DIFFERENT APPROACHES TO THE MATERIALITY ANALYSIS OF CORPORATE SUSTAINABILITY REPORTING

This thesis explores the intricate terrain of corporate sustainability reporting, offering a thorough examination and evaluation of five prominent frameworks: GRI, IIRC, IFRS, SASB, and ESRS. The research carefully examines the different approaches that each framework takes when analyzing materiality, which is a crucial factor in determining the importance and significance of sustainability information revealed by firms. The study uses a qualitative approach to compare different frameworks based on factors such as their conceptual foundations, methods for determining materiality, and procedures for engaging stakeholders. The findings indicate that each framework possesses distinct strengths and areas of emphasis, such as stakeholder inclusivity, financial materiality, integrated thinking, and regulatory compliance. However, there are deficiencies in the harmonization and interoperability across these frameworks. The fragmentation presents difficulties for organizations aiming to achieve comprehensive and cohesive sustainability reporting. The thesis asserts that a collective endeavor to establish a consolidated reporting system is essential for improving the clarity, responsibility, and ability to compare corporate sustainability disclosures. The argument is that aligning with this approach would not only streamline the reporting process for companies, but also enhance the quality of information accessible to stakeholders, enabling well-informed decision-making in support of sustainable development. Keywords: Corporate Sustainability Reporting, GRI, IIRC, IFRS, SASB, ESRS, Materiality Analysis, Sustainability Frameworks, Stakeholder Engagement.

This thesis explores the complex field of corporate sustainability reporting, offering a thorough examination and evaluation of five prominent frameworks: GRI, IIRC, IFRS, SASB, and ESRS. The research carefully examines the different approaches that each framework takes when analyzing materiality, which is a crucial factor in determining the importance and significance of sustainability information revealed by firms. The study uses a qualitative approach to compare different frameworks based on factors such as their conceptual foundations, methods for determining materiality, and procedures for engaging stakeholders. The findings indicate that each framework possesses distinct strengths and areas of emphasis, such as stakeholder inclusivity, financial materiality, integrated thinking, and regulatory compliance. However, there are deficiencies in the harmonization and interoperability across these frameworks. The fragmentation presents difficulties for organizations aiming to achieve comprehensive and cohesive sustainability reporting. The thesis asserts that a collective endeavor to establish a consolidated reporting system is essential for improving the clarity, responsibility, and ability to compare corporate sustainability disclosures. The argument is that aligning with this approach would not only streamline the reporting process for companies, but also enhance the quality of information accessible to stakeholders, enabling well-informed decision-making in support of sustainable development. Keywords: Corporate Sustainability Reporting, GRI, IIRC, IFRS, SASB, ESRS, Materiality Analysis, Sustainability Frameworks, Stakeholder Engagement.