Ethical Corporation, only 25% of companies stated that they set science-based targets to improve their environmental performance against climate change(12).
• The targets set by the Science Based Targets Initiative, in collaboration with the UN and the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP), are compatible with the level of decarbonization required to keep the global temperature rise below 2°C. According to AccountAbility's Sustainability Trends 2019 report, 163 companies have also committed to calculating and reducing their greenhouse gas emissions based on scientific data(13). “Collaboration for Climate Action” is one of the seven trends that will guide and shape the sustainable business world.
• In the 2025 reporting trends survey conducted by GRI, it is recommended that companies be much more transparent about their contributions to mitigating the effects of climate change, protecting ecosystems, and implementing regional sustainable development plans(14) . This situation illustrates that current efforts are not enough.
Responsible products and services means that all sectors provide services, produce and continue their operations by considering many responsible, environmental, social and governance factors in their fields of activity. This issue, which ranks 2nd among the most repeated issues, is also among the high material issues as the 8th issue that companies and their stakeholders prioritize the most.
Companies develop sustainable products and services and create value by addressing the environmental and social impacts of their products and services, from suppliers to employees. According to AccountAbility's Sustainability Trends 2019 report, Supply Chain Intelligence, that is, regulatory practices aimed at monitoring, management and transparency of supply chains, is the 4th of the 7 global sustainability trends of 2019. This issue, which covers supply chain management more broadly, is noteworthy because companies consider more innovative solutions while running their operations.
Equal opportunity and diversity constitutes one of the basic principles of ensuring an inclusive work environment where companies implement fair policies for all their employees without discrimination and accept differences such as age, gender, ethnicity, disability, sexual orientation, gender identity, religion and language. This issue must be on the radar of companies, especially in Turkey, where gender norms and roles create great barriers to women's participation and retention in employment. When we look at the analysis, this issue, which is among the most repeated issues, is also at the end of the medium material issues as the 20th issue that companies and their stakeholders give the most importance. Considering the position of this issue in the materiality matrix, which is on the agenda of almost all companies, it can be said that it is not prioritized enough.
Globally, studies evaluating the performance of companies note that the companies that implement gender equality and diversity strategies for both their management and employees perform much better in terms of profitability, financial performance and value creation. In addition, the diversity and inclusion performance of companies draws the attention of investors. For example, according to the analysis of the 2004-2014 period by RobecoSAM, which works in the field of sustainable investment, it is observed that portfolios with high gender equality scores outperformed portfolios with low scores by 11%. Following, Occupational health and safety, Customer loyalty and satisfaction, Business ethics and compliance, and Employee development and talent management are the 4th most repeated issues with the same amount. It is not surprising that the top four issues in the most recurring issues have cross-cutting issues across all industries.
The issue of anti-corruption and bribery is repeated six times and is defined as the issue that exists less frequently in companies’ and stakeholders’ agendas. This issue is ranked 11th in the materiality matrix among the medium material issues. According to the 2019 results of the Corruption Perceptions Index published annually by Transparency International and based on the opinions of businesspeople and experts in the countries, Turkey ranks 91st among 180 countries with 39 points. Turkey, which fell 13 ranks in one year, losing two points compared to 2018, is one of the three countries that experienced the most decline between 2013-2019(15).
It can be deduced that the poor course of this issue, which can be followed in global publishings, is inconsistent with the fact that it is rarely repeated in sustainability reports and is among the medium material issues.
Sustainable Development Goals presented by the United Nations Development Program guide companies’ sustainability reports. Within the scope of this analysis, the way companies manage SDG issues was examined under three categories:
When evaluated in these three categories, most of the companies base their reporting on SDGs as a basic framework. 93% (30 companies) of the companies include the Sustainable Development Goals in their sustainability reporting and mention what goals their activities contribute to. On the other hand, only 37.5% (12 companies) report their material issues aligned with the Sustainable Development Goals. Based on these data, it is possible to say that companies refer to SDGs, but they are weak in establishing a concrete relationship between their goals, material issues and SDGs.
From this point of view, one of the areas open to improvement is the companies' use of the SDG as a strategic tool by integrating them more deeply while reporting their sustainability performance.
When the objectives most frequently mentioned in the sustainability reports are evaluated, economic growth and climate change stand out.
All companies that reference SDGs in their reports state that they contribute to the 8th goal, Decent Work and Economic Growth. Looking at these results, it is possible to see that the tension continues between companies' desire for economic growth and their ability to take actions that would bear new costs to combat the climate crisis. We see that the tension between these two issues is consistent with the data on the material topics and the most recurring issues in the analysis above.
Another prominent finding in the analysis is that gender equality is the most emphasized issue among socially oriented goals. 73% of companies that reference SDGs in their reports mention that they contribute to the Gender Equality target. This is not a coincidence, given that gender equality and diversity are becoming increasingly important indicators of company performance and settling on the agenda of investors. The table below summarizes which of the evaluated companies contribute most to the Sustainable Development Goals:
According to AccountAbility's 2019 Sustainability Trends Report, Smart Contributions to the Global Goals is the second of the 7 global sustainability trends of 2019(16). From the data shared above, it is possible to say that companies follow this trend. On the other hand, the report highlights the importance of companies setting measurable and trackable targets and reporting these data, while emphasizing that it is not enough for companies to contribute to the Global Goals by traditional means. Based on this warning, companies need to set concrete and measurable targets by aligning the SDGs with their material issues and report their contribution to these targets in a concrete way.
Today, sustainability reports and sustainability materialities come to the fore as a mirror of the transformation in the business world in Turkey, when the global system and investments are radically changing. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the understanding of sustainability in the business world by revealing sustainability materialities. With this aim in mind, a common materiality matrix was created by compiling the data of 32 companies in the Borsa Istanbul Sustainability Index in Turkey that report material sustainability issues with the materiality matrix, leaving out the sector-specific and insufficient number of issues. According to the study's findings, Financial performance was found to be the top material issue for businesses and their stakeholders. In addition, while 9 of the 11 highest material issues were in the field of economics and governance, none of the environmental issues was included in the highest material issues cluster. This result shows that the basis of companies' sustainability materialities is their current financial concerns. Following the financial performance, the 4 issues with the highest materiality in the matrix are Research & development and innovation, Digital transformation and new technologies, Risk, opportunity and crisis management as well as Occupational health and safety.
However, the most recurring issue in the materiality matrix of companies is Climate change and energy. In other words, the issue of climate change is on the agenda of all companies. However, the fact that the issue is repeated and kept on the agenda does not mean that it is regarded as a high materiality. Although this issue is on the agenda of most companies, it is not among the top material issues according to the aggregated results. Thus, it is possible to say that companies prioritize strong financial performance in any case while coping with the climate crisis, but they do not take sufficient action against it. At the same time, materiality analysis is an approach that shows which issues are prioritized by companies as well as their stakeholders and it allows them to compare their priorities. When 32 companies evaluated from this perspective are analysed, companies and stakeholders mostly agree on Risk, opportunity and crisis management, Occupational health and safety, and Employee and human rights issues. Customer loyalty and satisfaction and Digital transformation and new technologies are the issues that companies and stakeholders diverge the most. The research also examines how companies' Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) contribute to framing material issues. While the vast majority of companies include their contribution to the SDGs in their reports, they are still in the process of prioritizing them with a strategic framework. Decent Work and Economic Growth, and Climate Action are the most frequently cited objectives of companies in their reports. These two aims give a clue about which of the Sustainable Development Goals the business world will work towards in the future. However, we see that companies lag in giving weight to the climate issue, even though they include the Climate Action objective. This result re-questions the perception that the concept of sustainability is associated with environmental issues. Within a system where uncertainties reign, we observe that more and more publicly traded companies share their performances with the public, in parallel with the increasing need for companies to be predictable. We hope that this study on the sustainability materialities of the business world in the Turkish section of this trend will be beneficial in terms of following the trends in the long run.
1. Hale, Jon. Morningstar, Sustainable Fund Flows in 2019 Smash Previous Records, 2020.
2. World Business Council for Sustainable Development, Reporting matters Navigating the landscape: a path forward for sustainability reporting WBCSD 2019 Report, 2019.
3. Aras, G., Özsözgün Çalışkan, A., Esen E., Kutlu Furtuna, O. Türkiye’de Entegre Raporlama: Mevcut Durum, Paydaşların Algı ve Beklentileri, ACCA, CFGS, KPMG, 2019.
4. Sustainable Development Association, Reporting Matters 2019 Türkiye Raporu, 2019.
5. The evaluated sustainability reports are listed in the Additional data for the Methodology section.
6. The issues included in the analysis are listed in the Environmental, Social and Governance headings and the Additional data for Methodology section.
7. The issues included in the analysis are listed in the Environmental, Social and Governance headings and the Additional data for Methodology section.
8. Lavadenz, Gadir. Heinrich Böll Stiftung. A new Global Biodiversity Framework …for what and for whom?, June 11, 2019.
9. Global Economic Forum, The Global Risks Report 2020, 2019
10. The GlobeScan, The 2019 GlobeScan / SustainAbility Leaders Survey Report, 2019.
11. Global Economic Forum, The Global Risks Report 2020, 2019.
12. Ethical Corporation, The Responsible Business Trends Report 2019, 2019.
13. AccountAbility, 7 Sustainability Trends 2019, 2018.
14. GRI, Sustainability and Reporting Trends in 2025 Preparing for the Future, 2015.
15. Transparency International, 2019
16. AccountAbility, 7 Sustainability Trends 2019, 2018.
1. Ak Enerji 2018 Sustainability Report
2. Akbank 2018 Sustainability Report
3. Aksa Enerji 2018 Sustainability Report
4. Anadolu Efes 2018 Sustainability Report
5. Arçelik 2018 Sustainability Report
6. Aygaz 2018 Sustainability Report
7. Brisa 2018 Sustainability Report
8. Coca-Cola İçecek 2018 Sustainability Report
9. Çimsa 2018 Integrated Annual Report
10. Enerjisa Enerji 2018 Sustainability Report
11. Enka 2018 Sustainability Report
12. Ford Otosan 2018 Sustainability Report
13. Garanti BBVA 2018 Integrated Annual Report
14. Global Yatırım Holding 2018 Sustainability Report
15. Halkbank 2018 Sustainability Report
16. Kerevitaş 2018 Sustainability Report
17. Koç Holding 2018 Sustainability Report
18. Kordsa 2018 Sustainability Report
19. Logo Yazılım 2017 Sustainability Report
20. Migros 2018 Sustainability Report
21. Polisan 2018 Sustainability Report
22. Şekerbank 2017 Sustainability Report
23. Şok Marketler 2018 Sustainability Report
24. TAV 2016- 2017 Sustainability Report
25. Tekfen Holding 2018 Sustainability Report
26. TSKB 2018 Integrated Annual Report
27. Turkcell 2017 Sustainability Report
28. Türkiye İş Bankası 2018 Integrated Annual Report
29. Ülker 2018 Sustainability Report
30. VakıfBank 2018 Sustainability Report
31. Yapı Kredi 2018 Sustainability Report
32. Zorlu Enerji 2016-2017 Sustainability Report
Market Value (Billion TL)
— Climate change and energy
— Water management
— Waste management
— Air quality
— Equal opportunity and diversity
— Occupational health and safety
— Employee development and talent management
— Community investments
— Employee loyalty and satisfaction
— Local economy and employment
— Stakeholder communication and collaboration
— Employee and human rights
— Impact on local communities
— Responsible products and services
— Customer loyalty and satisfaction
— Work ethic and compliance
— Financial performance
— Supply chain management
— Risk, opportunity and crisis management
— Corporate governance
— Data privacy and information security
— Digital transformation and new technologies
— Research & development and innovation
— Corporate transparency
— Responsible raw material
— Customer health
— Responsible marketing
— Anti-corruption and bribery
This document contains certain forward-looking statements, such as probabilities and expectations, which are based on assumptions of companies' current data and may be affected by known or unknown risks and uncertainties. Actual results, performance outcomes or events may differ materially from those expressed or implied in such forward-looking statements. No forward-looking statements in this document purport to make any definitive or unbiased recommendations, nor do they constitute investment advice. S360 is under no obligation to update any information or forward-looking statements contained herein in any form and under any circumstances, with the exception of any statement to be made to fulfill its legal responsibilities.
All rights in this document and any material contained therein are reserved and cannot be sold, reproduced, distributed, transmitted or disclosed in any form, in whole or in part, without the written consent of S360 Sustainability and Communication Services.
Design: Tolgahan Akbulut, tolgahanakbulut.com