Article2024

Analysis of double materiality in early adopters. Are companies walking the talk?

Diego Andrés Correa Mejía · Jaime Andrés Correa García · María Antonia García Benau

47 citations0/0 files storedSustainability Accounting Management and Policy Journal

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting Accounting and Financial Management Governance, Compliance, and Sustainability

Abstract

Purpose This study aims to analyse the consistency between what companies say (talk) and what they do (walk) regarding the application of double materiality in their sustainability reports. Design/methodology/approach Sustainability reports of 76 European companies that reported the application of double materiality and are listed in the Dow Jones Sustainability Index were studied through content analysis. Findings In total, 67% of the companies studied claim to apply double materiality but do not comply with the guidelines in this respect proposed by the European Financial Reporting Advisory Group. Therefore, these companies should be considered label adopters. Practical implications This study presents evidence of the existence of label adopters when double materiality is adopted at an early stage, meaning that regulators should seek to control compliance with the minimum requirements established for double materiality. This finding also has implications for assurers, who should consider the degree of real compliance with double materiality requirements when expressing their opinion. Social implications The existence of label adopters in the application of double materiality endangers the sustainable development pursued through agreements such as the Green Deal and through the Sustainable Finance policy proposed in Europe. Originality/value This work contributes to the emerging literature on double materiality. Unlike previous works, empirical evidence is provided on the changes that companies present in their material issues with the application of double materiality. Moreover, it confirms the existence of label adopters in the application of double materiality.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 47 citations exist upstream.

References

1995Managing Legitimacy: Strategic and Institutional Approaches 1973Job Market Signaling 2019The Importance of Climate Risks for Institutional Investors 2019Business contribution to the Sustainable Development Agenda: Organizational factors related to early adoption of SDG reporting 2012The Need for Sector‐Specific Materiality and Sustainability Reporting Standards 2021Double materiality and the shift from non-financial to European sustainability reporting: review, outlook and implications 2019Causes and consequences of voluntary assurance of CSR reports 2019Materiality analysis in sustainability and integrated reports

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.