The analysis and consolidation of the results considered: verification of the principle of inclusion of stakeholders and context of sustainability to the set of topics raised; assigning the degree of impact and importance of the topic to the stakeholders (materiality matrix) and prioritization; correlation of the topics with GRI aspects and indicators and consideration of the principle of completeness.

Six topics were identified as more relevant to Itaipu, which are listed in the table below. The changes from the previous document are:

• Improvement in the nomenclature and scope of the topic “Sustainable business development and areas of influence”, which not only considers the contributions to the territory, but also business aspects of eco-efficiency such as purchasing practices, energy consumption and effluents and waste.
• The topics "Anti-corruption", "Environmental and Socioeconomic Compliance", "Environmental and social assessment of suppliers and human rights" and "Rights of indigenous and traditional peoples” were in the Materiality Matrix of the 2016 Sustainability Report, but their nomenclatures were changed to meet the requirements of the Standards.
• Replacement of the topic "Electric power demand management", which is most adequately portrayed by the "Availability and reliability" and "Economic Performance" aspects.
• The inclusion of the topic "Occupational Health and safety" to reinforce the initiatives related to the topic "Safety practices".
• The "Investments" and "Human Rights Complaints Mechanisms" topics were excluded because of the Standards approach, which now considers them in the form of management.

The topics and aspects limits within the organization (where related to the topic or material aspect) refer to the operation in Brazilian territory, except for topics whose content is conceptually inseparable and must also cover the Paraguayan territory.

In order to define the topics limits and material aspects outside the organization, the perception of stakeholders consulted in previous cycles on the extent of impacts related to these topics was considered. It is not yet possible to confirm or quantify the occurrence or non-occurrence of these impacts outside the organization, since the implementation of a systemic methodology to carry out formal processes of socio-environmental impact assessment had interruptions and its continuity is under analysis.