GRI and materiality: discussions and challenges

Purpose This paper aims to offer an overview of key aspects of the journey to develop the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) Framework and Guidelines, focusing on the Materiality construct. It provides a practitioner’s perspective of several issues related to this construct. Design/methodology/approach This commentary is mainly based on publicly available technical documents, the analysis of papers related to the Materiality construct and a contextual review of the evolution of the main features of the GRI Guidelines and Standards. Findings This paper discusses the conundrum currently surrounding the Materiality construct and offers some reflections and suggestions about the challenges facing GRI. Practical implications Clarification of the Materiality construct could reduce confusion and eventually allow for clear identification and differentiation of the financial and sustainability accounting fields at their interface. Social implications Language creates reality; an opportunity has arisen to bring appropriate and distinctive terminology to the sustainability reporting field, bridging the gap between competing logics. Originality/value This viewpoint is timely. It contributes a practitioner’s perspective to the current debate on the development of the Materiality construct.

[1]  C. de Villiers,et al.  The Global Reporting Initiative’s (GRI) past, present and future: critical reflections and a research agenda on sustainability reporting (standard-setting) , 2022, Pacific Accounting Review.

[2]  Mario Abela.  “A new direction? The “mainstreaming” of sustainability reporting” , 2022, Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal.

[3]  B. Giner,et al.  A commentary on the “new” institutional actors in sustainability reporting standard-setting: a European perspective , 2022, Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal.

[4]  Josef Baumüller,et al.  Double materiality and the shift from non-financial to European sustainability reporting: review, outlook and implications , 2021, Journal of Applied Accounting Research.

[5]  Sveinung Jørgensen,et al.  Sustainability reporting and approaches to materiality: tensions and potential resolutions , 2021, Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal.

[6]  Carlos Larrinaga,et al.  The pre-history of sustainability reporting: a constructivist reading , 2021, Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal.

[7]  C. Adams,et al.  Connecting the COVID-19 pandemic, environmental, social and governance (ESG) investing and calls for ‘harmonisation’ of sustainability reporting , 2021, Critical Perspectives on Accounting.

[8]  Fahad Khalid,et al.  Examining the extent of and drivers for materiality assessment disclosures in sustainability reports , 2021, Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal.

[9]  Alberto Fonseca,et al.  Transparency of materiality analysis in GRI ‐based sustainability reports , 2020 .

[10]  Ellen Haustein,et al.  Materiality analysis in sustainability and integrated reports , 2020 .

[11]  Hans B. Christensen,et al.  Mandatory CSR and sustainability reporting: economic analysis and literature review , 2019, Review of Accounting Studies.

[12]  H. Mäkelä,et al.  Matter of opinion , 2019, Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal.

[13]  R. Torelli,et al.  The Materiality Assessment and Stakeholder Engagement: A Content Analysis of Sustainability Reports , 2019, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management.

[14]  Manuel Núñez-Nickel,et al.  Institutionalization of the Contents of Sustainability Assurance Services: A Comparison Between Italy and United States , 2018, Journal of Business Ethics.

[15]  Carlos Larrinaga,et al.  Reporting Models do not Translate Well: Failing to Regulate CSR Reporting in Spain , 2016 .

[16]  Giovanna Michelon,et al.  CSR reporting practices and the quality of disclosure: An empirical analysis , 2015 .

[17]  M. Jones,et al.  The adoption of the materiality concept in social and environmental reporting assurance: A field study approach , 2015 .

[18]  Axel Haller,et al.  The value added statement – an appropriate instrument for Integrated Reporting , 2014 .

[19]  R. Gray,et al.  Histories, rationales, voluntary standards and future prospects for sustainability reporting: CSR, GRI, IIRC and beyond , 2014 .

[20]  R. Gray,et al.  W(h)ither Ecology? The Triple Bottom Line, the Global Reporting Initiative, and Corporate Sustainability Reporting , 2013 .

[21]  Cristiano Busco,et al.  Redefining corporate accountability through integrated reporting: what happens when values and value creation meet? , 2013 .

[22]  Fabrizio Ferraro,et al.  The Role of Analogy in the Institutionalization of Sustainability Reporting , 2010, Organ. Sci..

[23]  Peter M. Clarkson,et al.  Revisiting the Relation between Environmental Performance and Environmental Disclosure: An Empirical Analysis , 2006 .

[24]  R. Bolt.  “Materiality is ...”: Sensemaking and Sensegiving through Storytelling , 2022 .

[25]  J. E. Peirce.  The concept of materiality , 1969 .