Rise and Fall of the Materiality Matrix: Lessons from a Missed Takeoff

Abstract

After a long period of the inclusion of materiality matrices within standard setters documents and non-financial reports, the Global Reporting Initiative officially abandoned the materiality matrix in 2021 after the GRI 3 standard release. To bridge the detected gaps in the literature, this article aims to investigate approaches to and arguments for the matrix until the issuance of GRI 3. The two-step research strategy adopted gives the same level of attention to the opposite positions found. Phase 1 (approach-oriented) reviews the materiality matrix presentation in the 2014–2020 non-financial reports of a sample of worldwide sustainability-oriented companies. Phase 2 (argument-oriented) performs qualitative content analysis on feedback for the GRI 3 preparatory works. The findings show that, besides the staunch adopters, a core of non-adopters persisted and prevented the takeoff of the matrix. Moreover, further insights into possible drivers both in favour of and against these approaches are provided. The final discussion both considers the lessons learnt, overlapping with policy implications, and suggests future research avenues.

An Explanatory Model of Materiality in Sustainability Accounting: Integrating Accountability and Stakeholder Heterogeneity

“…First, we note that materiality in sustainability accounting that is modelled from the standards (e.g., [10,12,18]) and exemplified in the empirical studies (e.g., De Cristofaro & Raucci 2022; Garst, Maas & Juijs, 2022) [23,79] is operationalised by quantifying multiple levels of materiality pertaining to stakeholder and firm actions, all of which differs from the standard method of applying the materiality concept in financial accounting. This method, which is based on quantifying the effort, resources, and time invested to resolve sustainability issues, was integrated into the HAM framework and illustrated using selected events involving Exxon.…”