1.4 Activity: DBS Bank case study by Gia Instructor

Question 1

2025-07-09 06:02:32 UTC

DB's materiality assessment process helped in identifying and prioritising key ESG issues such as climate risk and financial inclusion by identifying and prioritising the most significant ESG areas relevant to its business and stakeholders. Identification of ESG areas was through engagement across a broad stakeholder base. Secondly, these ESG issues were prioritised based on impacts on the banks long term value creation and stakeholder concerns.

How did DBS Bank's materiality assessment process help in identifying and prioritising key ESG issues such as climate risk and financial inclusion?

2025-10-30 00:24:56 UTC

The materiality assessment helped to gain insight from various stakeholders to identify key issues as they relate to long term value creation and stakeholder concerns. This then resulted in the identification and prioritisation of these issues to be founded on key principles of value.

DBS Bank utilised frameworks like GRI and TCFD for its ESG reporting. Why is the use of standardised frameworks important for consistency and comparability in ESG reporting?

2025-10-30 00:27:00 UTC

It is important to use recognised frameworks such as GRI and TCFD for ESG reporting as it allows for transparency and accuracy in reporting. As a result, it allows for simple benchmarking against industry competitors and promotes enhanced stakeholder trust as key concerns can be highlighted and addressed.

2026-01-17 03:03:49 UTC

DBS's materiality assessment considers input from all businesses and support units (their 'front-and-back-offices'), feedback from key stakeholders, matters that significantly impact the execution of DBS' strategy, and matters that re key to value creation, and - importantly - DBS refines this approach on (at least) an annual basis. This approach allows for a clear and topical understanding of the most material matters, which - in the context of DBS' strategy - include climate risk and financial inclusion.

2026-01-17 03:08:05 UTC

The use of robust, well-understood and industry-recognised reporting frameworks allows stakeholders (and investors) to track the organisation’s progress over a series of reporting periods, and to more confidently compare performance year-on-year and against other peers/participants in the industry.

Q1 Response

2026-03-07 01:47:45 UTC

DBS used an agile and multi-layered approach as the foundation of their review of the previous year's assessment, showing a continuous improvement framework. They conducted a desktop study, reviewed external trends and current data, and harnessed various channels to engage with their key stakeholders. Importantly, they concluded that while the current matrix was 'broadly in line', not only did new information ned to be considered, but factors already identified needed to be reevaluated. It was clear that the opportunities to use technology would address the risk of the widening gap for the 'underbanked'. Using the same framework, DBS also identified that responsible financing inherently needed to address climate related physical and transition risk, and hence are committed to ambitious decarbonisation goals across the sector, which they will leverage their client based work as well.

Q2 response

2026-03-07 01:57:15 UTC

The benchmarking of data leads to the accuracy of ESG reporting. Without frameworks such as GRI and TCFD, addressing global, national and sector standards, reporting cannot address relevant risks, progress and improve outcomes and prove a company's consistence risk management. Standards also provide the common language for clear and accessible reporting, without which, a lack of confidence amongst key stakeholders will ensue.

Q2 response

2026-03-10 04:57:18 UTC

Standardised frameworks allow anyone to compare multiple companies and look at how they are doing on any standard

It is easy for a company to look at others in the same or similar industry and work out is there another option that I should be looking at? Have I thought my initiatives? Are they the best solution that has been found for this problem? But no two companies are exactly alike, geographical variations, variances in size or value will make 2 companies in the same industry hard to compare.

But when companies have are in wildly different industries this is exponentially more complicated – how would you compare a Grain Corp and agriculture company with locations around rural Australia with an e-commerce giant like Amazon?

The answer is a shared framework where each of them has to look at the framework and apply it to their business, using a shared language to ensure that the information can be compared across companies, industries and countries.

2026-03-19 07:53:34 UTC

DBS Bank’s materiality process involved engaging with a range of its stakeholders including its employees, customers, investors and regulators to participate in materiality assessments. The Bank also conducted desktop research of external trends and data analysis to gain insights. This process identifies the most significant ESG issues that are likely to impact the Bank’s ability to create long term value as a bank. From here three key issues of climate risk, financial inclusion and ethical governance were identified and prioritised.

2026-03-19 07:54:20 UTC

Consistency in reporting allows stakeholders to track progress and compare the performance of a company over time. It can also provide the opportunity to compare performance across companies in the same industry. Using an established and accepted method to report clear and accurate data, that has can be verified is essential for lifting the credibility of ESG reporting and for building trust and confidence with stakeholders.

Question 1 Response

2026-04-08 01:35:02 UTC

The materiality assessment was helped by engaging a wide range of stakeholders to gather diverse perspectives on the most significant ESG issues. This process identified priorities such as climate risk, financial inclusion, and ethical governance, ranked based on their impact on long-term value creation and stakeholder concerns. These insights were then directly integrated into DBS's ESG strategy and reporting, ensuring the bank's efforts were concentrated on the most critical areas rather than across less significant topics.

Question 2 Response

2026-04-08 01:35:19 UTC

Standardised frameworks are important for three main reasons:

1. They provide a common language and structure, enabling stakeholders to meaningfully compare ESG performance across different companies and industries.

2. They ensure consistency over time within an organisation, allowing stakeholders to track genuine progress year on year.

3. Adherence to recognised frameworks like GRI and TCFD enhances credibility and reduces the risk of greenwashing, since disclosures are held to an independently established standard.

This framework-aligned reporting directly contributed to stronger stakeholder trust and external recognition of its sustainability leadership.

Q1

2026-05-10 05:16:49 UTC

DBS conducted a structured, stakeholder driver process through engaging with employees, customer, investors, and regulators to surface ESG issues. By evaluating and prioritising these issues, DBS ensured that the most critical risks and opportunities were embedded into their strategy and subsequent reporting.

q1

2026-05-25 06:35:47 UTC

DBS conducted a thorough engagement with all stakeholders of the business, employees, customers, investors, to obtain the material issues and then could ensure this were included in the long term strategy and collation of data implemented for annual reporting of metrics and progress for sustainability.

q2

2026-05-25 06:38:20 UTC

By following a framework such as GRI or TCRD, these provide a trusted standard that can provide comparability and ensure transparency of sustainability reporting for investors viewing reports for investment decisions vs other companies.

Response to Question 1

2026-07-14 04:45:21 UTC

DBS's materiality assessment assisted in identifying key ESG issues as it involved consulting with stakeholder, employees, customers, investors and regulators. From this, they were able to identify that their key ESG issues included climate risk and financial inclusion and and ethical governance.

Response to Question 2

2026-07-14 04:46:27 UTC

Using standardised frameworks like GRI and TCFD allow for consistent reporting of ESG information. This makes reports easier to compare, improves transparency, and builds trust with stakeholders.

Response to Q2

2026-07-21 02:16:54 UTC

DBS Bank utilised frameworks like GRI and TCFD for its ESG reporting. Why is the use of standardised frameworks important for consistency and comparability in ESG reporting?

A consistent agreed standard of reporting is critical to for ESG to remain relevant, credible and valuable. Following agreed standards means that reporting is comparable, it uses a common language, it is credible and adds assurance for stakeholders (employees, investors, the public) that decisions as bing made to deliver positive outcomes. It means also that assessments can be made if regulations are being followed and compliance being met. By having agreed standards and frameworks in place, there can be a reduced burden on reporting as the number of frameworks are reduced, or there is interoperability btw them.

Response to Q2

2026-07-21 02:16:55 UTC

DBS Bank utilised frameworks like GRI and TCFD for its ESG reporting. Why is the use of standardised frameworks important for consistency and comparability in ESG reporting?

Response to Q1

2026-07-21 02:17:39 UTC

In the 2025 DBS Sustainability Report “2025 Staying the course for a better world” on page 109, the annual materiality assessment approach was outlined as including 4 steps.

Identifying the sustainability-related impacts, risks and opportunities relevant for DBS across its value chain via stakeholder engagement, industry research and global benchmarking, and alignment with reporting frameworks such as GRI and SASB.
Assessing and prioritising the ESG factors based on its impact on the economy, environment and people, and sustainability related risk and opportunity that could impact investors.
Validate the material ESG factors within DSB executive and the board

4. Integrate these within existing governance structures, risk management, strategic planning and stakeholder engagement.