1. Sustainability Index 2011 Dace Avena, Maija Kāle Institute for Corporate Sustainability & Responsibility

2. Governance of the Index Framework LBASLDDK Councils NationalPublicBusinessExperts Implementation Institute for Corporate Sustainability & Responsibility

3. Governance of the Index National Council Ministry of Economics Ministry of Welfare Ministry of Environment Protection and Regional Development Ministry of Finance Public Council Employers’ Confederation of Latvia (LDDK) Free Trade Union Confederation of Latvia Transparency International Latvia World Wide Fund for Nature in Latvia Experts Estonian, Latvian & Lithuanian Environment (ELLE) Hauska & Partner Latvian Green Dot Liepa, Skopi ņ a / BORENIUS Spring Valley TNS

4. Global know-how www.sustainability-index.com www.bitc.org.uk www.iso.org www.globalreporting.org

5. Why now?  Global focus on sustainability  Responsible companies in Latvia do not have evaluation of their practice due to lack of standards  No existent practice of reporting on CSR and sustainability  GRI G3 guidelines – unused opportunity, one single report in the Baltics  Currently focus on corporate image and financial results instead of corporate practice:  Advantages of largest marketing budgets  Practice may significantly differ from the publically available information  External drivers : investors, export markets, mother companies, EU  Lack of knowledge in all levels

6. Difference Sustainability IndexReputation Top What is being evaluated? Corporate practiceCorporate image Who is doing that? Self evaluation with external proof Experts, society What influences the result? Corporate process management, expertise of managers Publicity, history, industry Threshold Companies with tax liabilities or insolvency cannot participate Top 100 (overturn) + 50 (publicity) Consulting, education Free of chargeNot necessary Public appraisal Yes Practical application Development of competitiveness and sustainability, new KPIs Selection of suppliers, attraction of investors Personnel training Setting PR goals

7. Pilot 2010  Very high participation rate  139 registered  105 trained  70 full participants  Lack of internal demand: NGOs, government, media  Concept hard to explain briefly  Challenges:  capacity of experts  engagement of government

8. Motivation 2010 Recognition and advantages in the market Internationally understandable evaluation Education Self-appraisal

9. Results 2010

10. Development 2011  Content  Moving closer to GRI G3 structure  Extra criteria to incorporate other initiatives (Family-friendly enterprise; Best employer, etc.)  Capacity  More experts on board  Diversification of funding  Full-time coordinator  Development of education, training  Governance  Institute with transparent funding and control  Independent management

11. Content and format  Web - based self-evaluation questionnaire  References to the publically available information (Annual Reports, corporate website, etc.)  Data from public registers regarding tax liabilities, fines and insolvency  High security of data– the individual results will not be publically announced to avoid direct rivalry. Results will be provided in four ranks (platinum, gold, silver, bronze) according to the performance level of the company  Communication of best practice – case studies  Participation in the index, evaluation and consulting – free of charge

12. Sustainability index 2011 Strategy 15% Market Relations 20% Society 15% Labour Issues 25% Environment 25%

13. Time frame  Registration 17 February – 4 March sustainabilityindex.lv  Education 17 February – 25 March  Filling questionnaire 4 March – 25 March  Awards & Index published 12 May

14. Contacts Maija Kāle maija.kale@ilgtspejasindekss.lv t. +371 26114496 Twitter: @ilgtspeja sustainabilityindex.lv