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

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.

Citation

Correa-Mejía, D.A., Correa-García, J.A. and García-Benau, M.A. (2024), "Analysis of double materiality in early adopters. Are companies walking the talk?", Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 299-329. https://doi.org/10.1108/SAMPJ-07-2023-0469