Accessible CSR communication

This extract is mainly intended for investors because:

• it requires some specialised business/financial knowledge since it mentions, for example, the “European Commission’s taxonomy of sustainable finance”, “advisory services”, or a “restrictive credit and insurance approach” without explaining these concepts;
• the sentences tend to be quite long and complex;
• the connections inside the text are not always explicit, so the reader needs to have enough knowledge to “connect the dots”. For example, while sustainable finance is mentioned in the title, it is only explicitly mentioned in the third paragraph, so the reader is expected to know that all of the activities mentioned before the third paragraph (e.g. having a policy regarding which products are sold to which clients) are examples of sustainable finance;
• the text says that the current analysis is incomplete and that it will be improved in the following years. While this detail is of interest to investors who will closely follow the activities of the organisation in the long term, it is less relevant for customers;
• even though paragraphs are separated by white spaces, the text is not visually engaging.

This text is mainly intended for customers (who might have little or no business/financial knowledge) because:

• it explains complex concepts, such as “sustainable finance” and the “European action plan”;
• the sentences are still quite long, but the information is divided into blocks, which makes reading easier;
• the beginning and the end of each block are visually indicated by a grey line, as well as by different colours and different formatting;
• the main ideas (e.g. “Europe”, “European”, and “sustainable”) are repeated throughout, making the text cohesive and easy to follow;
• only essential information is given — readers who find it relevant and want to know more are redirected to another page.

Please note that it is up to you to decide whether the extract that you have just read is easy to read or not. Below we list some features that you might want to keep in mind in your decision.

Text features that might increase accessibility: the text uses a personal style (with the use of “we”); key concepts (such as “impact strategy”) are in the title and then repeated throughout the text making it cohesive; the text contains a bulleted list to indicate the key achievements.

Text features that might reduce accessibility: some sentences are quite long; despite the bold in the heading and in the bulleted list, the text is not very visually appealing; some words and phrases (e.g. “execute on” or “relates to”) could be replaced by simpler versions.

Please note that it is up to you to decide whether the extract that you have just read is easy to read or not. Below we list some features that you might want to keep in mind in your decision.

Text features that might increase accessibility: the text contains short and simple sentences, a strong visual component, and a personal tone with repetition of “we”.

Text features that might reduce accessibility: some sentences are so short that they are ambiguous. For example, when reading “We dig deeper”, readers might ask themselves “digging deeper into what”?

Please note that, as explained in the theory section, a text can be revised in many different ways. Below we show you our revised text, but your text doesn’t have to be identical. What matters is that your final revised text is easy to understand for the intended audience.

Taskforce on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures

Scenario analysis

In 2018, we used the scenario analysis of the Taskforce on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures to understand the impact of climate change on our business in 2030. We selected the year 2030 for an intermediate scenario analysis, before considering the year 2050.

As part of our scenario analysis, we studied how PLanTra MC would potentially respond to climate change with its business model, its investments, and its technologies. We also analysed the potential impact of climate change on our strategic and financial plans.

We considered two scenarios:

• an increase in temperature of up to 2 degrees Celsius; and
• an increase in temperature of 4 degrees Celsius.

In both these scenario, PlanTra MC would have to pay higher costs. In a two-degree situation, the majority of these costs would come from higher carbon prices or from climate-related policy interventions. In a four-degree scenario, PLanTra MC is likely to pay higher costs because of more frequent disruptions caused by extreme weather events, such as storms and hurricanes.

After this scenario analysis, at PLanTra MC we decided to:

• raise awareness about climate change inside our company;
• integrate climate change awareness into our business plans;
• encourage engagement with climate change in our training and mentoring programme; and
• identify and disclose new climate-related challenges.

We will repeat this scenario analysis when relevant.