IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/corsem/v28y2021i2p570-580.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Transparency of materiality analysis in GRI‐based sustainability reports

Author

Listed:
  • Bianca Alves Almeida Machado
  • Lívia Cristina Pinto Dias
  • Alberto Fonseca

Abstract

While materiality analysis is often regarded as essential to sustainability reporting, there is a shortage of empirical studies about its transparency in published reports. This study had a three‐fold objective: (a) identify stakeholders and respective techniques of engagement in the materiality analysis; (b) quantify disclosures of materiality‐related indicators; and (c) explore the influence of assurance, standard, and headquarters' location in the transparency of materiality analysis. Based on a quantitative content analysis of 140 GRI‐based sustainability reports, this study found that, overall, organizations did not disclose comprehensive and detailed information about their approaches to identifying material topics. About 22% of the evaluated indicators were not fully disclosed in the sample. Non‐parametric tests suggested that third‐party assurance, type of GRI standard, and location of headquarters are unlikely to affect the rates of transparency. The study calls for further standardization and methodological development of materiality analysis in sustainability reporting.

Suggested Citation

  • Bianca Alves Almeida Machado & Lívia Cristina Pinto Dias & Alberto Fonseca, 2021. "Transparency of materiality analysis in GRI‐based sustainability reports," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(2), pages 570-580, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:corsem:v:28:y:2021:i:2:p:570-580
    DOI: 10.1002/csr.2066
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2066
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/csr.2066?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Font, Xavier & Guix, Mireia & Bonilla-Priego, Ma Jesús, 2016. "Corporate social responsibility in cruising: Using materiality analysis to create shared value," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 175-186.
    2. Markus Milne & Rob Gray, 2013. "W(h)ither Ecology? The Triple Bottom Line, the Global Reporting Initiative, and Corporate Sustainability Reporting," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 118(1), pages 13-29, November.
    3. Heitzman, Shane & Wasley, Charles & Zimmerman, Jerold, 2010. "The joint effects of materiality thresholds and voluntary disclosure incentives on firms' disclosure decisions," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(1-2), pages 109-132, February.
    4. Marco Fasan & Chiara Mio, 2017. "Fostering Stakeholder Engagement: The Role of Materiality Disclosure in Integrated Reporting," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(3), pages 288-305, March.
    5. Riccardo Torelli & Federica Balluchi & Katia Furlotti, 2020. "The materiality assessment and stakeholder engagement: A content analysis of sustainability reports," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(2), pages 470-484, March.
    6. Robert G. Eccles & Michael P. Krzus & Jean Rogers & George Serafeim, 2012. "The Need for Sector-Specific Materiality and Sustainability Reporting Standards," Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, Morgan Stanley, vol. 24(2), pages 65-71, June.
    7. Olivier Boiral, 2013. "Sustainability reports as simulacra? A counter-account of A and A+ GRI reports," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 26(7), pages 1036-1071, September.
    8. Lenzen, Manfred & Dey, Christopher J. & Murray, Shauna A., 2004. "Historical accountability and cumulative impacts: the treatment of time in corporate sustainability reporting," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(3-4), pages 237-250, December.
    9. Renzo Junior & Peter Best & Julie Cotter, 2014. "Sustainability Reporting and Assurance: A Historical Analysis on a World-Wide Phenomenon," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 120(1), pages 1-11, March.
    10. Jan Bebbington & Carlos Larrinaga & Jose M. Moneva, 2008. "Corporate social reporting and reputation risk management," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 21(3), pages 337-361, March.
    11. Jeffrey Unerman & Franco Zappettini, 2014. "Incorporating Materiality Considerations into Analyses of Absence from Sustainability Reporting," Social and Environmental Accountability Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(3), pages 172-186, December.
    12. Waris Ali & Jedrzej George Frynas & Zeeshan Mahmood, 2017. "Determinants of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Disclosure in Developed and Developing Countries: A Literature Review," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(4), pages 273-294, July.
    13. David L. Owen & Tracey Swift & Karen Hunt, 2001. "Questioning the Role of Stakeholder Engagement in Social and Ethical Accounting, Auditing and Reporting," Accounting Forum, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(3), pages 264-282, September.
    14. Cesar Saenz, 2019. "Creating shared value using materiality analysis: Strategies from the mining industry," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(6), pages 1351-1360, November.
    15. Giacomo Manetti, 2011. "The quality of stakeholder engagement in sustainability reporting: empirical evidence and critical points," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(2), pages 110-122, March.
    16. José M. Moneva & Pablo Archel & Carmen Correa, 2006. "GRI and the camouflaging of corporate unsustainability," Accounting Forum, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(2), pages 121-137, June.
    17. Alberto Fonseca, 2010. "How credible are mining corporations' sustainability reports? a critical analysis of external assurance under the requirements of the international council on mining and metals," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(6), pages 355-370, November.
    18. Edgley, Carla & Jones, Michael J. & Atkins, Jill, 2015. "The adoption of the materiality concept in social and environmental reporting assurance: A field study approach," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 1-18.
    19. Nicola Bellantuono & Pierpaolo Pontrandolfo & Barbara Scozzi, 2016. "Capturing the Stakeholders’ View in Sustainability Reporting: A Novel Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-12, April.
    20. Dror Etzion & Fabrizio Ferraro, 2010. "The Role of Analogy in the Institutionalization of Sustainability Reporting," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(5), pages 1092-1107, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mark Fuller, 2022. "Wheat and chaff: the degree to which strategic management principles are integrated within corporate social responsibility reporting among large Canadian firms," International Journal of Corporate Social Responsibility, Springer, vol. 7(1), pages 1-17, December.
    2. Collins C. Ngwakwe, 2023. "Corporate Social Responsibility, Benefits beyond Legitimacy: A Symbiotic Framework," Oblik i finansi, Institute of Accounting and Finance, issue 4, pages 53-59, December.
    3. Iván Andrés Ordóñez-Castaño & Edila Eudemia Herrera-Rodríguez & Angélica María Franco Ricaurte & Luis Enrique Perdomo Mejía, 2021. "Voluntary Disclosure of GRI and CSR Environmental Criteria in Colombian Companies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-18, May.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Inten Meutia & Shelly F. Kartasari & Zulnaidi Yaacob, 2022. "Stakeholder or Legitimacy Theory? The Rationale behind a Company’s Materiality Analysis: Evidence from Indonesia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-20, June.
    2. María Luisa Pajuelo Moreno & Teresa Duarte-Atoche, 2019. "Relationship between Sustainable Disclosure and Performance—An Extension of Ullmann’s Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-33, August.
    3. Charles H. Cho & Matias Laine & Robin W. Roberts & Michelle Rodrigue, 2018. "The Frontstage and Backstage of Corporate Sustainability Reporting: Evidence from the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge Bill," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 152(3), pages 865-886, October.
    4. Marta Vicente-Lama & Pilar Tirado-Valencia & Mercedes Ruiz-Lozano & Magdalena Cordobés-Madueño, 2023. "The impact of sectoral guidelines on sustainability reporting in ports: the case of the Spanish ports," Maritime Economics & Logistics, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association of Maritime Economists (IAME), vol. 25(3), pages 499-519, September.
    5. Journeault, Marc & Levant, Yves & Picard, Claire-France, 2021. "Sustainability performance reporting: A technocratic shadowing and silencing," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    6. Schepis, Daniel, 2020. "Understanding Indigenous Reconciliation Action Plans from a corporate social responsibility perspective," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    7. Chiara Mio & Marco Fasan & Antonio Costantini, 2020. "Materiality in integrated and sustainability reporting: A paradigm shift?," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(1), pages 306-320, January.
    8. Roberto Aprile & David Alexander & Federica Doni, 2023. "Enhancing the materiality principle in integrated reporting by adopting the General Systems Theory," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(5), pages 2219-2233, September.
    9. Riccardo Torelli & Federica Balluchi & Katia Furlotti, 2020. "The materiality assessment and stakeholder engagement: A content analysis of sustainability reports," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(2), pages 470-484, March.
    10. Olivier Boiral, 2016. "Accounting for the Unaccountable: Biodiversity Reporting and Impression Management," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 135(4), pages 751-768, June.
    11. Nicolas Garcia‐Torea & Belen Fernandez‐Feijoo & Marta De La Cuesta, 2020. "CSR reporting communication: Defective reporting models or misapplication?," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(2), pages 952-968, March.
    12. Torelli, Riccardo & Balluchi, Federica & Furlotti, Katia, 2019. "The materiality assessment and stakeholder engagement: A content analysis of sustainability reports," OSF Preprints tw6c7, Center for Open Science.
    13. Stefano Romito & Clodia Vurro, 2021. "Non‐financial disclosure and information asymmetry: A stakeholder view on US listed firms," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(2), pages 595-605, March.
    14. Michelon, Giovanna & Pilonato, Silvia & Ricceri, Federica, 2015. "CSR reporting practices and the quality of disclosure: An empirical analysis," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 59-78.
    15. Janine Maniora, 2018. "Mismanagement of Sustainability: What Business Strategy Makes the Difference? Empirical Evidence from the USA," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 152(4), pages 931-947, November.
    16. Mariappanadar, Sugumar & Maurer, Iris & Kramar, Robin & Muller-Camen, Michael, 2022. "Is it a sententious claim? An examination of the quality of occupational health, safety and well-being disclosures in global reporting initiative reports across industries and countries," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 31(2).
    17. Olivier Boiral & Iñaki Heras-Saizarbitoria & Marie-Christine Brotherton, 2019. "Assessing and Improving the Quality of Sustainability Reports: The Auditors’ Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 155(3), pages 703-721, March.
    18. Miguel Marco‐Fondevila & José M. Moneva Abadía & Sabina Scarpellini, 2018. "CSR and green economy: Determinants and correlation of firms’ sustainable development," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(5), pages 756-771, September.
    19. Ramona Zharfpeykan, 2021. "Representative account or greenwashing? Voluntary sustainability reports in Australia's mining/metals and financial services industries," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(4), pages 2209-2223, May.
    20. Kurniawan, Putu Sukma, 2018. "An Analysis of Information Materiality on Corporate Sustainability Report Using Information Materiality Map: A Review in Mining Industry in Indonesia," INA-Rxiv 7dzha, Center for Open Science.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:corsem:v:28:y:2021:i:2:p:570-580. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1002/(ISSN)1535-3966 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.