Supply Chains of the Banks in Poland Based on EU Sustainability Reporting Standards: A Review of the Data-Driven Potential

Abstract

The disclosure of value chains—particularly supply chains—in the European Union (EU) banking sector represents an emerging area of sustainability research. Triggered by the 2024 enforcement of the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) and the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRSs), EU-listed banks are now required to report on value chain impacts as part of their sustainability disclosures. This regulatory shift has positioned value chain transparency as a key element in double materiality assessments. This study explores the data-driven potential within commercial banks’ supply chains, focusing on the Polish financial sector as a case study. The methodology combines a literature review with a case study analysis supported by a comparative analysis using the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) Materiality Navigator tool. The findings indicate that banks currently do not consider upstream supply chain issues—such as data security, privacy, or systemic risk—as material, despite their relevance. However, by extending materiality considerations to upstream processes, the analysis uncovers significant data-driven opportunities related to supply chain transparency. This research contributes early empirical insights into how banks might develop value chain disclosures to understand accountability and data-driven potential better, offering implications for both academic inquiry and practice.

1. Introduction

1.1. The Emergence of Sustainable Value Chains in the Banking Sector

The traditional perception of supply chains is closely tied to logistics management and process management, enabling the effective movement of goods from suppliers to consumers within manufacturing companies [1].

However, increasingly new approaches to supply chains are emerging in the context of the Sustainable Development Goals [2]. Among them are sustainable development in company systems [3], sustainable business models [4,5], and circular business models [6], which add a new dimension to supply chains by integrating a sustainability approach and addressing the concerns of new sectors. Supply chain management was also identified as one of the leading aspects of sustainable organisations, based on a bibliometric analysis of scientific articles from the Scopus Database [7]. The topic also emerged in other studies on sustainable organisation concepts among interactions [3,8].

Supply chains are most often analysed in manufacturing companies, leaving considerable uncertainty about the approaches that should be taken concerning other industries, such as banks.

Banks have not widely disclosed their value and supply chains and are therefore not the subject of scientific research, which typically focuses on supply chains within the industry, in particular. However, the implementation of mandatory sustainable reporting in the EU, with sustainable value chains as an essential component of the materiality assessment, opens up a new area of research on banks’ supply chains. The need for security, agility, and resilience in banking processes demands an understanding of the sustainable supply chain in the context of data-driven tools, making it an intriguing subject for further research.

In the context of sustainable reporting and the prospect of implementing the Omnibus package in the EU, which is likely to limit the scope of reporting, banks will certainly remain among the most critical groups of entities subject to sustainability reporting. Therefore, supply chain issues are important in this group of entities.

The banking sector’s involvement in supply chains is due to the financial sector’s active implementation of modern solutions based on data and AI, which, however, is poorly described in the literature in this context. Therefore, the main research context of the value chain concerning banks is the financing of value chains.

1.2. Organisation of the Paper

In the study, we use the analysis of regulatory documents on reporting issues to learn the principles of supply chain analysis. The actual research presents the analysis of the sustainability reports of the largest banks in Poland, to systematise data about the consistency of the assessment of supply chains by individual entities. Reporting for 2024 is the first reporting under the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) in the EU and European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS) [9].

It is also the first opportunity to compare value chains in specific sectors. Therefore, the analysis of the banking sector, which has not been the subject of research in the context of supply chains so far, is interesting, especially considering the issues of process security and data processing. When searching for research on supply chains in banking, the majority of findings focus on supply chain finance.

Unlike traditional analyses that predominantly focus on manufacturing industries, this study addresses a significant gap in the literature regarding the banking sector’s supply chains, which have been under-researched. By examining how Polish banks perceive and report their value chains, the study highlights the critical role of both upstream and downstream processes in fostering sustainability.

Therefore, the paper is structured as illustrated in

Table 1. Research framework.

Phase	Step	Tool	Outcome	Part of the Paper
Defining and designing	1. Identifying the problem	Literature review, the sector’s documents review	Research aim	Section 1.1 and Section 1.2.
	2. Building theory	Bibliometric data analysis based on Scopus Database, VOSViewer 1.6.20, and literature review	Literature review summary	Section 2.1, Section 2.2, Section 2.3, Section 2.4 and Section 2.5.
Preparing, collecting	3a. Describing the method	Literature review	Explanation of the research scope (Table 2)	Section 3.1, Section 3.2 and Section 3.3.
	3b. Designing data collection and analysis	Analysis of the sector’s document content	Case studies selection and description (Table 3)	Section 3.4.
Analysing and concluding	4. Preparing results	Comparative analysis	Identification of Polish banks’ supply chains (Table 4)	Section 4.1.
	5. Conducting analysis	Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) Materiality Navigator Tool	Filled research report (Tables 5 and 6)	Section 4.2.
	6. Concluding the research	Research report template	Summarising and limitations	Section 5.

Source: own elaboration.

. This study aims to examine the potential for data-driven sustainable supply chains in the banking sector. The research methodology underlying this paper consists of two parts: a desk research component based on a complex literature review and a comparative study based on an empirical case study of significant commercial banks in Poland, supported by a comparative analysis using the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) Materiality Navigator Tool.

2. Literature Review

2.1. Defining the Scope of the Literature Review Based on Bibliometric Data Analysis

A search in literature databases of value chains, including supply chains in financial institutions (using the terms ‘banking sector’ and other related to banks), did not bring the expected results, as the dominant publications concerned the financing of supply chains or even food banks. Supply chains in the banking sector have been poorly evidenced in the literature. In addition, the content of individual publications directly related to supply chains that could be found did not provide satisfactory insights for further analysis. Therefore, it was decided to frame the theory, looking for key topics in the area of ‘supply chains’ directly in connection with ‘data-driven’, and then refer to the banking sector.

A complex bibliometric data analysis for a further literature review was performed based on the SCOPUS database (limiting the subject areas to business management and accounting, economics, econometrics, and finance within a time frame of the last 10 years). A data-driven supply chain Scopus-based literature review, supported by the VOSviewer tool, was conducted to search for further connections between supply chains in the banking sector. The process was diligent, influenced by the PRISMA 2020 guidelines.

A search of the keywords ‘data-driven’ and ‘supply chain’ in the SCOPUS database yielded 514 articles based on the relevance of their titles, keywords, and abstracts (see Figure 1). These articles were then analysed using VOSviewer to identify topics based on word co-occurrence (Figure 2). The total strength of the co-occurrence links was generated via the software to visualise the bibliographic coupling density. All keywords that were identified during the analysis were taken into consideration.

The topics were identified based on bibliometric data analysis of the co-occurrence and word clusters retrieved from the bibliographic database file. The co-occurrence type of analysis and all-keywords unit of analysis with the complete counting method were chosen. The threshold was selected with a minimum number of co-occurrences of 5 keywords and a total of 100 keywords limit. In the analysis process, 7 clusters were obtained. Using the density visualisation, the following topics (excluding supply chain and data-driven) were derived: big data, decision making, information management, data analytics, and machine learning. Those aspects can be included in the supply chain analysis of further commercial banks.

2.2. Digitalisation of the Banking Sector

Studies on the efficiency of digitalisation in banks are inconsistent, yielding contradictory results. Ayadi et al. find that digitalisation positively influences bank efficiency—particularly profit efficiency—up to an optimal level, beyond which returns diminish, with the effect significantly moderated by business models, as retail-oriented banks gain more than market-oriented ones [10].

The need to adapt to the extraordinary pace of digital transformation is a challenge for banking sector players. Most commonly, the digital transformation process consists of three stages (Figure 3).

During the transformation process, banks must consider four key areas, which include, apart from technology and innovation, strategy and organisation, people and culture, and value proposition [11]. Most of the research prioritises fintech and digitalisation as driving forces of the sector’s transformation. Fintech is conceptualised as a transformative force challenging traditional banking practices, delineating four strategic responses—platform integration, enhanced customer experience, banking-as-a-service (BaaS), and the establishment of digital trust—while accentuating the crucial significance of trust in the effective execution of digital banking paradigms [13]. Digital transformation is instrumental in mitigating systemic risk within banking frameworks, with larger banking entities disproportionately benefiting from economies of scale and network effects. Concurrently, a robust technological infrastructure further augments cost efficiency and facilitates risk mitigation [14].

2.3. Sustainable Value Chains vs. Value Chains

The concept of the value chain organises the process of achieving the goal (or goals) coherently and universally, allowing one to understand the transition from inputs to effects. The value chain in sustainable development refers to the connection of various entities from which the company buys resources and services (the so-called upstream) and entities with which the company has a relationship after the sale of products (the so-called downstream). The sustainability value chain provides a strategic roadmap for achieving both short-term and long-term financial results [12].

Downstream processes focus on a broad spectrum of data reflecting particular stakeholder groups, especially customers. In this context, there is a need to acquire new data sets that enable a different dimension of customer segmentation. It can be based, for instance, on their carbon footprint, transition away from fossil fuels, or the implementation of sustainable urban mobility initiatives within their organisations. The latter may include, among others, optimal transport choices that are less car-dependent, optimal car use (i.e., car-sharing and car-pooling), as well as education and awareness campaigns that promote cycling and the use of public transportation [15].

A sustainable supply chain encompasses strategies and operations that benefit both the environment and people, while also considering profitability [16]. As Siems et al. noted, all three dimensions of sustainability (environmental, economic, and social) play a pivotal role in meeting the requirements of customers, end-users, and other stakeholders. Therefore, sustainable supply chains integrate diverse stakeholders and their roles in the sustainable development of organisations as valuable drivers of sustainability [17].

Sustainable supply chain management (SSCM) provides a comprehensive framework for sustainably managing supply chains, taking into account diverse stakeholder demands [18]. SSCM integrates sustainability considerations with business systems that manage material, information, and capital flows in procurement and production [18]. SSCM manages the flow of goods, information, and capital between suppliers, the focal company, customers, and end-users [19]. It can be conceptualised throughout the entire lifecycle, considering the context of economic and environmental pressures. SSCM integrates business models that engage stakeholders, shifting the mindset from shareholders to stakeholders [18].

A narrower approach, known as green supply management, which emerges alongside other trends in sustainable organisations [20], focuses on environmental effects and responsibility [16,21]. Green supply chain management is designed to comply with regulations for environmental protection purposes [22]. This approach gained prominence as an effective management tool in manufacturing in the 1990s, particularly with the introduction of green procurement [21]. Leading green supply chain management processes encompass procurement, design, manufacturing, and distribution [21].

Sustainable supply chains are also considered integral to sustainable business models [19].

Circular supply chains combine an innovative approach with an economic concept, where collaboration and openness between the organisation network and the value chain are crucial [23]. However, analysis of studies on supply chain management considerations is focused on the new product market [24]. The purpose of the circular supply chains is to reorganise (for example, close, expand, dematerialise) the loops accompanying the circular approach [23,25,26]. Geissdoerfer et al. emphasise [26] the coexistence of economic and environmental contexts in the concept of sustainable supply chains. Circular supply chains are associated with management that aligns with value for stakeholders across the entire life cycle of the company [18].

Sustainable supply chains focus on addressing sustainable challenges, achieving sustainable development goals as a new competitive approach, and reshaping company processes toward sustainable development [2].

In many older studies, the supply chain and its management have been referred to as integral to manufacturing [27]. Manufacturing processes and industrial supply chains, which are mainly analysed, are blamed for being the most damaging [28]. A circular approach can contribute to the improvement of sustainable supply chains. An analysis conducted on the automotive industry in Indonesia revealed that waste management and the design of materials, parts, and products within a circular economy model are of the most significant importance [29]. As a result of strategic decisions related to the European Union’s climate policy, relations with the manufacturing sector are currently taking on a new dimension. Banks are focusing on assessing the risks of climate and energy transition, which particularly affects traditional industrial sectors and electricity generation.

Thus, sustainability is viewed here as a complex and integrated set of environmentally focused practices, such as those in the packaging and transportation processes, for example, through shipping. Upstream chains are perceived as crucial in the focal company’s impacts [19].

Among the many discussions on creating sustainable value through the supply chain, some suggest it is easier to demonstrate value creation for customers in downstream processes related to their product usage experience, compared to intangible processes within the upstream [19]. However, in many industries, with the increase in the number of suppliers and offshored processes by a focal company, it is upstream processes that are crucial [30]. Reference can therefore be made to global supply chains and cross-border supply chain management [28]. Sustainable supply chains require data-driven sustainable supply networks, the development of sustainable procurement, and new supply chain performance metrics.

Many contexts are underlined by supply chains, also in their sustainable dimension. One of the aspects is flexibility [2,28]. Flexibility of supply chains can be perceived in terms of levels of service, volume, sourcing, delivery, and product customisation. Additionally, the value of transparency in reporting supply chains is underscored in many business considerations [31].

2.4. Stakeholders in the Sustainable Supply Chain

According to general Freeman stakeholder theory, organisations influence and are influenced by individuals or groups [17]. Value creation is closely tied to relationships within the supply chain [19]. In supply chains, stakeholders play at least four roles, respectively: change trigger, new standards support, organisation actors’ facilitator, transformation leader [17]. Stakeholders ensure the implementation of sustainable practices in supply chains. While codes of conduct and other soft laws support sustainable supply chain practices, stakeholders can also play a role in supporting fair supplier selection and help identify sustainability risks [17]. The significance of different stakeholders is underlined in the concept of circular sustainable chain management [32,33].

Based on a study Siems et al. [17], the authors differentiate stakeholders playing roles in supply chains:

• upstream stakeholders: suppliers;
• the focal company: shareholders, top management, employees;
• downstream stakeholders: customers, end users, retailers;
• market stakeholders: financial intermediaries, unions, competitors, industry association;
• societal stakeholders: NGOs, research institutes, higher education institutions (HEIs), media, governmental entities.

Figure 3 can also be interpreted through the lens of stakeholders representing four key areas. Marculetiu et al. [34] synthesise the role of different pressure types that stakeholders can exercise to impact sustainable supply chains, assessing which actions are most effective [35]. It encourages more proactive stakeholder engagement for better sustainability performance, including supply chain management.

There are also discussions on the role of indirect stakeholders along the supply chain in creating value and how the supply chain impacts the monetary distribution of effects [13].

2.5. Summary of Literature Review

Globalisation has accelerated the development of complex supply chains that are not resilient to disruptions of an external origin. The risk of transferring problems from a single supplier to the entire supply chain can lead to a rapid collapse of the network, even in the early stages of disruptions [36]. On the other hand, the development of digital technologies, such as the Internet of Things and big data analytics, has a transformative impact on all sectors of the economy [37]. These technologies, together with cyber-physical systems (CPS), constitute the key components of data-driven technologies within Industry 4.0 [38].

Business disruptions resulting from external factors (e.g., COVID-19, interstate conflicts, involuntary migrations, and climate change) can be mitigated using analytical tools based on advanced technologies. In the case of the service sector, it means re-engineering stakeholders’ supply chains by integrating advanced technologies such as predictive analytics, artificial intelligence (AI), and virtualisation [39]. The increasing involvement of modern technologies shortens the time horizon of strategies but also the response time to unforeseen events.

To sum up, the emergence of big data, artificial intelligence, and cloud computing poses both opportunities and challenges for the banking sector. A complex review of the Web of Science and Scopus literature reveals that data innovations enhance risk management, fraud detection, customer analysis, and decision-making processes. They also introduce the complexity associated with data management, a shortage of appropriately trained staff, high implementation costs, and increasing cybersecurity risks. Security has been identified as a key concern in data-driven banking [14,40].

The interconnectedness of upstream and downstream entities in achieving sustainability goals is crucial in the context of supply chains. Globalisation has led to the development of complex supply chains that are vulnerable to disruptions. On the other hand, advancements in digital technologies present both opportunities and challenges, particularly in risk management and decision-making in the banking sector. Green supply chain management can be seen as a narrower focus on environmental responsibility and compliance, alongside the emergence of circular supply chains that prioritise collaboration and stakeholder value across the entire lifecycle. Sustainable supply chain management (SSCM) is an extension of a holistic approach that integrates sustainability with business systems. At the same time, flexibility and transparency are identified as key aspects of effective supply chains. The significant influence of stakeholders on the creation and operation of value chains is also revealed. Drawing on stakeholder theory, supply chains involve a diverse range of participants, including upstream suppliers, focal firms (which include shareholders, management, and employees), downstream customers and retailers, market actors (such as financial institutions, labor unions, and competitors), and societal actors (including NGOs, government agencies, media, and academic institutions).

Stakeholders act as catalysts for change, process enablers, standard bearers, and leaders in promoting sustainable practices. Active stakeholder engagement is essential for the successful implementation of sustainable supply chain management, as it significantly influences both value creation and risk mitigation.

3. Background and Methodology

3.1. Methodology

The research adopts a comparative analysis methodology to extract the data-driven potential of supply chains in the banking sector. The first stage of the analysis involves conducting a complex literature review (Figure 1). The second stage includes selecting the banks in Poland under precise selection criteria. The assumption was to compare banks that have a significant impact on the economy, as measured by their contribution to GDP. It was assumed that the largest banks would be trend-setters in supply chain management. Given the revenue and profitability of banks, supply chain management will be a crucial issue for both operational and strategic management.

The primary basis for the analysis is the European Sustainability Reporting Standards, which operationalise the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD). The investigation is focused on sustainability reports from the assessed banks operating in Poland. The study involved comparing the disclosures in the Management Board’s reports, which are part of the annual financial reporting. According to the implementation of the CSRD into Polish accounting law, sustainability reporting is part of the Management Boards’ reports, which may be titled: Report on Activities, Management Board’s Report on Activities, or Management Board Report on Operations.

The study thoroughly investigated the banks’ supply chains, as reflected in their sustainability reports. Additionally, the SASB Materiality Finder tool was utilised for comparison and to highlight potential discrepancies in sustainability reporting practices. This analysis showcased the application and compatibility of banks in terms of their operations.

3.2. Value Chains in International Sustainability Reporting Standards

The concept of a value chain is underlined in international reporting standards, i.e., OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) Guidelines [40], United Nations Principles on Business and Human Rights, and sustainability reporting standards, such as GRI (Global Reporting Initiative) Standards (GRI 1: Foundation, GRI 2: General Disclosures, GRI 3: Material Topics (https://www.globalreporting.org/standards/download-the-standards/, accessed on 22 May 2025) (Consolidated Set of the GRI Standards), or IFRS (International Financial Reporting Standards).

The Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) supports companies in increasing the transparency of their business activities, communicating their contribution to sustainable development, and taking responsibility for their influence. GRI defines the value chain as the scope of activities of an entity, as well as entities operating upstream in the supply chain to produce the entity’s products or services, and encompassing activities until the end of the product’s life (end-of-use) and after its useful life has ended.

GRI refers to an enterprise’s business relationships, encompassing business partners, those outside the primary category, and other enterprises connected by operations, products, or services. The value chain is used to assess the company’s process impact. According to the GRI, two essential elements of the value chain are crucial: the early stage of the chain (“upstream”), which includes resources, processes, or entities at the input (e.g., resources used and recipients), and the downstream stage. Upstream processes refer to the initial phase of the product life cycle. They can involve the sourcing of materials and resources for production. Downstream processes concern the final stages of a product’s life and are related to responsibility for the product after its useful life or use. Such methods include disposal, repair, or waste management.

In turn, the IFRS Foundation develops high-quality standards that ensure transparency, accountability, and efficiency in capital markets. IFRS has introduced the IFRS Accounting Standards, which were created by the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB), and are respected by more than 140 jurisdictions. In turn, for sustainable development, the IFRS Foundation established the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB) in 2021. The ISSB develops sustainable reporting standards under IFRS (International Financial Reporting Standards) (Sustainability Disclosure Standards).

According to IFRS S1 [41], a value chain is a system of resources and relationships that an entity uses to conduct its activities. The value chain comprises interactions, mutual relationships, and resources utilised to produce products or services. The value chain encompasses the entire process, from conception to production, delivery, consumption, and even post-consumption and end-of-life procedures. An individual is dependent on and influences resources and business relationships simultaneously. Such dependency generates or may generate sustainability risks and opportunities due to changes within the value chain [41]. These changes may concern [41]:

• the value chain of an entity or project;
• the entity’s business model, activities, or corporate structure;
• sensitivity to sustainability risks and opportunities (for example, changes in legal regulations).

The value chain may also include relationships with entities in which the central entity has made investments, resulting in a relationship established under International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS), such as associates, joint contractual arrangements, joint operations, or joint control.

Following their integration into the IFRS Foundation via the Value Reporting Foundation in 2021, the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) Standards have become a key component of the International Sustainability Standards Board’s (ISSB) efforts to establish a global baseline for sustainability-related financial disclosures. One of the core instruments supporting the application of SASB’s sustainability reporting is the SASB Materiality Finder. This publicly accessible and interactive tool explores sustainability topics most likely to impact a company’s value within a given industry. For financial institutions, such as commercial banks, the Materiality Finder identifies high-priority ESG topics—data security, systemic risk management, and financial inclusion—as materially significant based on evidence of investor interest and potential financial impact. The SASB Materiality Finder facilitates a more rigorous and consistent approach to identifying and disclosing sustainability issues that are relevant to both organisational strategy and capital market stakeholders. It serves as a technical tool for preparing sustainability reports and bridges qualitative judgment with sustainability reporting within 77 industries (

Table 2. Material sustainability topics and relevant issues in commercial banks based on the SASB Materiality Finder tool.

Topics	Relevant Issues
Environment	Not relevant
Social Capital	Data Security Access and Affordability
Human Capital	Not Relevant
Business Model and Innovation	Product Design and Lifecycle Management
Leadership and Governance	Business Ethics Systemic Risk Management

Source: SASB Materiality Finder tool.

).

Assessing sustainable value chains across complex corporate structures and groups requires a thorough approach, including good stakeholder identification, materiality assessment, and regulatory analysis. Therefore, value chains are of interest to advisory (consulting) companies.

3.3. Supply Chains in European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRSs)

A single concept of the value chain has been adopted, along with specific terms and concepts, in EU documents, reports, and economic practice. The idea of the value chain is distinguished in various reporting standards. It is also strongly emphasised in the CSRD [42] and the European ESRSs [9], which refer to corporate responsibility throughout the entire value chain.

The implementation document for the European Sustainable Reporting Standards has been prepared by the European Financial Reporting Advisory Group (EFRAG) on behalf of the European Union. In one of the implementation guidance documents prepared by EFRAG, IG 2 [42], the value chain refers to the complete range of activities, resources, and business relationships used by a company to produce products or services from concept to delivery, consumption, and end-of-life. The IG2 explanatory notes from the ESRS use the term ‘value chain’ in the singular everywhere; however, it is assumed that a particular company may operate across multiple value chains. The upstream and downstream stages in the value chain, including the scope of responsibility assumed by the company, fundamentally determine the assessment of the company’s impact and its ability to create sustainable value.

When considering the structure and scope of the value chain, aspects such as waste reduction, circularity (within the context of a circular economy), and supplier management will be included as generators of sustainable value creation.

Assessing the value chain becomes more complicated in the case of joint ventures. The balanced report should be consistent with the financial statements. However, not all related parties are included in the consolidated financial statements based on materiality, and they may have sustainability issues that are considered tangible and should be included in the sustainability statement.

The inclusion of disclosures in the value chain and an impact assessment also vary in extent, depending on the case and, in particular, whether the subject of the dependency involves operational control, a transaction, or a purely financial investment.

Similarly, if certain internal transactions are excluded from the consolidated financial statements, they should be included in the balance sheets if they were assessed as material.

The supply chain is a subset of the value chain. It refers specifically to the upstream actors and processes involved in providing products, raw materials, components, or services used in the development of an undertaking’s products or services. Depending on the position in the value chain, an undertaking’s supply chain can be part of the downstream value chain of another undertaking. According to the Implementation Guidance EFRAG IG 2 Value Chain, the main distinctions of the supply chain are that it focuses primarily on upstream activities. They include suppliers and providers and encompass sourcing, manufacturing, or service delivery as contributors to the production of products or services. Upstream actors are closer to the production staff and supply inputs to the process.

ESRSs indicate that the basis for materiality in the case of impacts in the value chain consists of four parameters: scale, range, and reversibility, which determine the severity of the impact, as well as the probability of occurrence. Those parameters are the subject of a strong critique due to incorrect substantive assumptions.

3.4. Supply Chains Analysis Based on the Sustainability Reports of the Polish Banks

The net balance sheet total of the banking sector in Poland (excluding the National Bank of Poland) amounted to PLN 3.4 trillion in 2024, more than double the amount in 2016 [43]. Nevertheless, the ratio of banking sector assets to GDP stood at 92.2%, and over the past ten years, it ranged between 87.4% and 100.5%. The ratio of Polish banking sector assets to GDP remained one of the lowest in the EU.

The net result of the banking sector in Poland in 2024 amounted to PLN 42,424 million; however, it is worth noting that this was achieved under conditions of high interest rates [43].

Although it is a sustainability perspective, it can also be applied to value chain processes in sustainability reporting and may be relevant to specific types of operations and institutions. Examples of such atypical institutions include banks and their operations, as disclosed in sustainability reports.

The research covered the seven most critical commercial banks operating in Poland: Bank Polska Kasa Opieki S.A. (PKO BP), Pank Pekao S.A. (PEKAO), mBank S.A. (mBank), Santander Bank Polska S.A. (Santander), BNP Paribas Bank Polska S.A. (BNP Paribas), ING Bank Śląski S.A. (ING), and Bank Millennium S.A. (Millennium). The criterion for selecting banks is a market share in the banking sector of above 4%, which corresponds to total assets exceeding PLN 100 billion. The share of banks in the Polish GDP is lower than the EU average. It means that the Polish banking sector is smaller in terms of the country’s economy compared to many other EU countries.

All the analysed banks are joint-stock companies listed on the Warsaw Stock Exchange. Therefore, they are subject to additional requirements of the capital market, including the best practices of companies listed on the Warsaw Stock Exchange (WSE). Their basic parameters are presented in

Table 3. Selected parameters of the banks under investigation in 2024.

Bank	Description	Share in the Banking Sector [%]	Net Profit [m PLN]	ROE [%]	TCR [%]	Employees
PKO BP	A universal bank that provides services to natural and legal persons, as well as other domestic and foreign entities. PKO BP S.A. is the largest commercial bank in Poland.	15.3	9304	19.2	18.6	21,803
PEKAO	A universal commercial bank offering a full range of banking services to both individual and institutional clients, operating primarily in Poland. Since 2017, Bank Pekao S.A. has been part of PZU S.A. Capital Group, the largest financial institution in Central and Eastern Europe.	10.08	6425	21.7	18.7	12,626
mBank	The bank began operations in 1986, initially focusing on the corporate client segment. From the outset, its development was based on organic growth and later expanded to include the individual client segment. The bank is replicating its digital retail banking model in other countries.	7.42	2243	14.8	15.9	7569
Santander	The largest privately owned bank in Poland. It has one of the largest networks of branches and partners, providing services through electronic access channels.	9.17	5213	20.4	17.7	11,396
BNP Paribas	A universal bank that is part of an international banking group, offering a full range of products for Polish and international corporations, the SME segment, farmers, and individual clients. It is present in local communities but operates on a global scale. The bank holds a leading position in the agri-food, consumer, large enterprise, and international corporate sectors.	5.05	2358	16.9	17.2	7512
ING	A universal bank serving both retail clients and business entities. The primary communication channel, with over 5 million customers, is the Internet, with mobile banking playing an increasingly important role. The bank is growing organically.	7.85	4369	20.4	14.9	7505
Millenium	Established in 1989 as one of the first Polish banks with private capital. In 1998, the bank began developing a network of retail branches under the Millennium brand in cooperation with Banco Commercial Portugues.	4.19	643	9.8	18	6700

Source: self-study based on the banks’ reports. ROE—return on equity, TCR—total capital ratio.

.

The study’s subject was disclosures in the area of the value chain based on sustainability reports disclosed for 2024, which were reported for the first time under CSRD regulations and ESRSs.

The study incorporates sustainability statements into the 2024 management report. Banks were among the first institutions to disclose their statements on the market, starting from February 2025. These reports were prepared for the first time in response to the implementation of the CSRD into local regulations. In Poland, these provisions have been implemented in the Accounting Act [44].

For the first time, the statement for 2024 has been prepared under the requirements of the European Sustainability Standards (EU ESRSs). In previous years, the Pekao Group published a non-financial report based on the GRI Standards [45].

Although the sustainability reports show the significance of the banks’ impact related to distribution downstream processes (Category 15 of Scope 3 of the Green House Gas Protocol), due to specific features for these institutions, supply processes and supply chain management in the upstream processes of the value chain are also an interesting area of research.

4. Results and Discussion

4.1. Results

The banks’ supply chains were disclosed as part of the value chains in annual financial statements. According to the CSRD, sustainability disclosures are an integral part of the management board reports, which are disclosed in a separate unit known as the sustainability statement or sustainability reporting. For desk research, consolidated statements were analysed. According to the ESRSs, the value chains of the banks disclosed in the sustainability statement, strategy, business model, and value chain sections are referred to as SBM-1. Recent dynamic changes in regulations have prompted banks to plan their strategy for very short periods. In all banks, the cut-off period for the end of the strategy is 2024 or 2025.

Based on the ESRSs, banks distinguish between upstream processes related to supplies, their operations, and downstream processes related to service recipients in their value chains (

Table 4. Selected Polish banks’ supply chains.

Bank	Supply Chains—Upstream Processes and Actors	Own Operations and Activities	Downstream Processes and Actors (Recipients)
PKO BP	Energy IT equipment (e.g., servers, computers, licenses) IT services (e.g., banking applications, insurance applications) Car fleet Cash handling equipment Visa and Mastercard clearing services Office equipment (e.g., furniture)	Banking Insurance Leasing Factoring Investment funds Other (e.g., property management)	Distribution channels—agencies and intermediaries Clients Investments—direct investments, private and business clients’ investments Waste and utilisation of products
Pekao S.A.	Financial market infrastructure Sources of capital and financing Regulators and government entities Communication service providers (e.g., data centers) Technology and equipment suppliers Physical infrastructure providers Utility providers (e.g., energy) Professional services Human resources	Private banking and investment products Corporate banking Retail banking Corporate banking, markets, and investment banking Technology and operations Human resources Finance Risk management Strategy	Customers (private, business, public) Business partners Intermediaries and distributors Marketing and advertising channels Retail networks and branches Digital platforms Broader operational bank’s environment
mBank	• Suppliers and service providers: ✓ Infrastructure (payment systems, internet access, logistics) ✓ Service providers and suppliers for business operations ✓ Data providers and advisors ✓ IT Service Providers ✓ Basic construction services ✓ Certifications in inclusive banking ✓ ATM networks • Product suppliers • Investors • Environment	Workforce in all group facilities: all employees in group facilities in Poland, Czech Republic, and Slovakia and persons working for mBank Group in regimes other than employment agreements, the Workers’ Council Corporate Social Responsibility activities (The mFundacja, Painting fund, social campaigns on cybersecurity, WOŚP—the great orchestra for Christmas charity) Business partners with professional organisations Environment	Financed clients: retail banking, corporates, and investment banking Representatives of sales services: mBank Group branches, mKiosks, financial centres, and agency services points of mFinance Customer service workforce (after-sales activities): mBank Group branches, contact centre, mobile application, and online service Communities Environment
Santander	Financial and supervisory institutions Regulators Providers of products and services (providers of technology, services, and infrastructure supporting banking activities)	Group’s assets Departments and functions in the headquarters	Retail banking Consumer Corporate and investment banking Business and corporate banking Associated companies Points of sale Payments and withdrawals from ATMs
BNP Paribas	Suppliers of services and products to the group (e.g., energy suppliers, electronic equipment, office supplies, and all kinds of services, including consultancy). Business partners	Group’s business activities: all the products and services of the bank and group companies for customers Group’s operations: the management of business activities, administration of buildings, equipment, and services that the group uses to conduct its operations, and the consumption of resources such as energy, water, etc.	Group’s products and services distributed within the operating segments, related to the group’s lending portfolio.
ING	• Activities, products and services: ✓ Procurement processes, including supplier verification (know your supplier) ✓ Managing relationships with suppliers of goods and services • Entities and actors—suppliers of products and services ✓ External consultants ✓ IT, software, and hardware service providers • Payment processing	Human resources management Facility management (e.g., office buildings) IT processes management	Development, marketing, and distribution of financial products and services in: Wholesale banking: loans, deposits, payment services, trade finance, trading portfolio, and financial markets Business banking: loans, deposits, payment and cash services, and trade finance Retail banking: mortgage loans, consumer credits, payment and cash services, deposits, brokerage business, and insurance Treasury and other investments
Millennium	Suppliers of significant groups of goods and services purchased: Administration ICT and digital resilience Marketing and advertising Key sources of finance	Bank’s Head Office: marketing, sales, risk management, ICT and cyber resilience, HR, and administration Own branches Subsidiaries: leasing, mortgage, investment fund Bank Millennium Foundation	Corporate banking customers Retail banking customers Leasing customers Distribution channels Investment fund company (TFI): investors, unit distributors, transfer agents, and investee companies

Source: banks’ sustainability reports for 2024.

).

The potential value of the audited banks’ value chain is based on individual assessments of double materiality, as outlined in the Sustainable Reporting Standards. For each bank, a list of inflows through its operations and the value chain has been created. The actual, potential, positive, or negative nature of each impact has been determined under the EU Sustainable Reporting Guidelines. In the case of effects, significance was based on four parameters: scale, range, and reversibility, which define the severity of the impact, as well as the probability of occurrence.

A conclusion derived from the examination of value chains and the evaluation of materiality, along with the subsequent analysis of sustainability risks, is that no upstream (supply chain) concerns have been identified in materiality assessments. This observation persists despite the existence of issues about data security, accessibility, and affordability, as well as systemic risk management, which are acknowledged as pertinent within the SASB Materiality Navigator for financial institutions.

4.2. Discussion

The inaugural sustainability reports, based on the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) and compiled for the first time in 2024, unveiled a considerable amount of intriguing secondary data regarding corporate operational practices, encompassing the value chains associated with the banking sector. It is imperative to acknowledge that the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRSs) emphasise upstream processes related to supply chains. Nevertheless, academic discourse also acknowledges downstream processes within these supply chains [46].

Banks are driven by digitisation and fintech. Unlike manufacturing companies, where scarce resources are a crucial aspect of supply chains, in the banking sector, scarce resources are primarily technology supply chains. The role of supply chains in banks, particularly third-party technology vendors, is significant due to the risks of data breaches, privacy issues, reputational damage, or system failures. Advanced technologies rely on AI and automation, as well as cybersecurity and data-driven analytics [11]. Hornuf, Klus, Lohwasser, and Schwienbacher demonstrate that traditional banks facing digital transformation pressures increasingly engage in alliances with fintech startups, especially when equipped with a clear digital strategy or a chief digital officer, favouring equity investments in smaller fintechs and product-based collaborations with larger ones, consistent with predictions from incomplete contract theory [47].

On the one hand, our study, based on Polish banks, reveals different perceptions of suppliers in the context of materiality. On the other hand, there is a consensus regarding the designation of technology suppliers perceived as material in value chains.

The analysed banks have different approaches in understanding and assessing their value chains in sustainability reporting, focusing on various aspects. For example, the Pekao Group [48] reports that the value chain was prepared based on expert analysis. Santander [49] reports that, in contrast to other banks, it was prepared according to the regulators. The Management Board’s Report on the activities of the BNP Paribas Bank Polska S.A. Group in 2024 [50] emphasised that the business model of financial institutions and their value chain is complex. Thus, the boundaries of the value chain are challenging to assess. PKO BP Bank [51] defines its value chain as a complex system of activities, resources, and relationships that underpin its business activities. The Management Board Report on Operations of the ING Bank Śląski S.A. Group in 2024 [52] used the following three-step approach:

• identification of the core activity based on the consolidated balance sheet and the consolidated profit and loss statement,
• mapping the core business areas and aggregation of activities based on similarities of products, services, and entities,
• exclusion of the activities with low likelihood of material impacts, opportunities, and risks.

The approaches to the revealed processes and actors also vary between banks. ING [52] identified six segments in the value chain on which the materiality assessment was performed. The supply chain is one of the six.

In the main processes of banks, banking activities addressed to various groups of customers are distinguished, and spheres related to the management of people, buildings, and IT processes are emphasised.

Banks perceive downstream processes as the most extensive, and their approaches are also diverted accordingly. For example, BNP Paribas [50] reports that the materiality assessment was based on the downstream part of the value chain. The downstream part of the value chain presents banks’ sectors of products or specific groups of customers and recipients (e.g., the approach of mBank [53]) or a mixed approach focusing on distribution channels and their supporting processes (e.g., marketing, advertising, and platforms), customer groups, and products. A broad approach also includes communities and the environment. Banks emphasise the special importance of the downstream part of the value chain. The Management Board Report on the Activity of Bank Millennium S.A. and the Capital Group of Bank Millennium S.A. in 2024 [54] focuses on customers as key value chain actors. The bank also classified employees and business partners (franchisees) into key value chain segments.

Downstream processes present a significant challenge in terms of collecting a broad spectrum of data, often particular to the selected stakeholder groups. The emphasis on the role of customers as key participants in the value chain, as highlighted in the reviewed reports, underscores the importance of understanding customer needs and preferences in the context of sustainable development. This customer-oriented approach not only increases engagement but also fosters the development of long-term, mutually beneficial relationships. Furthermore, the inclusion of employees and business partners as integral elements of the value chain reflects a holistic approach to the interconnected nature of banking operations.

Upstream disclosures, defined as supply chains, also differ in the context of the actors or activity approach; however, this part of the value chain is most consistent. Within upstream processes, Pekao ensures operational continuity, reliability, availability, as well as modern, user-friendly solutions for the services provided [48]. PKO BP focuses on the main procurement categories carried out in 2024, highlighting that over 6000 suppliers are registered in the Bank’s procurement application, and 389 procurement procedures were conducted [49]. The procurement categories in PKO BP include: software, materials and hardware, administrative services, IT security, and consulting (

Table 5. Supply chains (upstream) processes in Polish banks.

Upstream	PKO BP	PEKAO	mBank	Santander	BNP Paribas	ING	Millenium
IT equipment (e.g., servers, computers, licenses)	✓	✓	N/A	✓	✓	✓	✓
IT services (e.g., banking applications, insurance applications)	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓
Communication service providers (e.g., data centres)	N/A	✓	N/A	✓	✓	✓	N/A
Cash handling/ATM	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓
Financial market infrastructure (e.g., clearing, settlement, recording)	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓
Office equipment	✓	✓	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A
Utility providers (e.g., energy)	✓	✓	N/A	✓	✓	N/A	N/A
Service providers and suppliers for business operations (e.g., advisory, consultancy, HR, marketing)	N/A	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓
Sources of capital and financing/Investors	N/A	✓	✓	N/A	N/A	N/A	✓
Car fleet	✓	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A
Basic construction services	N/A	N/A	✓	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A

N/A—not available. Source: based on banks’ sustainability reports for 2024.

).

Based on the banks’ benchmarks, the following categories are derived from the banks’ supply chains:

• financial market infrastructure supporting banking activities, such as clearing systems provided by Visa and Mastercard or cash handling;
• IT services;
• IT equipment;
• office equipment;
• communication services;
• car fleets;
• utility providers;
• data providers.

In the reporting of supply chains in Polish banks, there is no broader reference to the role of service providers. However, supply issues are identified as material and highlighted in the context of risks. In other banks in the EU, broader references are already appearing. In its sustainability report, Deutsche Bank devotes space to referring to security or breaches in supply chains (Deutsche Bank).

Regarding upstream processes, PKO BP Bank notes that the asymmetry of information in the process of providing advice and concluding contracts (applicable to consumers and end users) is material. Pekao SA does not indicate any substantive issues in the upstream area. mBank binds upstream processes in a completely different way, highlighting the importance of selected environmental issues in governance, such as transparent cooperation, supplier relationship management, and addressing social issues in the upstream area, including conditions and labour law, as well as treating employees as equals. Santander has a similar approach, focusing on the same areas. BNP Paribas identifies the following issues as relevant: climate change adaptation and mitigation, own workforce, end-user relations, personal safety, data privacy, code of conduct, cybersecurity, market integrity, and financial security. Indeed, the bank does not separate upstream and downstream processes, but some of the above-mentioned ones relate to the upstream. In its analysis, ING does not consider the issue of upstream at all. Millennium stipulates that, due to the absence of information on indirect relationships within the value chain (such as information on their customers’ suppliers), these have not been included in their analysis. In the study of impacts concerning upstream processes, the following were considered material: working conditions, corruption, and bribery.

Considering the limitations in the materiality analysis related to upstream processes, it is worthwhile to address and expand the materiality issues identified by the SASB Materiality Finder to upstream processes and the related materiality issues in these processes across other sectors. The analysis of the reports shows the need to link material issues in banking with other sectors that provide services as part of upstream processes (

Table 6. Material supply-chain data-driven topics based on a matrix of commercial banking sector topics and topics derived from the dominant processes in banks’ supply chains: hardware, software, and IT services and telecommunication services.

Issue Category	Commercial Banks	Hardware	Software and IT Services	Telecommunication Services
Energy Management			Environmental Footprint of Hardware Infrastructure	Environmental Footprint of Operations
Customer Privacy			Data Privacy	Data Privacy
Data Security	Data Security	Product Security	Data Security	Data Security
Access and Affordability	Financial Inclusion and Capacity Building
Employee Engagement, Diversity and Inclusion		Employee Diversity and Inclusion	Recruiting and Managing a Global, Diverse and Skilled Workforce
Product Design and Lifecycle Management	Incorporation of Environmental, Social, and Governance Factors in Credit Analysis Financed Emissions	Product Lifecycle Management
Supply Chain Management		Supply Chain Management
Materials Sourcing and Efficiency		Materials Sourcing		Product End-of-life Management
Competitive Behaviour			Intellectual Property Protection and Competitive Behaviour	Competitive Behaviour and Open Internet
Systemic Risk Management	Systemic Risk Management		Managing Systemic Risks from Technology Disruptions	Managing Systemic Risks from Technology Disruptions

Source: based on the SASB Materiality Finder tool.

).

Energy management and the ecological impact of operations and hardware infrastructure are fundamentally important, particularly for telecommunications equipment and services. In contrast, banking institutions do not perceive these aspects as central to their sustainability agendas. This is due to the low (so far) level of energy consumption in the sector.

Banking institutions exhibit limited engagement in managing environmental impact compared to hardware-centric sectors. The issues of data privacy and security maintain consistent significance across all four sectors, underscoring their crucial role within a data-centric, digitally interconnected ecosystem. The incorporation of product security within software and IT services denotes risks that are specific to particular sectors.

Access to services and affordability, alongside financial inclusion and capacity development, are paramount for commercial banks, aligning with their fundamental function as financial intermediaries and their obligations towards social responsibility.

The concept of end-of-life management is exclusively pertinent to hardware, signifying responsibilities related to environmental impact post-consumption.

The management of systemic risks, particularly those related to technological disruptions, is prioritised in both banking and IT sectors, indicating a mutual susceptibility to operational and cyber-related shocks.

To sum up, while data security, human capital, and systemic risk management are priorities that transcend sectors, commercial banks particularly emphasise financial inclusion, the integration of ESG considerations into credit processes, and financed issuance. The implementation of the SASB framework highlights both convergence and divergence in the significance of sustainability within the digital and financial sectors, providing essential insights into the harmonisation of ESG strategies applicable to each industry.

However, the emergence of big data, artificial intelligence, and cloud computing poses both opportunities and challenges for the banking sector. A complex review of the Web of Science and Scopus literature reveals that data innovations enhance risk management, fraud detection, customer analysis, and decision-making processes. They also introduce the complexity associated with data management, a shortage of appropriately trained staff, high implementation costs, and increasing cybersecurity risks. Security remains a key concern in data-driven banking [46].

Digital transformation has revolutionised financial services and commerce globally, presenting new challenges for the banking sector [55]. The integration of advanced data analytics, machine learning, blockchain, and Internet of Things (IoT) technologies has enabled organisations to optimise supply chain operations, enhance decision-making, and improve overall efficiency [56,57].

Niemand et al. (2021) demonstrate that in the context of banks in Germany, Switzerland, and Liechtenstein, entrepreneurial orientation (EO) significantly enhances performance in the digitalisation era, with EO moderating the relationship between a bank’s strategic digital vision and its performance—highlighting that success depends less on the extent of digitalization and more on a proactive, innovative, and risk-taking strategic approach [58]. These results suggest that a bank’s level of digitalisation does not affect its profitability.

Recent research highlights that integrating entrepreneurship and legitimacy theories through the lens of organisational inertia can enhance the performance of the longstanding financial services industry through digitalisation. However, this is contingent upon their ability to reduce institutional and strategic inertia [59].

Digitalisation embodies a ubiquitous and disruptive challenge confronting the banking industry, necessitating the reconfiguration of nearly all collaborative processes. Through a qualitative investigation involving executives from German banking institutions, a variety of managerial impediments have been identified. They include strategic, technological, regulatory, customer-related, and organisational factors. They comprise multiple sub-barriers that critically impact the efficacy of digital transformation initiatives [60]. By applying stakeholder theory to the financial supply chain, one highlights the collaborative contributions of suppliers, buyers, financial institutions, and technology providers in creating value. This approach advocates for multi-stakeholder credit rating systems that incorporate operational, financial, and technological performance metrics to enhance the assessment of supplier creditworthiness [61].

It is worth emphasising the gap in research on supply chains in the banking sector and data-driven supply chain management. The role of supply chains is essential because, in addition to the issue of efficiency, trust and resilience are key aspects. The growing complexity of technology supply chains presents a substantial threat to operational resilience, with potential adverse effects on customer trust and institutional reputation.

The development of the banking sector in recent years has involved a significant shift in customer preference towards online services, accompanied by the rapid growth of mobile banking. It provides banks with new opportunities for responsive actions within a short time frame, significantly reducing the reaction time to market changes and greatly improving the accuracy of customer segmentation.

To sum up, the analysis revealed significant variations in how banks perceive and report their value chains, with a consensus on the materiality of technology suppliers. The study uncovered a nuanced understanding of upstream processes, where banks emphasise operational reliability and procurement strategies. Conversely, downstream processes are reported as more extensive, focusing on customer engagement and integrating sustainability into service delivery. The findings (supported by the literature review) also highlight the critical role of digitalisation and data-driven approaches in enhancing operational resilience and managing supply chain risks. Despite the emphasis on upstream disclosures, the gap remains in considering service providers within the sustainability narratives of Polish banks.

5. Conclusions

This research contributes to the limited literature on sustainable supply chains in the banking sector by providing insights into the first sustainability reports generated under the CSRD framework. It highlights the need for further investigation into the interconnections between banking, sustainability, and supply chain management, particularly in the context of diverse regulatory environments. The study identifies key areas for future research, including the classification of downstream processes within supply chains and the assessment of data-driven potential in enhancing sustainability practices in banking. As banks navigate the ongoing challenges of digital transformation, environmentally oriented regulatory frameworks, and evolving consumer expectations, a comprehensive understanding of sustainable supply chains emerges as a strategic imperative for achieving long-term resilience and competitive advantage.

As a result of strategic decisions related to the European Union’s climate policy, relations with the manufacturing sector are currently taking on a new dimension. Banks are focusing on assessing the risks of climate and energy transition, which particularly affects traditional industrial sectors and electricity generation. Therefore, identifying the supply chains of traditional industrial and energy sectors is an essential element in assessing the climate transition risk of some banking sector customers. Most respondents representing Polish banks planned to expand their sustainable financing offerings in 2024, mainly through loans for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and loans with subsidies from national or EU funds to support environmental transition or the transition to a sustainable economy [62].

The majority of studies identified through the keywords “supply chains” and “bank” pertain to financial services and the financing of supply chains [63]. A limited number of studies address sustainable supply chains within banking contexts. An intriguing reference to banking suggests that supply chains play a pivotal role in facilitating financial innovation, encompassing the development of new financial products and services, as well as the establishment of distribution channels [64]. Consequently, there exists a pressing need for further exploration of the interconnections between banking, supply chain management, and sustainability. The initial sustainability reports generated under the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) in 2024 provided significant secondary data, particularly concerning value chains within the banking sector.

The research unexpectedly reveals that banks do not consider upstream supply chains to be significant factors, despite these concerns being related to data integrity and system security. Nonetheless, noteworthy insights related to data-driven opportunities emerge from broadening the scope of materiality issues delineated by the SASB Materiality Finder to include upstream operations within banking institutions. Such an examination uncovers the following instances of data-driven considerations within supply chains: the security of data and products, the protection of data privacy, and the management of systemic risks.

The authors’ analysis of the first sustainability reports, which, in this view, include an examination of value chains disclosed by companies for the first time, offers valuable insights for further research. The following issues are worth addressing in future research:

• resolving the question of whether to include some downstream processes in supply chains;
• systematising and exploring supply chains typical of the banking sector, taking into account research in other EU countries;
• assessing the potential of data-driven considerations in financial value chains of the banking sector.

Future research should further explore the interactions between banking, sustainability, and supply chain management, particularly concerning how diverse regulatory environments and socio-cultural contexts shape the adoption of sustainable supply chain practices in the financial sector.

Limitations

Based on the data of the Polish Bank Association, the Polish banking sector is one of the smallest in Europe (based on asset-to-GDP, equity/GDP, or loans to the non-financial sector/GDP ratios). A limitation of the study is the lack of comparison of supply chains in other EU countries. There is also a possibility that the value chain of financial institutions is assessed differently in different countries. Additionally, it would be beneficial to expand the analysis in future studies by utilising specific data-based tools to mitigate supply chain risks.