{"id":286,"date":"2025-08-07T16:32:22","date_gmt":"2025-08-07T08:32:22","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/web.csh.org.tw\/web\/ESG\/?page_id=286"},"modified":"2026-08-10T09:09:41","modified_gmt":"2026-08-10T01:09:41","slug":"%e9%87%8d%e5%a4%a7%e4%b8%bb%e9%a1%8c%e7%ae%a1%e7%90%86%e6%96%b9%e9%87%9d","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/web.csh.org.tw\/web\/ESG-en\/?page_id=286","title":{"rendered":"Material Topic Identification Process"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

To ensure that this report focuses on the sustainability issues most relevant to Chung Shan Medical University Hospital\u2019s operations, healthcare services, value chain relationships, and stakeholder concerns, and to provide a basis for prioritised disclosure and management approaches, the report preparation process refers to the principles of GRI 3: Material Topics<\/strong> and establishes a structured material topic identification process.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The process is built on stakeholder identification and focuses on the actual and potential, positive and negative impacts that the Hospital\u2019s operations and healthcare services may have on the economy, environment, and society, including human rights. Through issue collection, consolidation of sustainability topics, stakeholder surveys and impact identification, impact significance assessment, and discussion, the Hospital determines the material topics to be prioritised for disclosure in this report.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As there were no significant changes this year in the Hospital\u2019s operating model, major stakeholder groups, scope of healthcare services, or sustainability context, a full stakeholder identification process and material topic questionnaire survey were not repeated.<\/strong> Instead, the Sustainability Development Management Committee reviewed the continued applicability of the previous year\u2019s materiality assessment results based on annual operations, requirements of competent authorities, internal management information, and feedback obtained through routine stakeholder engagement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Committee confirmed that the previous assessment results continue to reflect the Hospital\u2019s current sustainability management priorities and stakeholder concerns and therefore remain the basis for disclosure, management approach development, and performance tracking in this report.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

To provide a complete overview of the material topic identification methodology, the materiality analysis consists of five steps: stakeholder identification, consolidation of sustainability topics, stakeholder input collection and impact identification, assessment and discussion of impact significance, and confirmation and reporting of material topics.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Materiality Analysis Process<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Stage<\/strong><\/td>Step<\/strong><\/td>Description<\/strong><\/td>Outcome<\/strong><\/td><\/tr><\/thead>
Understanding the Sustainability Context<\/strong><\/td>Step 1: Stakeholder Identification<\/strong><\/td>Review the Hospital\u2019s operating and sustainability context and identify key stakeholders with reference to the AA1000 Stakeholder Engagement Standard (SES)<\/strong>. Stakeholders are quantitatively assessed according to five principles: dependency, responsibility, influence, diverse perspectives, and level of interest<\/strong>.<\/td>5 stakeholder groups<\/td><\/tr>
<\/td>Step 2: Consolidation of Sustainability Topics<\/strong><\/td>1. With reference to the GRI Standards, SASB Standards, the principles of the TCFD framework, Ministry of Health and Welfare hospital accreditation criteria, healthcare industry indicators, internal sustainability tasks, and outcomes from routine stakeholder engagement, the Hospital identified 50 relevant topics<\/strong> associated with the healthcare sector and its operations. 2. Responsible units reviewed the relevance of these topics to the Hospital\u2019s operations, healthcare services, and stakeholders, narrowing them to 20 priority sustainability topics<\/strong>. These were reviewed and confirmed by the Committee before the questionnaire was prepared.<\/td>50 relevant topics 20 priority sustainability topics<\/td><\/tr>
Identifying Actual and Potential Impacts<\/strong><\/td>Step 3: Stakeholder Input Collection and Impact Identification<\/strong><\/td>Online questionnaires were distributed to key stakeholders to assess the impact of Hospital operations on the external economy, environment, and society. At the same time, the Sustainability Development Management Committee and executives at Vice Superintendent level or above completed internal impact questionnaires, enabling two-way identification of internal and external impacts.<\/td>1,721 questionnaires: 7 senior executives 18 Sustainability Development Management Committee members 1,696 stakeholders<\/td><\/tr>
Assessing the Significance of Impacts<\/strong><\/td>Step 4: Impact Significance Assessment and Discussion<\/strong><\/td>1. Based on the two-way analysis, the Sustainability Development Management Committee comprehensively evaluated the positive impacts, negative impacts, stakeholder concern, and implications of each topic for Hospital operations and sustainable development. 2. Topics were prioritised based on the assessment results and discussed in Committee meetings to determine the material topics requiring priority disclosure. 3. Confirmed material topics were subsequently incorporated into management approaches, performance indicators, and action plans as the basis for sustainability management and disclosure.<\/td>5 material topics<\/td><\/tr>
Reporting Topics with Significant Impacts<\/strong><\/td>Step 5: Confirmation and Reporting of Material Topics<\/strong><\/td>Following approval by the highest governing body, the Hospital aligned the five material topics with the GRI Standards and AA1000 principles, developed corresponding management approaches, and continued to review their relevance in response to stakeholder expectations.<\/td>Management approaches for 5 material topics<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Note:<\/strong> A full stakeholder identification process and material topic questionnaire survey were not repeated this year. The outcomes shown in the table are derived from the previous year\u2019s comprehensive materiality assessment. Following review by the Sustainability Development Management Committee this year, the results were confirmed as still applicable to the disclosures and management approach planning in this report.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Materiality Analysis<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

(1) Basis of Analysis and Matrix Presentation<\/h4>\n\n\n\n

Building on the material topic identification process described above, the Hospital conducts materiality analysis and topic prioritisation based on stakeholder concern and the positive and negative internal and external impacts of each sustainability topic. The results serve as the basis for confirming material topics and determining subsequent disclosures.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This year, the existing two-axis analysis was refined into a Positive Impact Materiality Matrix<\/strong> and a Negative Impact Materiality Matrix<\/strong>, showing the relative positions of the 20 sustainability topics according to their internal and external impacts. Bubble size represents the level of stakeholder concern.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In both matrices, the horizontal axis represents external impact<\/strong>, while the vertical axis represents internal impact<\/strong>. Topics are colour-coded according to the three ESG dimensions: green for Environmental, orange for Social, and blue for Governance<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u25a0 Preliminary List of Sustainability Topics for Material Topic Identification<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Governance Topics<\/strong><\/td>Social Topics<\/strong><\/td>Environmental Topics<\/strong><\/td><\/tr><\/thead>
G1<\/strong> Risk Management and Emergency Response Mechanisms G2<\/strong> Healthcare Quality, Implementation and Evaluation G3<\/strong> Information Use, Security and Protection G4<\/strong> Procurement and Supply Chain Management G5<\/strong> Ethical Business Conduct G6<\/strong> Economic Performance and Hospital Management Strategy G7<\/strong> Pricing and Billing Transparency G8<\/strong> Medical Research and Innovation<\/td>S1<\/strong> Safe Environment and Facilities S2<\/strong> Patient-Centred Services S3<\/strong> Human Resource Management S4<\/strong> Medication Safety S5<\/strong> Anaesthesia and Surgery S6<\/strong> Occupational Safety and Employee Health S7<\/strong> Labour-Management Relations S8<\/strong> Laboratory, Pathology and Radiology Operations<\/td>E1<\/strong> Waste Management E2<\/strong> Greenhouse Gas Emissions Management E3<\/strong> Energy Management E4<\/strong> Water Resource Management<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

(2) Threshold Interpretation Principles<\/h4>\n\n\n\n

The interpretation of the matrices continues to follow the analytical logic used in the previous assessment period. A score of 3.4<\/strong> is used as the threshold for high significance in both the positive and negative impact matrices and serves as the primary basis for identifying material topics.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Scores below 1.8<\/strong> are shown as a low-significance reference range to assist interpretation of topic distribution; however, this is not<\/strong> a threshold for determining material topics.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The adjustments made this year relate only to the presentation of the analysis. The methodology, data basis, and assessment logic used to identify material topics remain unchanged.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

(3) Analysis Results and Confirmation of Material Topics<\/h4>\n\n\n\n

According to the materiality analysis, most topics in the Negative Impact Materiality Matrix<\/strong> fall within the low-significance range, and no topics reached the high-significance threshold. This indicates that the overall operational risks of the Hospital remain manageable.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Although \u201cRisk Management and Emergency Response Mechanisms\u201d<\/strong> and \u201cSafe Environment and Facilities\u201d<\/strong> were not classified as highly significant topics, both remain closely related to healthcare safety, environmental and facility management, and organisational resilience. The Hospital will therefore continue to monitor and strengthen these areas.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the Positive Impact Materiality Matrix<\/strong>, topics are generally distributed across the medium- to high-significance range. Among them, \u201cInformation Use, Security and Protection\u201d<\/strong> and \u201cMedication Safety\u201d<\/strong> reached high significance in both internal and external impact dimensions, demonstrating their critical value to healthcare quality, patient safety, and organisational trust.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Following comprehensive review by the Sustainability Development Management Committee of the matrix results, the previous material topic baseline, and the Hospital\u2019s current sustainability management priorities, and after reporting the results to the Management Meeting, the following five topics<\/strong> were confirmed as the Hospital\u2019s material sustainability topics for the year:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \n
  • Information Use, Security and Protection<\/strong><\/li>\n\n\n\n
  • Medication Safety<\/strong><\/li>\n\n\n\n
  • Patient-Centred Services<\/strong><\/li>\n\n\n\n
  • Human Resource Management<\/strong><\/li>\n\n\n\n
  • Greenhouse Gas Emissions Management<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

    For each material topic, the Hospital will subsequently disclose its policy commitments, management actions, performance outcomes, short-, medium-, and long-term targets, and corresponding standards. These disclosures will serve as the basis for advancing sustainability governance and monitoring management performance.<\/p>\n\n\n

    \n
    \"\"\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t<\/svg>\n\t\t<\/button><\/figure><\/div>\n\n
    \n
    \"\"\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t<\/svg>\n\t\t<\/button><\/figure><\/div>\n\n
    \n
    \"\"\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t<\/svg>\n\t\t<\/button><\/figure><\/div>\n\n
    \n
    \"\"\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t<\/svg>\n\t\t<\/button><\/figure><\/div>\n\n
    \n
    \"\"\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t<\/svg>\n\t\t<\/button><\/figure><\/div>\n\n
    \n
    \"\"\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t<\/svg>\n\t\t<\/button><\/figure><\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    To ensure that this report focuses on th<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"parent":76,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"ngg_post_thumbnail":0,"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-286","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/web.csh.org.tw\/web\/ESG-en\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/286"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/web.csh.org.tw\/web\/ESG-en\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/web.csh.org.tw\/web\/ESG-en\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/web.csh.org.tw\/web\/ESG-en\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/web.csh.org.tw\/web\/ESG-en\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=286"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/web.csh.org.tw\/web\/ESG-en\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/286\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1115,"href":"https:\/\/web.csh.org.tw\/web\/ESG-en\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/286\/revisions\/1115"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/web.csh.org.tw\/web\/ESG-en\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/76"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/web.csh.org.tw\/web\/ESG-en\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=286"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}