| Component | Comment | 2009 Response |
|---|---|---|
| Direct economic value generated | ||
| a) Revenues | Net sales plus revenues from financial investments and sales of assets | £41,324m |
| Economic value distributed | ||
| b) Operating costs | Payments to suppliers, non-strategic investments, royalties and facilitation payments | £7,427m |
| c) Employee wages and benefits | Total monetary outflows for employees (current payments, not future commitments) | £2,317m |
| d) Payments to providers of capital | All financial payments made to the providers of the organization’s capital | £2,634m |
| e) Payments to government | £27,629m | |
| f) Community investments | Voluntary contributions and investment of funds in the broader community (includes donations): statutory reporting criteria | £13.8m |
| LBG criteria | £14m | |
| Economic value retained | ||
| (calculated as Economic value generated less Economic value distributed) | Investments, equity release, etc. | £1,302.2m |
At the end of 2006 and following the publication of the Stern Report, we undertook an analysis of the potential risks posed by changes in climate over the next 10 to 20 years. Assisted by the consultancy company Environmental Resources Management (ERM), the study concentrated on key leaf operations, factories and global impact areas such as direct materials supply, business travel and freight. ERM identified 56 potential climate change risks, ranging from weather-related phenomena (changes in temperature, precipitation, extreme events) to regulation (levies on emissions) and established upper and lower boundaries for a potential future in 2020, based on available academic literature from sources such as the Stern Report and Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change publications.
The headline outcome from this study was that climate change could potentially bring physical impacts affecting our companies. The annual incremental costs of this could range from £50 million to £100 million. The study foresaw almost no regulatory impacts.
This information is in our 2009 Annual Report
.
This information is more relevant locally and we do not collate global data on it.
This information is more relevant locally and we do not collate global data on it.
We do not currently measure the proportion of spending on locally based suppliers as this would be an extremely complex calculation. We are a global business and have contracts with global suppliers, although the delivery and invoicing of goods and services often takes place locally, making it difficult to categorise spend as 'global' or 'local'. Our companies use the most appropriate supplier for goods and services, taking into account numerous factors such as meeting our minimum standards, capability and capacity to supply, quality, location, price, speed of delivery and various other criteria, including local regulations and social issues.
There is information on our approach to recruitment in the People and culture section of this Report.
This information is more relevant locally and we do not collate global data on it.
In some of our companies, research has been carried out to quantify the economic impact of tobacco growing in particular areas. While providing useful information at a local level, we have found that varying methodologies have meant that this information cannot be aggregated to provide a meaningful picture of our global economic impact.